It's been a very long hiatus since I have last blogged. It's been due to a combination of writer's block and a general feeling of "meh." But Sheriff John Stone is back in town.
Brief explanation as to the title of this blog: "Al-Zilzal" means earthquake in Arabic. I jokingly gave myself this nickname as a "street ball" name last year but, more importantly and seriously, it refers to the fact that the Middle East is undergoing a political earthquake of historic ramifications right now. Civil war in Syria; a coup and ferocious crackdown in Egypt; vicious sectarian violence in Iraq; tensions between the Gulf Arab states/Israel and Iran; and more. In short: it's great fun!
The Middle East has long been a focus of violence and warfare. As the crossroads of Africa, Europe, and Asia, it has seen myriad armies march through its deserts and its mountains. One only need to think of the Egyptians, Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Mongols, Turks, etc, etc. The land is soaked in the blood of conquerors, martyrs, and countless, countless victims.
In that sense, the events that we are seeing today are but the latest stirrings of a volatile region. But they are of huge importance. Whither Egypt? Is it on its way to a renewal of the Mubarak years? Or something different? How about Syria? All the pundits and experts were convinced even in the summer of 2011 that Bashar al-Assad was going to fall any day. He has still not fallen, and he will not fall for quite some time, if he does at all. What is the destiny of that country? It is historically the "beating heart" of political pan-Arabism, and is being fought over in a frenzied fashion by, on one side, the Syrian military, paramilitary groups loyal to Assad, Hezbollah, Iraqi Shiites, Iran, and Russia; and, on the other, Sunni Muslims of varying political orientation, ranging from leftist to liberal (in the classical sense) to fundamentalist to radical Islamist. This latter faction is supported by the Gulf Arab states and, minimally, by the Western powers, including the United States. The fate of Syria will not leave the rest of the region unchanged. Lebanon was, until the mid-20th century, considered part of Syria; "the Lebanon", as it used to be known, referred to Mt Lebanon, not to what constitutes the modern state. There has been Sunni-Shiite (and Alawi) fighting in Lebanon, particularly in Tripoli, but also in Beirut, that perpetually traumatized city. Iraqi volunteers have gone to Damascus to fight for the tomb of Sayyida Zeinab, granddaughter of the Prophet Muhammad, which lies on the southern outskirts of Syria's capital. Iraq, of course, has its own issues; there have been suicide bombings in Baghdad, Mosul, and basically every other major Iraqi city including the southern city of Basra (but not including much of Iraqi Kurdistan). Syria, as the geographical heart of the Middle East, has become the staging ground of an international war between Sunni and Shiite, a sort of Middle Eastern Spanish Civil War (or Afghanistan, which I, for arbitrary reasons, will not consider part of the Middle East for the purposes of this blog. And really, it's not. It's southern/central Asia. Deal wid it.) And, of course, there is the looming specter of the Iranian bomb, and the almost humorous sight of John Kerry tripping over himself to "stop them" by giving them everything they want in return for our lifting of sanctions. What about Iraq? We pulled all of our troops out, Shiites and Sunnis are blowing each other up, Nuri al-Maliki has strengthened his grip on power and has been assisting Assad's forces in Syria. What is the future of this country?
You might notice that I have not mentioned the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This conflict is a particular academic interest of mine, but it is of very, very minor importance when one places it against the backdrop of the scene I have presented. The Syrian civil war has killed north of 125,000 people and is fought with very little consideration of civilian life; in fact, the Syrian military has used starvation as a purposeful tactic to weaken the opposition. There have been massacres of civilians, including the use of chemical weapons back in August. I have seen a horrific video of Hezbollah fighters dragging corpses and the barely living out of a truck and then proceeding to kill the living and to pump bullets into the already dead. Iran, which of course backs Assad to the hilt, is proceeding with its nuclear weapons program, and it is casting a very large shadow over the entire region. Our (in)action has infuriated Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain, among others, who fear, and have reason to fear, the Iranian bomb. Egypt is a country of 80 million people that is structurally unable to feed its own people.
In the meantime, despite the best efforts of John Kerry and the media, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been rather quiet. There have been a few incidents, sure, but they do not remotely compare to the hugely important events elsewhere in the region. Indeed, the only reason that these incidents are reported as widely as they are is because Israel is a popular whipping boy. A bulldozed home outside of Ramallah will appear more prominently in most Western newspapers than the murder, starvation, disease, and displacement that characterizes the war that is occurring literally right next door in Syria. The construction of apartments in Eastern Jerusalem will get more attention and boil more blood than the bombardment of Syrian cities by Bashar al-Assad's minions. And this, of course, points to the corrosive, disproportionate obsession with the Jewish state that characterizes much of the world. Taken in isolation, of course the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is important, as are all conflicts. They should all be taken seriously. It is when this conflict is clearly seen to override other developments in importance that things become wrong and dangerous. A proponent of the disproportionate attention on Israel would probably suggest that this is because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the "key conflict" in the region: the mama conflict from which all others stem. This is silliness, of course, but it is believed, in one degree or another, by a lot of people in Washington, D.C. and other important capitals around the world. "The road to peace lies through Jerusalem." But clearly the violence between Sunni and Shiite in Lebanon and Iraq, the war in Syria, the crisis in Egypt, Iran's aggrandizement, and past brutalities in the region (Hama in 1982; the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88; the various civil wars in Yemen in the 1960s, 1980s, and 1990s; the Dhofar rebellion in Oman in the 1960s and 1970s; Bahrain's suppression of Shiites; Saddam Hussein's genocide of the Kurds and invasion of Kuwait; and on and on and on) have and had nothing to do with Israel/Palestine, at all. That conflict is but an alibi for leaders like Saddam Hussein, Hafez and Bashar al-Assad, and others to cloak their own brutality and drive for power in the region.
This has been, admittedly, a rather unfocused, scattered post. I'm a little rusty! But it's good to be back in the game.
Brief explanation as to the title of this blog: "Al-Zilzal" means earthquake in Arabic. I jokingly gave myself this nickname as a "street ball" name last year but, more importantly and seriously, it refers to the fact that the Middle East is undergoing a political earthquake of historic ramifications right now. Civil war in Syria; a coup and ferocious crackdown in Egypt; vicious sectarian violence in Iraq; tensions between the Gulf Arab states/Israel and Iran; and more. In short: it's great fun!
The Middle East has long been a focus of violence and warfare. As the crossroads of Africa, Europe, and Asia, it has seen myriad armies march through its deserts and its mountains. One only need to think of the Egyptians, Hittites, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Mongols, Turks, etc, etc. The land is soaked in the blood of conquerors, martyrs, and countless, countless victims.
In that sense, the events that we are seeing today are but the latest stirrings of a volatile region. But they are of huge importance. Whither Egypt? Is it on its way to a renewal of the Mubarak years? Or something different? How about Syria? All the pundits and experts were convinced even in the summer of 2011 that Bashar al-Assad was going to fall any day. He has still not fallen, and he will not fall for quite some time, if he does at all. What is the destiny of that country? It is historically the "beating heart" of political pan-Arabism, and is being fought over in a frenzied fashion by, on one side, the Syrian military, paramilitary groups loyal to Assad, Hezbollah, Iraqi Shiites, Iran, and Russia; and, on the other, Sunni Muslims of varying political orientation, ranging from leftist to liberal (in the classical sense) to fundamentalist to radical Islamist. This latter faction is supported by the Gulf Arab states and, minimally, by the Western powers, including the United States. The fate of Syria will not leave the rest of the region unchanged. Lebanon was, until the mid-20th century, considered part of Syria; "the Lebanon", as it used to be known, referred to Mt Lebanon, not to what constitutes the modern state. There has been Sunni-Shiite (and Alawi) fighting in Lebanon, particularly in Tripoli, but also in Beirut, that perpetually traumatized city. Iraqi volunteers have gone to Damascus to fight for the tomb of Sayyida Zeinab, granddaughter of the Prophet Muhammad, which lies on the southern outskirts of Syria's capital. Iraq, of course, has its own issues; there have been suicide bombings in Baghdad, Mosul, and basically every other major Iraqi city including the southern city of Basra (but not including much of Iraqi Kurdistan). Syria, as the geographical heart of the Middle East, has become the staging ground of an international war between Sunni and Shiite, a sort of Middle Eastern Spanish Civil War (or Afghanistan, which I, for arbitrary reasons, will not consider part of the Middle East for the purposes of this blog. And really, it's not. It's southern/central Asia. Deal wid it.) And, of course, there is the looming specter of the Iranian bomb, and the almost humorous sight of John Kerry tripping over himself to "stop them" by giving them everything they want in return for our lifting of sanctions. What about Iraq? We pulled all of our troops out, Shiites and Sunnis are blowing each other up, Nuri al-Maliki has strengthened his grip on power and has been assisting Assad's forces in Syria. What is the future of this country?
You might notice that I have not mentioned the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This conflict is a particular academic interest of mine, but it is of very, very minor importance when one places it against the backdrop of the scene I have presented. The Syrian civil war has killed north of 125,000 people and is fought with very little consideration of civilian life; in fact, the Syrian military has used starvation as a purposeful tactic to weaken the opposition. There have been massacres of civilians, including the use of chemical weapons back in August. I have seen a horrific video of Hezbollah fighters dragging corpses and the barely living out of a truck and then proceeding to kill the living and to pump bullets into the already dead. Iran, which of course backs Assad to the hilt, is proceeding with its nuclear weapons program, and it is casting a very large shadow over the entire region. Our (in)action has infuriated Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain, among others, who fear, and have reason to fear, the Iranian bomb. Egypt is a country of 80 million people that is structurally unable to feed its own people.
In the meantime, despite the best efforts of John Kerry and the media, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been rather quiet. There have been a few incidents, sure, but they do not remotely compare to the hugely important events elsewhere in the region. Indeed, the only reason that these incidents are reported as widely as they are is because Israel is a popular whipping boy. A bulldozed home outside of Ramallah will appear more prominently in most Western newspapers than the murder, starvation, disease, and displacement that characterizes the war that is occurring literally right next door in Syria. The construction of apartments in Eastern Jerusalem will get more attention and boil more blood than the bombardment of Syrian cities by Bashar al-Assad's minions. And this, of course, points to the corrosive, disproportionate obsession with the Jewish state that characterizes much of the world. Taken in isolation, of course the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is important, as are all conflicts. They should all be taken seriously. It is when this conflict is clearly seen to override other developments in importance that things become wrong and dangerous. A proponent of the disproportionate attention on Israel would probably suggest that this is because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the "key conflict" in the region: the mama conflict from which all others stem. This is silliness, of course, but it is believed, in one degree or another, by a lot of people in Washington, D.C. and other important capitals around the world. "The road to peace lies through Jerusalem." But clearly the violence between Sunni and Shiite in Lebanon and Iraq, the war in Syria, the crisis in Egypt, Iran's aggrandizement, and past brutalities in the region (Hama in 1982; the Iran-Iraq War of 1980-88; the various civil wars in Yemen in the 1960s, 1980s, and 1990s; the Dhofar rebellion in Oman in the 1960s and 1970s; Bahrain's suppression of Shiites; Saddam Hussein's genocide of the Kurds and invasion of Kuwait; and on and on and on) have and had nothing to do with Israel/Palestine, at all. That conflict is but an alibi for leaders like Saddam Hussein, Hafez and Bashar al-Assad, and others to cloak their own brutality and drive for power in the region.
This has been, admittedly, a rather unfocused, scattered post. I'm a little rusty! But it's good to be back in the game.
I just spent 20 minutes writing a comment and Internet Explorer ate it! Will try to recreate it later. UG
ReplyDelete