# Why the Middle East Keeps Failing



## Edward Campbell (12 Mar 2014)

We have a (22 page long) thread on Europe's continuing failures but it is not the only region with problems. This article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from _The Economist_ suggests that the Arab Middle East is also in political trouble:

http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21598718-americans-saudis-and-qataris-are-unusually-knotty-diplomatic-tangle-no-one


> *Diplomacy in the Gulf*
> No one is happy
> *Americans, Saudis and Qataris are in an unusually knotty diplomatic tangle*
> 
> ...




There are, I believe, other problems:

     1. Persistent worries about Arab banking, especially in the financing for the huge building projects undertaken by some free spending Gulf sheikhs; and

     2. Religious divisions, even amongst the predominantly _Sunni_ Gulf Arabs.  

I sympathize, just a wee tiny bit, with President Obama; the Middle East is the an entry point into a quagmire that extends from Morocco through Egypt and the Gulf to the Caspian Sea region, West Asia, and down into Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim country. The so called Islamic Crescent is not monolithic, there are religious, social and (deep) cultural differences. (In fact, in my own, personal travels, I met East Asian Muslims who are very upset about what they see as the _Arabization_ of their faith and attempts by both Egyptian and Saudi based (financed) imans to impose Arab cultural norms on e.g. Malaysians, who regard themselves as more _enlightened_ than the Arabs.) The _Asian pivot_ may allow the USA to help to counter (contain?) radical Islamic _movements_ in Philippines, Malaysia/Thailand and so on. In this effort America would be allied with China.  ???

Gulf oil is, of course, _strategically_ important vital to China, Europe and America.


----------



## FAL (12 Mar 2014)

When I was in Dubai, I was privileged to talk to a person in the know who was a consultant to the military of the UAE, possibly just Dubai. He said that they have minor skirmishes with a neighboring country militarily occasionally. This surprised me, as I never saw this on the news, but, if it doesn't help sell Big Macs and Chevys or advance the anti-family agenda in the West, it won't necessarily make the news in the West.

The latest one, he said, was a naval confrontation which the Emiratis/Dubai had won handily. I apologize for not recalling which country it was, but I believe it was the Saudis.

It seems that the peoples of the region can bicker, like any family, and remain brothers. The Middle East is just not like the paleface world.


----------



## Edward Campbell (3 Jul 2014)

The _Economist_, again, provides some historical perspective in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from that journal:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21606284-civilisation-used-lead-world-ruinsand-only-locals-can-rebuild-it


> The tragedy of the Arabs
> *A civilisation that used to lead the world is in ruins—and only the locals can rebuild it*
> 
> Jul 5th 2014
> ...




We need to take the opening paragraph with a grain of salt ... yes, the Arabs were _ahead_ of the West, but it wasn't, in the main, through their own efforts. What had happened was that the West, Europe, had fallen into its _dark ages_ and Jews, yes, Jews, had brought Greek and Roman _knowledge_ to "the great cities of Baghdad, Damascus and Cairo." But that's a quibble. The article is, substantially correct in both its identification of causes and the effects and the only possible solution: local people, Arabs, must reform their societies, their cultures, or they must perish.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Jul 2014)

Further quibble, it was Persians, Greeks that did much of the heavy thinking and even their Crusade hero was a Kurd. I would not say that Isam was radicalized in the 60-80's The Whabbis have been hard at work trying to radicalize Islam since the 1700's. In fact Deobandism sprang forth from Whabbism (I was wrong in another thread thinking that both evolved concurrently) and helped aggravate the existing conditions leading to the Indian Mutiny. t was the advent of oil money that has allowed the Whabbis to expand their influence on the rest of the Islamic world, using bribes, threats, community conformists and mosque building to do so.

with the current king so near his deathbed I wonder if a mild form of paralysis has formed in the leadership?


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 Jul 2014)

Kal, in _The Economist_, sums up Iraq:





Source: http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/full-width/images/print-edition/20140705_WWD000_0.jpg


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Jul 2014)

The last sentences of this article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from _Foreign Affairs_, strucke me:

          "The challenge for Israel is to maintain that state of readiness while at the same time making the humane and appropriate choices that ensure its security, enhance Israel’s attractiveness as a strategic and commercial partner
           for Western nations, and maintain its internal social cohesion over the long haul. This trifecta may seem impossible, but the first 19 years of Israel’s national existence suggest otherwise."

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141647/ariel-ilan-roth/how-hamas-won


> How Hamas Won
> *Israel's Tactical Success and Strategic Failure*
> 
> By Ariel Ilan Roth
> ...




My _sense_ is that Israel could and should be a a good, productive, neighbour and trading partner, even friend to other Middle Eastern countries. But I think it is clear that some (not all) Arabs and others (Persians, etc) disagree.

In the 1960s the Israelis waged and won a classic PR campaign. The Arabs learned and they hired the very best New York PR firms to burnish their image ... and they have, in my _opinion_, won the PR war now. And I think that PR war - the global "hearts and minds"/public opinion thing - matters more than all the tactical victories.

Israel must, as the old saying goes, win every battle, while the Arabs, Hamas, only need to get lucky once. I really doubt that Israel can survive in the Middle East, and I think that's a shame, for the Middle East.


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Jul 2014)

Some tidbits out of Israel/Gaza:

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration bans U.S. airlines from flying into Ben Gurion airport because of things that go boom coming from the Palestinian side.
While the U.N. complains about schools in Gaza being bombed by Israel, they've also complained (twice - here and here) about "someone" storing rockets in Gaza schools.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Jul 2014)

Hmm E.R.
I think that article makes a leap of faith that there were other options for Israel to choose. Perhaps for Lebanon, but not for Gaza other than not withdrawing. I think the writer was looking through a straw at a quote from Clausewitz.


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Jul 2014)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Hmm E.R.
> I think that article makes a leap of faith that there were other options for Israel to choose. Perhaps for Lebanon, but not for Gaza other than not withdrawing. I think the writer was looking through a straw at a quote from Clausewitz.




I don't disagree, but I think Hamas has found a great tactic and I think they are wining the global PR war. American radicals like Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin proposed a doctrine of _provocation_; experience says that the "forces of law and order" (Israel with respect to Gaza) must respond to increasingly outrageous provocation by taking increasingly strong measures against the "innocent" kids, the radicals. Eventually Hoffman, Rubin, _et al_ suggested the people, until then disinterested or pro "law and order," will be repulsed by the police (etc) actions and will turn their sympathy towards the kids/radicals. It works on a national scale, too, and Hamas knows it ... Israel knows it, too, but, as you say, what else can they do?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Jul 2014)

Considering the way the world is moving right now, Hamas PR moves may have little effect for the costs to themselves. They to have tactical and strategic limits and cannot maintain the status quo forever.


----------



## a_majoor (24 Jul 2014)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I don't disagree, but I think Hamas has found a great tactic and I think they are wining the global PR war. American radicals like Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin proposed a doctrine of _provocation_; experience says that the "forces of law and order" (Israel with respect to Gaza) must respond to increasingly outrageous provocation by taking increasingly strong measures against the "innocent" kids, the radicals. Eventually Hoffman, Rubin, _et al_ suggested the people, until then disinterested or pro "law and order," will be repulsed by the police (etc) actions and will turn their sympathy towards the kids/radicals. It works on a national scale, too, and Hamas knows it ... Israel knows it, too, but, as you say, what else can they do?



Even Hoffman wasn't original, the tactic of provocation was promoted in the "Mini Manual of the Urban Guerrilla" - Carlos Marighella's 1969 terrorism manual for Latin American revolutionaries. The tactic failed in Latin America because ultimately the State could raise the bar far higher that any revolutionary group could go (having far more resources), and if the "revolutionaries" went too far in their provocations, the local population would turn against them in revulsion rather than against the police.

The situation in Gaza is different, Hamas commits terrorism against Isreal, so Western observers are not in the same boat as the hapless populations of South American civilians caught between the depredations of the terrorists/revolutionaries and the Police. Hamas and the Arab world has also spent decades and hundreds of millions of dollars in their PR campaign, thus creating this moral inversion of the events in Gaza. Just watch any Canadian news broadcast and make a time chart: how much time is spent on the civilian "victims" vs the actions of Hamas? Is there even discussion of the fact that Hamas uses the population and nominally protected sites like schools, hospitals and mosques to store and fire weapons? Is there ever discussion on the fact Hamas encourages people top stay in targeted buildings even after a clear warning is given?

For that matter, on the other side, is Israel ever given credit for humanitarian pauses, or the policy of warning civilians in target buildings? When was the last time you saw gun camera footage of secondary explosions coming from a target during or after an Isreali strike (confirming there were weapons there?). Is there ever any expression of sympathy for Israeli victims of rocket attacks or the disruption of Israeli society from constant terror attacks in these reports?

I have a feeling that some sort of threshold has been crossed in Israeli society, however, and they are not going to stop fighting whenever the US or EU puts the pressure on them. They will be working very hard to inflict as much damage on the military and C2 infrastructure of Hamas, and to kill as many Hamas "fighters" as they possibly can, and only stop when they are ready to stop.


----------



## a_majoor (2 Aug 2014)

It really is all about culture. No matter what we say or do, this is how these people really behave:

http://thefederalist.com/2014/05/01/what-happens-when-a-palestinian-doesnt-hate-israel-enough/



> FOREIGN POLICY
> *What Happens When A Palestinian Doesn’t Hate Israel Enough?*
> By Luke Moon
> MAY 1, 2014
> ...


----------

