The State and War in the Middle East Sources to look at: Foreign Policy, Middle East Studies Association, World Bank, Refugee Republic, Majlis Blog, Angry Arab Types of conflict: Civil War or rather Internal War - armed competition over political order within a state Yemen - 2 incidents, 69-71, 94-95 (officially unified, south lost) Lebanon - 79-89 Doha Rebellion 60s Western Sahara Iraq - 03-08 Syria - 1982 Egypt - 1990s Algeria - 1990s Revolution Iranian - '79 Egypt - '52 Iraq - '58 Interstate War Iran Iraq War (high casualties) Iraq Kuwait War Arab Israeli Wars Post-colonial Wars Algeria Palestine Syria Iraq Superpower Intervention United States in Iraq (both now and during Kuwait occupation) Suez Crisis Lebanon - '58, '82 Genocide Armenian Genocide Anfal Campaign - Saddam Hussein attempting to wipe out Iraqi Kurds and explained it as war casualties In terms of frequency and intensity of war: Western World - less frequent, more intense Middle East - more frequent, medium intensity Adverse effects of conflict Refugee, loss of life, internal displacement Instability causes a loss of opportunity Lack of infrastructure and increase of corruption Conflict does not usually yield political outcomes or border changes Middle East does not seem to have conflict that ends conclusively Future Conflicts Yemen and Saudi Arabia Iran and Israel Political changes in Iraq Hezbollah in Lebanon Gaza Westbank Assassination, leader dying, major terrorism incident Charles Tilly: War makes states, states make war Why strong states (developed) came about and why weak (developing) came about In the developed world our domestic lives are becoming more peaceful, more social order The path to this peace involved countless years of violence There are fewer political entities Agrarian societies ---> Fuedal principalities ---> Organized political rule This process is sovereign extinction To do this you have to disarm the mercenaries and populations and create borders Geographically resident princes and political authorities war on each other to gain monopolies of violence and finance Conquest Results Political power consolidated by disarming populace (militias outlawed) Fiscal boundaries... in versus out delineate resources, population, taxation Bureaucratic and Logistic Logics type of new armies, new technologies and European war use of mercenaries (who have weapons and no allegiances) decreases because of demand for national armies and getting rid of domestic rivals bureaucratic demands logistic responses size is virtue economies of scale and specialization - advent of credit and monetization running out of poor people to fight allegiance becomes necessary with bigger states demand for better armies you have to create huge infrastructure for armies bureaucracy, weaponry, comodification Problem of debt? Princes and feudalism relied on tributes, rents, and seizure for money Racketeers - organized crime Borrowing money and not giving it back Ratchet effect - higher budgets after wars Capital becomes mobile so people move and sources of money for principalities leave Move to direct taxation Taxation = representation Political ---> Administration ---> Fiscal (WAR = POLITICS) What kind of Western state do we have? Very little violence in states, national security gets better What about the rest? Time, the states in the Middle East were formed in the 20th century Outside influence The European Experience - patterns of death and violence over time, number of states over time What are the variables to explain conflict in the Middle East? State: state development, what it is does what it doesn't do? Identifiable actors, most powerful, coercive means, easiest to follow, they set up infrastructure, borders, alliances etc. Why do we focus on non-state actors more than state actors? states have legitimate use of force? States as a source of instability or potential solutions Random VOCAB: Majlis - special gatherings, "a place of setting", possibly parliament? Ian Lustick: The reasons why the Middle East doesn't have a regional power? It has resources, it's centrally located in the world, generally homogenous culture In comparison to how North American and European countries developed, the Middle East has far more external influence Intentionality (whose fault is it?) is an issue that cannot be debated so easily; it's just history Tilly with all his friends... China, Brazil, India were capable of becoming "great powers" without major wars In Africa, weak states are defined by the conflict between Juridical Sovereignty (legal) and Empirical Sovereignty (actual) States often without infrastructure, cohesion, order In the Ottoman Empire, Muhammad Ali is sent to control over Egypt and breaks away and wants to make it a great power: prospective state builder Egypt had resources, war capability Muhammad Ali was taken down by the great powers of Europe, the Ottoman's were handed a bill and they took it out on the Egyptians Nasser created Pan-Arabism and tried to create an identity Eisenhower doctrine - anyone who fights communism, the US will help; Nasser goes against this and therefore the United States Saddam Hussein as well So what? Circumstantial, it doesn't have to do with culture, leadership, and religion, etc. Brian Job: What is a weak state? Lack of infrastructure, lack of roots Security becomes a question for security for whom? State? Regime? Nation? There are a different kind of securities It's important what's going on on the inside Security dilemma does not apply states view the world as a danger, states are always trying to protect themselves so preemptively others do the same ways out - alliances In the developing world it is a insecurity dilemma within a state there are rival claims to security internally there is a security dilemma threats to security are usually domestic state borders are protected and are sacro-sanct you get protracted social conflicts conflicts that escape the concept that conflicts are getting less frequent and more intense makes resolution and comparison incredibly difficult finding out information and what's important is very difficult The developing states want to stay like they seem weak so they can pull support from stronger states? Bernard Lewis: Is an Orientalist Intellectual father of neo conservatism Was a consultant to neo-conservatists in the Bush Administration Starts out with the birth of Islam - this was when they were unified, it was a classic view of Islam conflictual from the beginning - there are Islams and there are infidels, the Muslims must bring the others into enlightenment Why is there a separation between church and state with Christianity? with chrisitianity they do not always follow doctrine Ultimately in this piece he believes that it is too risky to force change in the Muslim world and that we shouldn't get involved In the future he believes the conflict comes to the west Why Muslims hate the West? Anti-west: incorporation of other ideas from the Germans and the French The west is hollow, we have no culture, we are a corruptive force But this isn't wide spread Support for Israel and ignorance of Israeli violations Soviet Union recognized Israel first, but we haven't ALWAYS supported Israel Psychological mindset that Israel is a threat... how much does public opinion in the Middle East go against Israel? Americans support immoral regimes It does not suffice because a lot of the regimes are ineffective Racism? Not any less than them Imperialsim as well America was just following the projected plan of an empire (nothing different) Slavery was stopped in the west first *Historical Pyschosis *The Arabs/Muslims feel humiliated leading to rage *Lewis generalizes all Muslims Olivier Roy Two moving parts of piece: one delves into the intricate conflicts within the Middle East internally how American policy doesn't really take into account these intricacies and doesn't really understand them Islamism and Islamist - religion and politics must be joined (Lewis sees this as a monolith) Military vanguard Islamic State Sharia law applied narrowly to family, personal sphere, morality Saudi model Sharia Law is selectively applied to maintain politics Sharia Law Cultural - Bottom up There is an attempt to be geostragetical but because they cannot be because they are local Politics is better than socio-cultural If socio-cultural is the main actor than why does neoconservative top-down method fail? There is no legitimacy and they cannot create loyalty to state Democracy seems insincere ACcountability is necessary Roy unpacks the monolith of Lewis What binds Islam? Today Islamists and secularists are bound by their opposition to the regimes The three traumas of the Arabs in the Middle East (starting on pp.74) Shi'ia is a minority in the Arab world... Charles Doran Similarities with Lewis - believes rage is connected to Islam However he doesn't completely ignore the politics Doran gives more examples Explicitly says the Islamists arguments are rooted in politics Gives more agency to the US, but that they are still secondary Why did this specific group (Bin Laden) attack us specifically? Focus on Sunni Islamists Muslim Brotherhood - Egypt, 1923 Hamas - Gaza, 1962 Islamic Action Front DISTINCTION - Saudi Arabi has the Wahabi and is NOT related to the MB Salafi They believe that they must emulate their forefathers The Muslim world has been polluted and must be recaptured Fundamentalist can be applied in this sense They are a social movement and are not politically organized Salafeen dress differently and they stand out They may not be organized but there is a strong sense of belief and current The closer you get to Shi'ia borders there is an increase in Salafi Because it is not politically defined it is flexible The politically defined groups just reframe everything; they force compromise; "we'll liberate this part of the land" Israel doesn't trust Hamas because once Hamas gets power they'll want it all These groups are social movements and don't really have concrete political platforms and doctrine Hubal - pagans that converted, idolatry, they are the disease of Islam Secularists and Islamists have same disdain for United States Balanced polymorphism with religious/cutlural/doctrinal and political Al Qassam The Palestinians get kicked out of the economy essentially (shift from Jaffa to Haifa) Hashemites from Saudi Arabia - in Iraq and Jordan... Abdullah They sold the Palestinians?? Individual Peace Treaties fro Israel Neve Gordon Uses metaphors to show how things have changed... The occupation of Palestine has changed in many ways Statist Bias State is autonomous Was no agency, state acted in a political vaccuum State is embedded in society Shift of modes in Israeli policies, and the contradictions that exist within the Palestinian agency and Israeli politics Modes of Power Disciplinary Power - creating laws and forcing people to comply, disseminate homogenaity and norms, differences can be easily noted Bio Power - homogenizing society, standardizing institutions, populations as opposed to individuals Sovereign Power - legislative power, and executive enforcement Modalities of Control - principles underlining the control (which were temporariness and abitrariness) Normalize so that there is not an initial uproar from Palestinians Controlling Mechanisms Legal system - new one being created, that does not apply to Jews, Ad hoc situation, Isreali's carry a cone of legality Law is arbitrary - it's applied and not in different areas Military administration High Court Permit Regime Privileges Surveillances Illusion of "Temporary" occupation caused contradiction and caused Palestinian agency Allowing Palestinians to build Universities but regulating what goes in and out of them... contradictions! Sovereign power dominates - reduces the power of Jordan's influence in Israel and how they helped to manage the Palestinian populations (ch.2) Sovereign power starts and goes into disciplinary and bio power Why do the Israeli's feel like they have to do this? deportation, arrests, measures against strikes, shutting down of businesses Colonization Principle - Separation Land/People Contradiction - Israel, Palestinian 1987 First Intifada Popular uprising, relatvely nonviolent 1993 Oslo Peace Process - Outsourcing (Marxist thought) Original sin is colonization and occupation 2000 Second Intifada Israeli settlements restrict movements Sayidi unpacking israeli analytical revisionist theory War ----> Palestinian Palestinian identity was formed before 1967 Once you take the war away, problems will arise and PLO will fail Gordon Occupation ----> Palestinian One State/Two State Solution Identity - contradictions, the policies that were meant to fragment the palestinian population actually gave them a shared experience PLO and Fatah and DFLP is an institution in the hopes of an eventual state They are funded by rents from other countries But this results in more outside influence Politics of the Elites Ideological basis of Apartheid is racism Hafrada - Separation (Apartheid) The Israeli-Palestinian case is not exceptional, it happens everywhere else (grand scale)