Middle East conflict and whether Western blame oversimplifies its causes

How very reasonable of the people who raised you.

Of course you are correct @Ihatetomatoes that it’s overly simplistic to blame all the ills of the world on “the West”. It removes all accountability from any country not part of the all big all powerful all evil “West”.

People who do so must find it self soothing in some way, it’s a mystery otherwise why they are so determined to maintain the delusion.

When I was little I was always told that two wrongs don't make a right.

There were also despots before the West rose to power. When the centre of civilisation and trade was the Silk Roads and their surrounds, and Europe was a muddy mess of the periphery.

There are despots today that the West did not install.

Is your position that the West is fully/ mostly to blame for the problems the ME faces today?

And who was it that put those despots in power ? That is the key here I reckon.

It's not even like HK so far as I can see. Before HK was due to be handed back, Deng made clear to the UK. No universal suffrage before the lease is up, or else we invade. No, They were basically handed over to whoever offered the best oil deal.

Not a great deal different really than if the SNP won an indy ref, and sovereignty was just handed over to the Duke of Argyle, to rule as an absolute monarch.

And see what happened when Iran did do democracy, the Brits and the US overthrew them and put their man in. A despot. Cos oil.

And then what happened when Iran overthrew the despot. They got crippling sanctions and were ostracized.

And if considering Iran, then Saudi Arabia needs to be considered. Ruled by an absolute monarchy, the same sharia law where women are property, but that is overlooked because they sell the oil and buy the fighter jets.

Colonisation has resulted in many countries being forced into poverty and exportation of their natural resources. That results in instability, corruption, extremist groups, civil wars, etc.

Yes colonisation has resulted in all those things but that colonisation has been done by various many different groups of people. The displacement and driving out of indigenous people has happened in counties all over the world. However the colonisation damage done in the middle east seems to take front stage for most activists. Yet they often fail to put the blame squarely for the destruction of countries at the feet of the ideology that has taken over and displaced most the people in the middle east for hundreds of years. The west do interfere deliberately in matters they should not because of various benefits they get from it but the problem started hundreds of years ago. The fact activists don't call out so much because they don't believe various groups should actually have their own agency, that they need western saviours because they are innocent of all wrongs is part of what keeps various conflicts going.

Bit like Donny?

Most Americans believe Trump has inappropriately profited since returning to power, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds

No one is suggesting the West hasn't interfered in the ME. That would be silly. It has obviously often interfered.

The OP is asking if we think all or most of the current problems in the ME are down to the West's interference. As if those poor people in the ME are completely without agency to help themselves or not.

I'm going to massively simplify everything and say... problems in the ME were not mainly caused by the West until Western empires rose, then while Western powers were the main powers then yes, the Western powers were the main instigators of problems... but now Western empires are in retreat and can no longer be held solely responsible. I'd say currently sectarianism and frankly medieval reading of ancient texts , and oil revenues being concentrated in the hands of a few despots are the main current problems. I don't blame the West for Islamic sectarianism or for every single leader who prioritizes his power and riches over the welfare of his own people.

No, that's American 'interference'. So what exactly? You don't think Iran's behaviour has anything to do with how that situation evolved?

Of course, the US is at war with Iran at this very moment. I think that counts as western interference.

Its like pulling teeth this thread. Just because something is true outside the ME doesn't make it any less applicable in the ME. The point is you cant generalise about 'The West' which is not a homogeneous thing at any point in time, being 'to blame' for ALL the instability in the ME as if countries in the ME have no power or agency or history of their own. Anyone can find a gotcha but what exactly does anyone ger out of that?

How to respond without using whataboutisms. Can't really. Because many of the things you say are not specific to the mid east.

Quotes from you in bold italics.

"the middle east has massive amounts of sectarianism,"

As does the west. NI for example.

"their own political thought which basically led to things like the muslim brotherhood and ba’athism"

Imagine that. Imagine them having their own political thought. Is that good or bad in your view ?

"he really thought westerners were total animals, women showing their bodies (i.e. being able to see them) animalistic sexual behaviour"

Yeah. Maybe he did. Not unusual really for anyone not travelled.

"People really have no idea how utterly unhinged some strains of thinking are."

Yup. Just look at any REFORM thread on here.

"The oppression of women and human rights abuses are definitely not taught by the west is it."

I assume you missed out a question mark. Do they need some teaching by the West ?

"The arab slave trade is much older than the western one and much more enduring,"

See US prisons and their labour system. Happens today. The UK has ppl in jail for for slavery.. today.

"When Arabs fight it’s gassing Kurds, dropping chemical weapons out of helicopters on civilians."

As opposed to dropping big bombs, and firing missiles at schools. Are you saying they don't fight fair ?

"Many countries still allow child marriage with a judges approval."

No doubt they do. Was there not a UK boxers daughter just got married at 16 ? There are still 4 US states with no minimum age.

"A lot of the problems really are still high amounts of religious conviction and sometimes an aversion to proper education."

Are those connected ? You mean like religious home schoolers in the west ?

"There is a tension between people who believe in caliphate style systems built around religious authority and people who believe in some sort of secularised governance."

Yes. Like everywhere else, there are different opinions. See above re Reform. Add in communists, separatists, religious fundies etc.

"Even with Sykes Picot, the border is drawn yet people insist on bothering their neighbours."

Naughty people. Arguing over borders someone drew for them. The UK and Ireland still argue over Rockall. Spain and the UK over Gibralter. Argentina.... And have you seen is going on in South Asia ?

"Iraq decided Kuwait was actually a province of Iraq."

Trump is saying the SOH is US territory now. Dictators really should stop doing that.

"When Lebanon was occupied by Syria Assad used to go on about Lebanon should be absorbed into “Greater Syria”"

Expansionist. Putin comes to mind.

"Literally nothing is forcing you to try to strong arm anyone else."

Tell Trump that re Greenland, Canada, Panama, VZ, ....

"With Arab countries every accusation is a confession tbh."

What do they accuse people of ?

"History didn’t start in the 1960’s"

Yup. Big bang. But evangelists disagree with that.

"I mean even the spread of Islam is a story of war, colonialism, Imperialism, eradication of indigenous religions and cultures."

Not familiar with the History of Christianity then ?

So there you go. I took the time to go through your gish gallop list of points. What is the trajectory of your argument? Because I am not seeing anything specific to the mid east here.

Now take those issues, the same issues that are found anywhere, and throw on a massive big dollop of foreign interference from the west. Mainly the US.

There I go what? Only a fool would say the empire did no damage, and I have not said or implied any such thing. Im not conceding anything. Its a matter of historical record. 'The West' by the way was not and is not an empire.

Quote " Others see the damage they did".

There you go then. So you do concede that empire was damaging for the countries taken over.

Two very interesting books to read for you @Ihatetomatoes :

Leon Uris Exodus
Georgia Howell Queen of the Dessert: The extraordinary Life of Gertrude Bell

These conflicts did not start in the 1980's. It's running very deep and has It's routes in the past. While blaming the West is simplifying things, it's still a valid explanation for the ongoing conflicts in the region. The West have had no understanding of the culture of the countries they colonised ... start there on your journey to understanding and making sense of the conflicts. Then add oil & greed and you are off to a good start!

Exactly. Making everything about the West is part of the imperial mindset!

This is exactly the sort of lazy stuff Im talking about. All this map shows is that Britain had a big empire - something I think we all knew. It doesn't show anything about the huge differences in governance arrangements and relationships with the existing power structures in those countries. There isn't a one size fits all. One of the funny things about travelling in many of those countries, as I have done, is how favourably a lot of people look on the British past. Others see the damage they did. Others hate them.

I think people forget that the middle east has massive amounts of sectarianism, their own political thought which basically led to things like the muslim brotherhood and ba’athism. I remember reading a quote by Sayyid Qatab about when he went to America, he really thought westerners were total animals, women showing their bodies (i.e. being able to see them) animalistic sexual behaviour (people dancing). People really have no idea how utterly unhinged some strains of thinking are. The oppression of women and human rights abuses are definitely not taught by the west is it. The arab slave trade is much older than the western one and much more enduring, I think the last country to ban slavery in the Gulf was Oman, and that was in the 1970’s. When Arabs fight it’s gassing Kurds, dropping chemical weapons out of helicopters on civilians. Many countries still allow child marriage with a judges approval.

A lot of the problems really are still high amounts of religious conviction and sometimes an aversion to proper education. There is a tension between people who believe in caliphate style systems built around religious authority and people who believe in some sort of secularised governance. Arabs have their own stuff going on, not everything is about the west.

Even with Sykes Picot, the border is drawn yet people insist on bothering their neighbours. Iraq decided Kuwait was actually a province of Iraq. When Lebanon was occupied by Syria Assad used to go on about Lebanon should be absorbed into “Greater Syria”. Literally nothing is forcing you to try to strong arm anyone else. With arab countries every accusation is a confession tbh. History didn’t start in the 1960’s. I mean even the spread of Islam is a story of war, colonialism, Imperialism, eradication of indigenous religions and cultures.

You said, quote "Its racist and lazy to blame the West for everything that goes wrong elsewhere. It infantilises and others people other parts of the world."

Where has anyone mentioned race if they say that stuff like this ...

August 19, 1953: CIA and MI-6 Conduct Iranian Coup, Reinstate the Shah - History and Headlines

... rather messes things up for the citizens of a sovereign country ?

Or how about then two army officers pull of a map of the middle east and draw lines over it and decide what the countries will be ? I would say that "nfantilises and others people other parts of the world."

I don't see how saying the above example are wrong is lazy, racist, and infantilises people.

Can you explain how saying "hey that was wrong and it messed things up" is racist ?

'Because it infantilises and others people in other parts of the world' on the basis of them being a different race.

Of course.

So why is it racist ?

Two things can be true at once.

Why is it racist ?

And when you say" It infantilises and others people other parts of the world.", I would say that is exactly what the West done. Over the weekend I read Bligh's account of his boat journey after the Mutiny on the Bounty. Bit odd really, that they would sail past some island, note it's position, and claim it as British without even landing there to say hello.