|
|
CPDS Home Contact |
Introduction
+
|
Introduction As a result of the outbreak of conflict in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah in mid 2006, there were many calls for real solutions to problems in the Middle East. For example:
Such calls recognise the need to do more than contain current violence (eg to create an environment in which people of the Middle East can gain peace and justice). The purpose of this document is to suggest what might be required to achieve such an outcome - and that this seems well beyond what appears to be being considered in diplomatic efforts to prevent violence. |
Qualification |
[This document is in a very preliminary form and requires extensive adjustment] Author's approach The author has no detailed knowledge of conflicts in the Middle East - much less who is 'right' or 'wrong'. All parties seem to have been pig-headed and to have preferred violence to other options. Rather the author comes at this question primarily from the viewpoint what has been required for the development of modern societies (with particular consideration of the situation of Western societies and East Asia) which has suggested issues in relation to the Middle East's predicament). |
Overview |
The problem raised by conflict in the Middle East is far wider than the actions of terrorist organisations or Israel's efforts to defend itself. Though Israel's relationships with its neighbours are a 'sore' in the Middle East, this is not the only point of conflict / instability and there are broader concerns that help inflame the 'sore' - especially the autocratic governance, poor economic performance and alienation from global cultures that characterise many countries in the region. Thus 'development' issues are of central importance to conflict / instability in the Middle East. In fact the major obstacle to ending violence is arguably that attention is focused on actual or potential conflicts and military / security methods are emphasised as a response, which has the effect of preventing serious attention to the contextual factors that have a key role in driving those conflicts. The stakes are rising. Attempts by the US to promote political and economic progress through use of force to displace bad governments in the Middle East to head off a radical Islamist 'revolution' have been based on the theory that pre-emption would make a future global-scale conflict. However Islamist extremists show increasing power (eg Iran is heading towards nuclear weapons; chaos rather than effective government prevails in Iraq and Afghanistan; and Hizbollah's resistance to Israeli attempts to destroy it in southern Lebanon was vastly more effective than had been expected). Unless the conflict is resolved diplomatically or ideologically, the potential for far wider and more destructive regional conflicts is increasing. A better way to prevent conflict would be to demonstrate that this can't really lead to progress in resolving the underlying causes of tensions in the Middle East. This should be obvious as the history of the region over the last few decades suggests that conflict is mutually destructive and self-perpetuating. However Israel (and indeed the US and various Middle Eastern governments) deserve to be exposed as foolish for their use of primarily militarily / security methods in attempting to prevent attacks by Islamist extremists, because (a) this has the effect of validating their cause and (b) demonstrating to Muslim populations the probable futility of the extremists' ideology (ie their lack of any practical solutions to challenges facing the Middle East) should be a far easier, cheaper, more effective and less damaging way to reduce the potential for conflict. This could perhaps be achieved by methods speculated in Discouraging Pointless Extremism. The latter suggests, for example, that the Islamist goal of governing complex / ever-changing social and economic systems in accordance with simpler and unchanging religious principles can probably be shown to be unworkable. Israel (and the US and others who have sought to discourage Islamist extremism) have largely failed to even try to demonstrate the impracticality of politicising religion. The Cold War ended when people in the Soviet world realized that Communism was not a sensible way to manage an economy or society. Careful evaluation and public exposure of the practicality (or otherwise) of Islamist ideologies should take a lot more tension out of the Middle East than Israel's military action against Islamist extremists on its borders (or war crimes' charges to moderate that action). |
Non Solutions |
'Solutions' that would not work US president has called for Muslims generally to reject extremism and reiterated his (a) intent to fight terrorism (b) intent to pressure for democratic political reforms in Middle East and [ref]
This can't work because of the absence of preconditions for a democratic system of government to be effective (eg a social order based on a belief in liberty; and civil institutions to develop policy options). War crimes: Israel's use of excessive force in Lebanon could probably be the basis
for war crimes' action. It matters little whether Israel's use of excessive force was the result of (a) an attempt at deterrence reflecting its insecurity (b) intelligence blunders or (c) an attempt to provoke action by Syria / Iran that would rationalise a response favourable to nations having heavier firepower. |
Reducing Contextual Stresses |
Real Solutions: Reducing Contextual Stresses? The political and economic context in the Middle East could be improved if attention could be given to them. For example:
The US's political environment is a significant part of the problem because it allows excess influence through lobbying by influential interest groups - ie by something like a 'military industrial complex'. Under this influence the US has been unable to view problems in the Middle East other than through a militarist lens - though at times in the past its leadership would probably have been capable of taking a broader view. The methods that the US is using are accelerating the decline of its status and reputation in the world (ie those methods are not in the interests of the US itself). It is vital to encourage the world community to lift its sights from simple concern with conflicts. A better option is to encourage world leaders to look at the 'big picture' questions so as to give the peoples of the Middle East some hope of a future.. |