The Arab World: Imagining Peace and Prosperity
I attended the conference “The Arab World: Imagining Peace and Prosperity” during the conferences of world affairs. The conference was led by Professor John Willis. The panel consisted of Ben Wagner, a British Professor specializing in Arab political thought, Kemal Kirisci, TÜSİAD (Turkish Industry and Business Association) Senior Fellow and Turkey Project Director, and Ross Wilson, a former U.S. Diplomat and ambassador.
While the panel was set to discuss the hypothetical prosperity of the region, Wagner started the debate with introducing the problems with our preconceived notions of the region and its conflicts. Strong opinions are had about the different problems and their potential solutions, but Wagner insists that we need to realize the ambiguity of the situation before we can functionally offer long term assistance.
Another issue with our perspectives is our tendencies of essentialism. We tend to see “the conflicted Middle East” instead of the many smaller and varying conflicts of the different people and cultures that occupies the region. The Media has continuously grouped and polarized these people to a point where our whole understanding of the region is disturbed.
Kirisci follows by being more optimistic about the idea of possible peace and prosperity in the region, but argues that the domestic conflicts coupled with the lacking system of inclusive policies as well as market cooperation is what keeps the Middle East from progressing.
Kirisci also uses Iraq’s recent development and way of improvement as an example of this reachable progression, stating that Iraq needed to hit rock bottom before they could start developing. The situation in Syria will either prove or abolish Kirisci’s theory when we see their development after they now are hitting rock bottom.
Kirisci also argues that our current goals for the Middle East with the Western World as a light house to lead the way is flawed, in that the Western World is currently in a state of regression, indicating that the Western World might be a functional role-model, but not a good one.
Wilson on the other hand, attributes the lack of development in the Middle East to an established system of violent politics in an ethnically divided region. The eras of corruption and violence is so fundamental to the system that revolutionizing movements like the Arab Spring will continue to sprout.
Wilson also argues that Russia and China has played a part in keeping from stabilizing the region, being the “Wild Cards” with increasing footholds in the region and adverse goals for their newfound influence.
Whether Russia and China’s influence is positive or negative could be argued. China’s operations to increase infrastructure has been well received and their influence has grown, but when you accept China’s benevolence you need to remember what they did to Tibet and the Rohunga’s in Myanmar.
A decreasing global reliance on the natural resources provided by the Middle Eastern region has also contributed to the instability, causing exports fundamental to their market and industry deteriorates and causes economic turmoil. While the Western World has decreased their importation of Middle Eastern oil and natural gasses, China has increased theirs, establishing China as a consumer and ally, further growing their influence.
The panel argues that despite the decline in global demand for their products, their own development as well as increasing cooperation could easily facilitate the gaps left by the global market, leading the region not only into a time of development, but also increased regional independence from the global markets.
Abolishing borders and strengthening unions was seen as a step towards progression by the panel, and its success can be seen by the customs and immigration deals between Turkey and the European Union of 1995. The free migration between Turkey and The European Union came as a side-effect of the deal, but proved to be a great element in securing cooperation. Today the deals secure more Europeans into Turkey than the other way around.
The weakening of borders both economically and geographically has proven to work positively in developing regions in other parts of the world as well. In an attempt to reestablish their economies after a challenging time at the end of the 20th century, Asian countries went into an Economic Cooperation (APEC), which through harmonizing products and streamlined borders dramatically increased their trade between them, but also decreased their political disputes.
An attempted unification would be impossible with the current situation in Syria, where Kirisci says “Assad has basically won” and that Syria currently is “a black hole exporting instability.” While this problem is apparent, Kirisci says “no one is willing to pay the price.”
The position the United States takes in this conflict will be detrimental to its future diplomatic possibilities and layout of the world, which is why Wilson urges patience. Attempts at pushing agendas through soft power and positive encouragement are Wilson’s solutions to gradually dealing with the established autocracies.
The panelists all seemed to agree to that the idea of increased cooperation within the region would be the most successful approach to establishing growth and prosperity. The increased cooperation will not only be productive for the economy, but also prove as a mediator for the political conflicts the now already cooperating nations are facing. While the situation now might seem dire, Kirisci reminds us of a Syria before the Assads that “almost became the oasis of opportunity that we wanted.”
Image Sources
https://www.dawn.com/news/761503
http://www.iranreview.org/content/Documents/Is-Iraq-Bound-for-the-Same-Destiny-as-Syria-.htm
