The ethnic factor in international relations in the Middle East: a historical retrospective and the current state

Dubinin Aleksandr Igorevich ORCID: 0009-0004-7237-1676 National Research Lobachevsky State University Nizhny Novgorod 603022, Russia, Nizhny Novgorod, Gagarina str., 23 adubinin40rus@mail.ru

"The ethnic factor in international relations in the Middle East: a historical retrospective and the current state".

Introduction

     The modern Middle East is a region located mainly in Western Asia and partly in North Africa. Vast territories from the Arabian Peninsula to Turkey, Israel and Egypt unite representatives of numerous peoples and faiths, whose views and beliefs are often radically different from each other. Thus, the formation of political systems in a number of Middle Eastern states in the twentieth century did not contribute to detente in relations between neighbors. Russian scientists pay considerable attention to the problems of relations between peoples in the Middle East.  I.V. Ryzhov, M.Y. Borodina and M.I. Savicheva single out "terrorism, internal as well as interstate conflicts, the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction" as the most pressing problems of the Middle East countries ^{[10, p.49]}. I.V. Ryzhov, M.Y. Borodina and F.A. Dorofeev also consider the problems of the confrontation of Islamic trends in the context of common security in the Middle East. They note that, given the current situation in the region, "an early stabilization of the Middle East situation is unlikely." ^[11] A.G. Volodin writes about the danger of increasing political terrorism in his article "Political terrorism and international security". In it, the scientist dwells in detail on the causes and criteria of extremist organizations in the Middle East and suggests ways to combat them. V. Nadein-Rayevsky draws attention to the difficult geopolitical situation, which is deteriorating due to the actions of major regional powers, such as Turkey, in relation to ethnic minorities. ^[9] I.D. Zvyagelskaya notes that in the modern Middle East, interstate conflicts recede into the background, giving way to internal contradictions based on developing traditional identities. ^[4] This article will consider the factors contributing to the escalation of tension in the Middle East in the context of the formation of state systems and their ethnic policy in the XXI century. The evolution of Turkey's relations with the countries of the Middle East and Russia is similarly considered in the article by M.P. Kirillova. ^[6] A wide range of topics devoted to ethnic, religious, cultural and political peculiarities of the countries of the region is covered in the collective monograph "The Middle East in a changing global context".^[1] The degree of involvement of military formations in the political life of the Middle East countries was analyzed by D.A. Mirgorod.^[8] Speaking about the influence of the countries of Europe and the United States on the position of forces in the region, an article by V.V. Duyan should be highlighted, considering through the prism of the Libyan civil war the problem of dividing spheres of influence not only in North Africa, but also in the Middle East. N.Y. Surkov studied the main trends in the development of Arab countries in his article "The Arab world in search of answers to the challenges of 2022" ^[12]   Foreign scientists also devote their research to this topic. A.Abdulmajid scientific article "Religious Diversity and Conflict in the Middle East" believes that the religious factor determining the choice of the political course of the Middle East countries. ^[14] The defining role of Islam is also discussed in M. Barbato's article "Postsecular Plurality in the Middle East: Expanding the Postsecular Approach to a Power Politics of Becoming". The author refers to the term "Political Islam" and believes that it is capable of challenging the traditional monarchies of Saudi Arabia, Morocco or Jordan. ^[15] The novelty of this work lies in the analysis and study of the historical prerequisites for the formation of statehood of individual countries of the Middle East, dividing them into groups to identify signs that affect the ethnic factor in international relations in the Middle East. 

Historical prerequisites for the formation of the statehood of the countries of the Middle East

    In order to study in more detail the problems stated in the topic of the article, it should be noted that many ethnic features inherent in individual countries of the region were finally formed during their statehood in the last century. At the same time , the emerging states should be divided into several types:

1) Historically dependent. The borders of such countries were determined by the metropolises and were formed, as a rule, without taking into account the ethnic and religious characteristics of the local population. The most striking examples are Iraq, Syria, Kuwait. It is worth noting that despite their independence, the European powers are still striving to extend their sphere of influence to these countries. During the so-called "Arab Spring", Western states made attempts to influence the situation in the country largely because of hydrocarbon resources and the desire to score political points. ^{[3, p. 26]} 

2) States that emerged due to the active struggle of national liberation movements for independence. Countries of this type at certain historical stages could have full or partial independence, but subsequently lost it. It is impossible not to mention Egypt, whose centuries-old history and culture were formed in ancient times. Having fallen into vassalage to the Ottoman Empire in the XVI century, Egypt was able to preserve its identity and eventually defend the right to exist as a separate entity on the world map. At the present stage, it is impossible not to note the militarization of the country, which occurred largely after the adoption of amendments to the Constitution of 2009. ^[8] The trend towards militarization of the ruling elite continued further. So, in 2014, during a military coup, the head of the country's armed forces, Abdul Fatah al-Sisi, became head of the armed forces. 

4) Individual, unique examples of the formation of statehood. The most striking example is Israel, whose inhabitants were expelled from their territories by the Romans and only eight hundred years later re-asserted their claims to the lost lands. Since the XIX century, numerous Jewish organizations began to teach Hebrew as a national language, thanks to which national identity began to form. However, as V. Kuznetsov and I.D. Zvyagelskaya note, "the Jewish national movement took shape in the context of European ideological trends" ^{[5, p. 137]}, which distinguishes Israel from the rest of the Middle East countries.  Turkey, as a fragment of the Ottoman Empire, has entered a new stage of its history in an order of reduced borders. At the same time, part of the modern elite still dreams of returning to its former greatness and imperial status. However, due to the country's membership in NATO, Turkey cannot fully pursue an independent policy. ^[6] Also, in many ways, it is Ankara's membership in the aforementioned military alliance that prevents close integration with Iran, which has made a colossal journey from a monarchy to an Islamic theocratic republic, while remaining largely within its historical borders. ^[12]

    The liberation movements that actively swept the Middle East after the First World War led to the fact that various approaches to state-building were already formed within the Arab world. Among them was the pan-Arab vector, the essence of which was to unite the people according to linguistic and ethnic principles. The sub-regional principle of the former territories of the Ottoman Empire was based on common values formed in individual provinces of the collapsed state, such as Lebanon, Iraq, Sudan, Egypt. In conclusion, it is impossible not to note the Islamic approach, the main idea of which was the transformation of religious foundations into a national idea. Thus, in Iran, the unifying role was played by the Farsi language, the imperial past and Shiism. Yu.S. Boychenko in the material "The increasing role of the ethno-confessional factor and its conflictogenic potential highlights religion as one of the most effective "ways of assembling identity."" ^{[2, p.126]}

    In the context of ethnic and religious confrontations, the example of Lebanon is interesting, in whose society there is a religious division between three currents at once: Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims and Christians. It seemed that thanks to the so-called National Pact (twentieth century), a compromise was reached between religious and ethnic communities in the country, however, subsequently the people of Lebanon were drawn into a bloody civil war. In the 21st century, Lebanon's ethnic problems have only worsened. A serious problem for the Lebanese was the Palestinian displaced persons (about 0.5 million people) ^{[7, p.30]} professing Sunnism, which is why most of them were denied a Lebanese passport. Towards the end of 2014, Syrians fleeing the war began to enter the country, which in turn alerted the local government, which decided to introduce entry visas for Syrian refugees. 

The situation of peoples who do not have their own statehood

    It is worth noting that there are numerous peoples in the Middle East who have national consciousness and identity, but have not received statehood. These are the Palestinian Arabs and Kurds, for whom the struggle for the creation of their own state is currently the most important. About ten million Palestinians are divided into two roughly equivalent parts, one of which lives in disputed territories with Israel, and the second is dispersed in other Arab countries. The Kurds, whose number is three times more, settled mainly in Turkey, Iraq, Iran and Syria. ^[13]

      However, only in the territory of Iraqi Kurdistan, the mentioned people received broad autonomy. In addition, the Kurds put forward claims to a city called Kikruk, which they considered their own historical capital. This settlement, rich in natural resources, has become a "stumbling block" between Arabs and Kurds. Thus, according to estimates, as of 2005, about 53% of Kurds and 27% of Arabs lived in Kirkuk. ^{[7, p.37]}  This city remains a subject of controversy to this day. Many Kurdish opinion leaders, including the head of the Kurdistan Democratic Party, Mahsud Barzani, consider Kikruk to be the original Kurdish territory.  Separately, it should be said about the 2017 referendum, during which the majority of Kurds voted for the creation of their own state were not accepted by the center - Baghdad.

    Thus, it can be concluded that the formation of statehood among the peoples of the Middle East took place according to different scenarios, which, of course, influenced the current unstable situation in the region. Religious, political, and ethnic factors contributed to the emergence of local conflicts and wars. So, in 2011, after a decade-long civil war, a unified Sudan split into northern and southern parts. Ethnic and religious contradictions (the majority in the north professed Islam, and in the south - Christianity), as well as the confrontation of elites became the starting point for disintegration processes within the state. In turn, a new civil war broke out in South Sudan after independence between the ethnic groups of Dinka and Nuer. ^{[1, p.115]} The struggle for control over resources and the confidence in the “election” of one's own tribe (tribalism) ignited the conflict with greater force.

The relationship between the central government and the power structures beyond its control

    One of the features of the countries of the Middle East is the presence of several law enforcement agencies that are not controlled by the official authorities at once, which in turn poses an immediate threat to the existence of the state apparatus. In the same Lebanon, simultaneously with the government forces and the police, there is a paramilitary formation of Hezbollah. So during the Second Lebanon War, it was this group that opposed the Israeli army, and in the Syrian crisis, Hezbollah forces supported government forces and participated in battles against the opposition and radicals who joined it.  Several parties actively supported from the outside have been fighting in Syria for several years in a row. Shiite militias from Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan joined the conflict on the side of the Syrian army, supported by the Russian Aerospace Forces, as well as Hezbollah. Terrorists from the IG (Banned in Russia) and other formations opposed the government forces. The United States of America and its allies provided assistance to the Kurdish self-defense units, which later merged into the "Syrian Democratic Forces". It should be noted that along with the Kurds, Arabs and representatives of other local ethnic groups are fighting in the SDF.^{[1, p.127]} Armed opposition groups are often singled out as a third party to the conflict, supported by Turkey, the Persian Gulf countries and the United States. In Iraq, the most powerful formation is the "popular mobilization forces", composed mostly of Shiites. In Iraqi Kurdistan, the so-called "Peshmerga" militias are of great importance, often replacing law enforcement agencies.  Representatives of this armed group actively opposed the forces of ISIS (Banned in Russia) and even liberated a number of territories from extremists. In Saudi Arabia, the National Guard is of great importance, formally subordinate to the monarch, but at the same time controlled by representatives of different clans of elites who promote their own interests. In fact, acting as an alternative force, the National Guard exerted pressure on the monarch. Thus, using the example of a number of countries in the Middle East, it can be traced that individual armed groups formed according to ethnic, religious or other principles can actively influence the policy of the central government, support the opposition, and in some cases militarily oppose the policy of the ruling elite.    

The situation of ethnic minorities in Turkey

    Speaking about international relations in the Middle East, it is worth paying attention to the situation of ethnic groups in Turkey, which has changed significantly by the beginning of the XXI century. After the 2002 elections, in which the Justice and Development Party received the majority of votes, a number of initiatives aimed at solving socio-cultural and ethnic problems were put forward. A project called "The Process of Democratic Initiative" was actively being worked out, designed to improve the standard of living of representatives of non-Muslim minorities. Thanks to the "Package of Democratic Transformations", a reform was carried out that allows teaching in foreign languages in non-State educational institutions. The Institute of Gypsy Language and Culture was opened at the University in Edirne. An action plan was also developed to support the Roma minority. After the 2015 elections, the number of representatives of ethnic and religious minorities in Parliament increased. It is worth noting that these decisions were ambiguously perceived by the population due to strong nationalist sentiments and the desire to create a single, monolithic Turkish nation. In addition, the term "minority" in Turkey was most often perceived with a negative connotation. Unlike in Europe, where this status was a privilege, in Turkey it was often accepted as recognition of a lower position in society.  Therefore, Kurds, Alevites and other representatives of a non-titular nation sought to avoid the concept of "minority" in order to exclude associations with segregation and isolation. ^{[1, p. 467]} Instead, they proposed the term "ethnic, linguistic or cultural group", which did not contradict the idea of the unity of the Turkish nation. ^[1] Thus, ethnic, religious and other groups did not receive the official status of a minority, but demanded the granting of rights that are considered to be the rights of minorities. ^[1] Consequently, Turkey's ethnic policy in the context of international relations can be considered contradictory. On the one hand, the ruling elite made concessions and granted greater rights to national minorities, on the other hand, the Kurds and Alevites did not have the status of officially recognized minorities. 

    As mentioned earlier, the Middle East is a specific region for a number of reasons. Separately, it is worth highlighting the formation of the so-called civil society in the region. As a rule, using the term "civil society", scientists refer to the concepts of European liberal democracy. However, in the monograph "The Middle East in a Changing Global Context" edited by V.G. Baranovsky and V.V. Naumkin, the thesis is put forward that the countries of the Middle East have their own civil society: Islamic movements have serious opportunities to mobilize supporters, often do not obey state bodies. ^{[1, p.197]} Of course, such religious movements do not contribute to democratic transformations, however, their actions contribute to the development of a civil society of the theocratic, illiberal type inherent in this region. Thus, the Middle Eastern society can exert pressure on the authorities and push through its own interests, including relations between the peoples of both a separate country and interstate relations, which is certainly a feature of this region.

Foreign influence in the Middle East

   Another significant aspect that should be kept in mind is the factor of foreign interference in the internal affairs of the region, which has already been mentioned above. Attempts to influence the situation in the region often result in serious civilian casualties and an increase in the number of radical people. So, the bloody events turned out to be the US intervention in the internal affairs of Iraq, which became the place of the struggle of Sunni radical movements with the Shiite militia. Largely due to the short-sighted policy pursued by the American side, namely the ban on the activities of the Arab Socialist Revival Party (PASV), the dissolution of the army and the destruction of the Iraqi state apparatus as such, the conflict involved an increasing number of followers of different views and religions. George W. Bush's policy on the ethno-confessional issue also contributed to further escalation. The Americans relied on Shiite organizations (the "Draft Party", the "Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution"), which could not but affect the mood of the Sunnis and contributed to the surge of interfaith hostility. Thus, V. V. Naumkin, referring to a Johns Hopkins University study, gives the following figures: "in the period from March 2003 to June 2006, 601,027 people died violently in Iraq."^{[7, p.34]}  It is worth noting that the increase in violence has led to an outflow of the population from the country, including among minorities. Thus, the number of Christians in the country has decreased from 1 million 400 thousand people to less than 400 thousand. ^{[7, p.35]} 

Conclusion

     Based on the above, it can be concluded that ethnic contradictions in the Middle East are deeply rooted in the political systems of states and depend on a number of reasons: from the unwillingness of certain countries and peoples to recognize sovereignty over certain territories of a state to contradictions at the confessional level. The article paid special attention to the history of the formation of statehood in individual countries, the strength and degree of involvement in the historical process of national liberation movements, as well as the desire of some numerous peoples (for example, the Kurds) to acquire their own statehood both in the twentieth and in the XXI century. All this, coupled with the confrontation of Islamic trends, the presence of armed formations not controlled by the central government and the desire of third countries, mainly Western European, to strengthen their own positions in the region, destabilizes the situation in the Middle East. 

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.