It all started in 18th century, where whole world was full of fiefdoms and serfdoms (with some exceptions). Europe rose in its military technology and their thirst for capitalist power has made them to conquer the whole world and establish their imperialism. For the luxury of few, they have exploited many as if it was a legitimate thing to do. The want for economic and political supremacy made European nations to fight against each other which culminated with world wars.
These wars resulted in the emergence of new nation-states, which actually should have carved through Woodrow Wilson's 14 point theory but ironically not. Along with this the decolonization has sculptured countries with disputed borders.
There formed countries with true reasons and strong leadership and some without reasons and ineffective leadership. The best example is the south Asia where partisan of Pakistan was totally unnecessary if it was not for the idiotic Islamic groups. Even the breaking of ottoman empire has left many minorities in each state making it politically unstable.
After years of decolonization, neo-imperialism has allowed external political factors to play in the internal politics of the third world. US attack on Iraq, failed intervention in Libya, intervention in Afghanistan are fine examples to quote. After the world wars the west intervention can be replaced by US intervention, and after 1991, world has become uni polar and a highway for US's economic conquer of world.
The current instability in the middle east is majorly due to the US intervention in the past and can be traced back to west intervention (colonies, breaking of ottoman empire). Saying that only western intervention has created the instability would be incorrect. Their own ethnic conflicts, medieval political thoughts have lead them to the present scenario. Except Tunisia there is no stable government after Arab spring. Today the condition of the Arab world has become such worse that it has left with two options wither go with the authoritarian rule of fall into anarchy.
These wars resulted in the emergence of new nation-states, which actually should have carved through Woodrow Wilson's 14 point theory but ironically not. Along with this the decolonization has sculptured countries with disputed borders.
There formed countries with true reasons and strong leadership and some without reasons and ineffective leadership. The best example is the south Asia where partisan of Pakistan was totally unnecessary if it was not for the idiotic Islamic groups. Even the breaking of ottoman empire has left many minorities in each state making it politically unstable.
After years of decolonization, neo-imperialism has allowed external political factors to play in the internal politics of the third world. US attack on Iraq, failed intervention in Libya, intervention in Afghanistan are fine examples to quote. After the world wars the west intervention can be replaced by US intervention, and after 1991, world has become uni polar and a highway for US's economic conquer of world.
The current instability in the middle east is majorly due to the US intervention in the past and can be traced back to west intervention (colonies, breaking of ottoman empire). Saying that only western intervention has created the instability would be incorrect. Their own ethnic conflicts, medieval political thoughts have lead them to the present scenario. Except Tunisia there is no stable government after Arab spring. Today the condition of the Arab world has become such worse that it has left with two options wither go with the authoritarian rule of fall into anarchy.
Instead of saying that only
ReplyDeletethe west is responsible for the failed political working of the Arab world which I totally hold them responsible for. Don't you think holding on to the old dogmatic laws and practices has made them vulnerable to such neocolonial attacks?
@dungeon(girl)
ReplyDeleteI guess i have already answered your question in my last paragraph