Posted on 01/19/2013 7:11:13 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Because of its strategic location between the two twentieth-century centers of Arab power, Egypt and Iraq, Syria has been for many decades a bellwether of Arab politics, viewed widely in the region as the heartland of Arab nationalism. The fact that the first major pan-Arab nationalist party, the Baath, was established in Syria and the leading roleplayed by Syrian (including Lebanese) intellectuals and activists in making pan-Arab ideology popular contributed greatly to this perception.
Moreover, whichever ideological or political trend emerged victorious in Syria came to dominate, more often than not, the Arab political scene. This was true in the 1950s and 1960s during the time of a "cold war" between “revolutionary” military regimes espousing the cause of Arab nationalism and conservative monarchies determined to hold on to their power and privilege. According to one analyst, today’s regional politics are showing signs of a new cold war, "and, once again, that broader conflict is manifesting itself in a struggle for Syria.”
But this new cold war extends beyond the Arab world. Saudi Arabia is being challenged by non-Arab Iran. Also, the ideological lines of conflict are blurry. Arch-conservative Gulf monarchies, steadfastly opposed to democracy in their own countries, support democracy in Syria, along with non-Arab democratic Turkey. Meanwhile, the authoritarian Assad has the support of Iran, whose hybrid political system encompasses both clerical and representative institutions.
Some argue that Iran’s role in the current regional cold war has introduced sectarian (Shia versus Sunni) as well ethnic (Persian versus Arab) divisions into the region.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
fyi
Iran—”cold” war? LOL! When the mad mullahs get their nukes mounted, there won’t be anything “cold” about it. But yeah, someone from the Middle East might try to convince us westerners of that.
Thanks Ernest. Iran doesn’t have a “hybrid political system” which “encompasses both clerical and representative institutions” — obviously there’s an agenda at work in this op-ed.
Three pages of complicated reading. It would be easy to say, I hope they kill one another, given that none of those Arab states actually have any friendly use for us.
The mealy-mouthed maggot claims Islam isn’t violent, Moslems are merely on a quest for dignity, and violence is just one of the tools it uses. IOW, Islam, and Moslems, are inherently violent, and can’t be trusted with a burned out match, or with a teaching job in any university.
Turkey’s stance on Israel will reverberate in Washington
The Middle East will never be the same. America must recognise Turkey’s emergence as the region’s pre-eminent power
Mohammed Ayoob
The Guardian, Monday 12 September 2011
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/12/turkey-israel-reverberates-washington
See? Turkey’s good, because it suddenly follows the Islamofascist agenda on Israel, as does Ayoob.
But, after a year or so, all his talk about “preeminent power” vanishes:
Turkey must beware the Syrian quagmire
Ankara risks being drawn into a conflict from which, unlike Saudi Arabia and the US, it cannot escape
Mohammed Ayoob
The Guardian, Thursday 4 October 2012 14.20 EDT
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/04/turkey-must-beware-syrian-quagmire
Everyone hates each other. Our work there is done.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.