Middle East” As a Framework of Analysis: Re-Mapping a Region in the Era of Globalization
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The “Middle East” as a Framework of Analysis: Re-mapping A Region in the Era of Globalization Rashid Khalidi In recent years, there has been increasing dissatisfac- English term. The Turkish and Persian terms for the region tion among many scholars with the term “Middle East” as a are also translations of the term “Middle East.” Sadly, al- designation for the vast region lying between the Atlantic sharq al-awsat in Arabic, and analogous terms in other Ocean, Central Asia and India. This dissatisfaction results regional languages, indicate that an external perception of in part from the fact that the term is one of many relics of an the region is prevalent in countries of the “Middle East” earlier, Eurocentric era, when things were “near,” or “far,” or itself. In Western countries, this reaches the point of a per- in the “middle,” in relation to the privileged vantage point verse sense that in this region — perhaps even more than of Europe.1 in others in the non-Western world — the West has a pecu- While similar designations for other regions, such as liar proprietary interest. This was clearly indicated during “the Far East,” and “the Indian subcontinent,” are being the second Gulf War (the Iran-Iraq war being the first) when discarded in academia in favor of more geographically neu- politicians and commentators in the United States fre- tral terms like East Asia and South Asia, this has not hap- quently referred to “our oil,” speaking not of the oil-fields pened with regard to the “Middle East.” It would certainly of Texas and Oklahoma but of those of Saudi Arabia and be feasible to describe this region strictly in terms of its Kuwait. geography (as west Asia and North Africa,2 or as the land It goes without saying that within this region there exist mass between the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Indian other ways of describing it, representing quite distinct al- Ocean and the Black Sea) or in terms of its culture (Islamic, ternative world views. Thus the Arabic terms for “Arab or Mediterranean, for example) or in other terms. But with world” and “Islamic world:” “al-alam al-Arabi,” and “al- few exceptions, this has not happened in most departments alam al-Islami;” the even more highly charged terms for the and centers devoted to the study of this region in the Arab nation and the Islamic community, “al-umma al- United States. The older language-based units generally Arabiyya,” and “al-umma al-Islamiyya,” represent power- still tend to describe it as the Near East, and the newer area ful competing frameworks for describing and understanding studies centers as the “Middle East.”3 this region. One finds these terms in the political writings of The old Eurocentric appellation has not only remained Arab nationalists and Islamists respectively, and in much of in both academia and the public domain, but has continued the public discourse which they have influenced over the to shape the way in which the region is regarded in the Eng- past few decades (as well as in earlier writings). But in spite lish-speaking world (and through its French and German of the impact of these powerful trends of thought, it is the analogues, “moyen Orient” and “naher osten,” even farther imported term “Middle East” in translation which seems to afield). Thus, a description of this region as a function of its enjoy the greatest currency in the Arab and other countries position vis -à-vis Europe, rather than for something inher- in the region. ently intrinsic, is not only archaic and misleading but con- There are other problems with the term “Middle East.” tinues to shape a perception of the region as being defined One is the lack of a precise definition of the areas, coun- in terms of the perspectives and concerns of others. tries, cultures, religions, and language groups which are Even within the “Middle East” itself, this term has great encompassed by this designation. In spite of the wide- currency, with the standard designation in Arabic, “al- spread use of the term, there is no consensus as to pre- sharq al-awsat,” being no more than a translation of the cisely where the “Middle East” is, what its limits are, and © 1998: COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF SOUTH ASIA, AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST (formerly SOUTH ASIA BULLETIN), Vol. XVIII No. 1 (1998) KHALIDI:THE “MIDDLE EAST” AS A FRAMEWORK OF ANALYSIS 75 what it includes. While some definitions include North Af- and China, rather than in the “Middle Eastern” historical rica, others do not — the United States State Department, core of the Islamic world, however defined. for example, for many years considered the “Middle East” If the “Middle East” is not synonymous with the Islamic to include the countries of West Asia and Egypt, but not world, whose center of gravity is today far to the east, what the rest of North Africa. By some definitions, the region is its central focus? It is perhaps most easily defined in includes Turkey, while by others it does not; by some it terms of the peoples who speak Arabic, Persian and Turk- includes Afghanistan, by others it does not, and so forth, ish, the three main historic languages of Islam. Even that stretching across a very broad range of countries on the definition causes problems, however, since there are many “periphery” of the “central” countries of the region. Practi- who speak other languages in the region (Berbers, Israelis, cally the only areas included in virtually every definition of and Kurds, to name but three) and many living well outside the “Middle East” are the “Fertile Crescent” – another old it who speak related languages, notably Tajik and a number term to signify geographical Syria and Mesopotamia – and of Turkic languages. the Arabian Peninsula. Iran and Egypt are almost always Other problems with this term are broader ones, which included, but are left out by a few definitions, and so it relate to this and other regions, and to the institutional goes. processes whereby they are defined, studied and processed Beyond this, even if there is a general sense of which into knowledge in universities and els ewhere. Thus the broad areas are included, there is no clear idea of where the enterprise of area studies as it has developed in the Ameri- precise limits of the region are. This is true wherever no can academic community since World War II has left us in clear boundary is provided by a large body of water like the the late 1990s with a Balkanized set of fields, each one in Atlantic, the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, or the Indian large measure isolated from the others, and all of them suf- Ocean. Thus the question arises in Western Africa over fering from a greater or lesser degree of isolation from much whether the “Middle East” ends in the Sahara or south of it, of what is going on in the broader realms of the social sci- and in Eastern Africa whether it includes the Horn of Africa ences and the humanities. or not; or at the region’s eastern limits, in West Asia, where In the study of the “Middle East,”4 for example, complex by some definitions Pakistan and Afghanistan are part of processes which transcend regions, such as the trade, capi- the “Middle East” and by others they are not; or to the tal and labor flows between countries all around the rim of north-east, where the question arises of how much, if any, the Indian Ocean, which in differing forms appear to have of Central Asia is part of the region. The latter question has been quite significant for a very long time, have been given been reopened by the collapse of the Soviet Union, and by far less attention than they deserve (and less attention than the resultant closer involvement of the countries and peo- a newly discovered “region,” the Pacific rim). This has oc- ples of Central Asia with Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and curred partly because these processes transcend several other states to their south, which has renewed historic con- fields which have been reified through the fields known as nections between them. “Middle East studies,” “African studies,” and “South Asian Leaving aside these seemingly trivial definitional prob- studies.” Beyond this, little attention has been paid in the lems, there are others relating to the confusion — in the “Middle East” field to what was happening in other West at least — about the identity of the people who live in branches of area studies. This was true whether it was the this region: are they all Muslims, or all A rabs, and if so does study of South Asia, where the Subaltern School has had a this mean that other peoples living in the “Middle East,” profound influence which has now gone well beyond the such as the Turks and Iranians, are Arabs? Such questions, history of that region alone, or Latin American Studies, which we might expect to come only from those with a high where dependencia theory for many years was highly influ- degree of ignorance and a faulty education, are in fact ential in analyses not only of Latin America but of devel- commonly asked by many Americans and Europeans who opment and under-development generally. are neither ignorant nor poorly educated. At least in part, The situation today may indeed be worse than it was their confusion is rather a function of the fact that the term before the modern area studies approach was devised.5 To used to describe this region confounds many non-experts, explain why this is the case, it is necessary to discuss or at least fails to enlighten them sufficiently.