1. Viola George Shenouda
900133171
In about 1000 words, comment on the below text from the Kissinger reading assigned in
relation to the current situation in the Middle East.
“Some of the postcolonial nations represent yet another distinct phenomenon. For many of them,
the current borders represent the administrative convenience of the imperial powers. French
Africa, possessing a large coastline, was segmented into seventeen administrative units, each of
which has since become a state. Belgian Africa – then called the Congo, now Zaire – had only a
very narrow outlet to the sea, and hence was governed as a single unit even though it constitutes
an area as large as Western Europe. In such circumstances, the state too often come to mean the
army, which was usually the only “national” institution. When the claim has collapsed, civil wars
has frequently been the consequence. If nineteenth – century standards of nationhood or
Wilsonian principles of self-determination were applied to such nations, a radical and
unpredicted realignment of frontiers would be inevitable. For them the alternative to the
territorial status quo lies in endless and brutal civil conflict.” (Page 807)
“In most [….] parts of the world, the state has preceded the nation; it was and often remains the
principal element in forming it. Political parties, where they exist, reflect fixed, usually
communal, identities; minorities and majorities tend to be permanent. In such societies, the
political process is about domination, not alternation in office, which takes place, if at all, by
coups rather than by constitutional procedures. The concept of a loyal opposition – the essence of
modern democracy – rarely prevails. Much more frequently, opposition is viewed as a threat to
national cohesion equated with treason and ruthlessly suppressed.” (Page 811)

2. Viola George Shenouda
900133171
Along with the breeze of the Arab Spring, the season brought up cases of non fulfillments,
and cases where storms have arisen instead. Kissinger seems to answer a question that was to
ring bells in the ears of this troubled region’s inhabitants today: Is the Middle East open to
democracy? Unlike the favored justification, it seems that the trouble is not on account of the
fact that democratic features are in their genesis, but on account of a failure, dictated by the
historic structure of those states.
Ever since the fall of the Ottoman Empire post the great war, this region and its people
have found themselves grouped and separated by lines of sand drawn by foreign hands. Passing
through an additional period under the status of mandates, a series of coup d’etats took place, and
for the first time, independence was experienced. For the first time, a newly acquired state of
nationhood came to its senses, integrating itself in border frames that it did not shape. That was
the time when an on ground state demanded its inhabitants to develop a nation. Taking the case
of Egypt for instance, independence was marked by the 1952 coup, popularly known as
revolution. The praised account of breaking free from the status of a kingdom to a republic was
shared by the military movement of the free officers. Hence Nasser, nourishing the notion of
nationalism, and most notably nationalizing the Suez Canal, the unexpected move of ejecting the
British remnants on this land. Viewed as a patriotic institution, the Egyptian military held this
history of legitimacy that continued to conquer the minds of the nation. Apart from controversies
about certain incidences when association was drawn between some military forces and protests’
suppression, the army and the people were chanted as one on the days of the January uprising,
2011. A following momentous trust in the military was witnessed on the 30th of June, 2013,
extending their legitimacy grant preceding the ousting of the Muslim Brotherhood’s regime.

3. Viola George Shenouda
900133171
The element of military has proven an equal significance in shaping domestic events as in
foreign ones, which was acutely demonstrated in the recent years of the region’s disturbances.
That is not primarily about the capacity of its arms’ strength but about its stance. This remains
the case in the ongoing Syrian civil war. Had not the military responded to protests with such
brutal crackdowns, the peaceful protests would have not progressed to armed rebellions,
duplicating the worsening of matters. However, the military remains viewed as part of the
resolution as well as being part of the current problem. As proven by neighbouring stories, the
army might be the only solution for terminating the chaos. A military coup, if succeeded in
conciliating the army with the people, might constrain the capability of ISIS seizing power.
The arising of ISIS, emerges as a today consequence of a century aged sentiment of
Islamism’s suppression, perhaps inherited ever since the period post the great war and continued
its strive for a consolidated Caliphate amidst the Arab regimes that failed to appease and
accommodate those Islamist aspirations. Today’s shattered image of the region demonstrates
Kissinger’s statement, that the application of of Wilsonian principles of self determination would
lead to radical and unpredicted realignment of frontiers. Today, the alternative to the past
territorial status quo is still illustrated in every rift in the core of these so called nations. Sectarian
divisions continue to make the post colonial borders porous and twitching. Remarkably, the
Sunni Shia divide have marked several spots, intensifying in Syria, Iraq and lebanon, and
continued pathing the way to Bahrain and Northern Yemen. As mentioned by Kissinger as well,
rule in these scenes have depended on domination of dictatorships, and on repressing opposition.
Divisions of sectarian and ethnic communities in Syria and Iraq have never been resolved or
treated. Meanwhile, the Assad and Saddam Hussein’s regimes have sought to consolidate their
power, regardless of the embedded tensions that have always been threatening by radical

4. Viola George Shenouda
900133171
eruptions. Evident in the past narrative of Lebanon, religious and ethnic groups have failed to
partition power and have fallen to civil war in 1975, today, Syria is acutely segmented, and
today’s Iraq is sliced between the kurds and Arabs, along with the Sunni Shia conflicts
continued. Joining the chain, emerges Libya’s civil war today.
It seems that the post colonial borders were only to be valid back at that time. The time
when inhabitants were collectively employed to the benefit of a blonde head. But if the foreign
departure have pathed the way for national governance of those new states over the lines it drew,
it could not paint a harmonious nation for it. We today witness Hezbollah intervening on the side
of the Assad regime in neighbouring Syria, and creating a mini state of its own in Lebanon.
Actors’ orientations have caused them to jump across borders to assist allies, while de unifying
their home. Attempts of unity have been slaughtered by the branching divisions, the lust for
power and dominance. Pan Arabism and Baathism have not only failed to function, but to exist.
Ironically, Arabs on awakening to their awaited independence, have awakened to their
differences instead.