The Iraq war has overthrown the European-inspired secular nationalism that since 1918 was the driving ideological force of the Middle East. The "new" Middle East certainly isn't the democratic, pro-Western stuff of American neo-conservatives' dreams, but it may present an opportunity to create a regional order that reflects the legitimate interests of all the actors involved.
President George W. Bush’s Middle East policy undeniably managed to achieve one thing: it has thoroughly destabilized the region. Otherwise, the results are not at all what the United States had hoped to accomplish. A democratic, pro-Western Middle East is not in the cards.
But, while things are not developing as American neo-conservatives had intended, they are nevertheless developing. The historical failure named Iraq war, the demise of secular Arab nationalism and the soaring oil and gas prices have wrought profound changes in the region. From Damascus to Dubai, from Tel Aviv to Teheran, a new Middle East is now emerging.
The old Middle East arose from the borders and political identities created by the European powers after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. Its driving ideological force was a European-inspired secular nationalism, which strove for political and social modernization through top-down government action. This type of nationalism, or “Arab socialism,” reached its apex during the Cold War, when it could lean on Soviet military, political, and economic support.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Rather than seeing themselves as the arbiters of divine precepts, Supreme Court justices after World War II generally understood that constitutional jurisprudence must respond to the realities of the day. Yet today's conservatives have seized on the legacy of one of the few justices who did not.
considers the complicated legacy of a progressive jurist whom conservatives now champion.
In October 2022, Chileans elected a far-left constitutional convention which produced a text so bizarrely radical that nearly two-thirds of voters rejected it. Now Chileans have elected a new Constitutional Council and put a far-right party in the driver’s seat.
blames Chilean President Gabriel Boric's coalition for the rapid rise of far right populist José Antonio Kast.
President George W. Bush’s Middle East policy undeniably managed to achieve one thing: it has thoroughly destabilized the region. Otherwise, the results are not at all what the United States had hoped to accomplish. A democratic, pro-Western Middle East is not in the cards.
But, while things are not developing as American neo-conservatives had intended, they are nevertheless developing. The historical failure named Iraq war, the demise of secular Arab nationalism and the soaring oil and gas prices have wrought profound changes in the region. From Damascus to Dubai, from Tel Aviv to Teheran, a new Middle East is now emerging.
The old Middle East arose from the borders and political identities created by the European powers after the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. Its driving ideological force was a European-inspired secular nationalism, which strove for political and social modernization through top-down government action. This type of nationalism, or “Arab socialism,” reached its apex during the Cold War, when it could lean on Soviet military, political, and economic support.
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Subscribe
As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.
Register
Already have an account? Log in