- Article Written By Arvin Niknia, Independent Author
In my previous article, I wrote about the eternal legacy of the British in the Middle East when they created the phenomenon of the political minority. After the British were forced to leave the Middle East, they left behind authoritarian states. The British favored kingdoms in the Middle East because they could better maintain their influence. I also argued that democracy was not very sustainable in the Middle East because democracy in the Middle East was imitated in the West. A Prime Minister” Vizier” is created in the monarchy so the king is not assassinated. In the old system, the Prime Minister was an intermediary between the king and others. Freemasonry’s and Illuminati’s ideologies are based on the fact that monarchy and religion do not belong in modern society.
In this article, I will describe why democracy did not last in the Middle East and why Kurds and Palestinians fell victim to populism.
In Europe, it all started after the fall of the Austria-Hungary Empire, where various ethnic minorities were created. A country like Romania took advantage of the opportunity and conquered part of Hungary.
In addition, new countries that had not existed before were created. Of course, the same thing also happened in the Middle East. After the Germans lost the First World War to the British, their ally, the Ottoman Empire, fell apart. The Germans had big projects and wanted to build an extensive railway from Berlin to the Ottoman Empire. Germany was developing strongly, and the British did not like that because they did not want a strong European competitor.
On the other hand, the Ottomans did not want war because their economy was under severe pressure, but the Germans managed to get them into war with the Russians. The Germans cheated both the Ottomans and the Russians by firing at Russian ships in the name of the Ottomans. The Ottomans had had many wars with the Russians and were among the few countries in history to occupy and set fire to Moscow. The Ottomans and Germans lost soon after Bulgaria’s army surrendered.
The Ottoman Empire had already disintegrated with the Young Turk Revolution in 1908. It is very similar to the Soviet disintegration even before the fall of communism in Russia due to Russian nationalism. This was why the Turks were immediately ready to establish the nation-state of Turkey (1923) after the fall of the Ottomans. This does not apply to Kurds and Palestinians. Kurds were still loyal to the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire when the nation-state of Turkey was established by Turkish nationalism. Kurdish nationalism did not exist then. It had not dawned on the Kurds that the national state of Turkey was not the Ottoman Empire but another form of state and government.
The British did not want the Kurds to become part of Turkey, even though the Kurds had a strong desire for it. The Kurds were still loyal to the Sultan, but the Sultan was no more. This was also the problem with many ethnic Arabs because they were still loyal to the Sultan. The Arabs desire their identity, Nahda” Arab renaissance,” but Arab nationalism does not exist. Unlike the Arabs, the Iranians, like the Turks, showed their nationalism to the world in 1921, when Reza Shah Pahlavi took over power in Persia and formed the nation-state of Iran (1925).
In relation to Islamic propaganda and the Islamic state, the British and the French determined the borders in the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916. It is, of course, confirmed that the British and French divide the countries between them and determine the borders, but the borders are determined by Arab, Turkish, and Iranian nationalism and not the Sykes-Picot Agreement. According to the agreement, Saudi Arabia was supposed to be small, but Saudi Arabia chose to expand Saudi Arabia and take over areas that the British had designated for Iraq.
On the other hand, Turkish nationalism and Kamalism set about expanding Turkey and conquering territories that Greece occupied. Indeed, the Turkish Kemal Atatürk (1881–1938) was a nationalist. Without him, Turkey today is just Anatolia. Of course, he killed many from Armenia, but it was to incorporate Armenia into Turkey(1914-1923). He also created the “Kamalism” democracy in Turkey, which was much stronger than the European democracy. Later, Europe chose secularization, which made democracy in Europe stronger, while the Turks chose Islamization, which limited democracy in Turkey. As I said before, the countries in the Middle East were becoming Islamized due to neo-colonialism and globalization.
Iraq did not exist as a nation or a country, and Iraqi nationalism did not exist at all. Iraq is the most artificially created country in the Middle East. The British begin to promise the Kurds that if they become part of the newly created country of Iraq, they will get better conditions than if they become part of Turkey. The British occupied Iraq in 1917 and took over all the Ottoman tax systems and modernity. The Ottoman Empire was undoubtedly a success; otherwise, it would not have survived this long.
Kemal Atatürk arose from the reforms and modernity of the Ottoman Empire. He had studied in Syria and completed his education in Anatolia. All Arabs first learned Arabic, then Turkish, and finally had to work for the Sultan. The Sultan was God’s representative on earth. All were Ottomans, and they were treated equally. However, ethnicity and loyalty to one’s people still existed in the old days, but nationalism did not exist. Indeed, the city of Mosul and the Kurds belonged to Turkey, but after the Armistice of Modrus in 1918, the British chose to bomb the Kurds and show them that a battle against the British in favor of the Turks was useless.
Iraq and Syria were intended to be divided into three or four parts after the Sycepico Agreement in 1916, but the San Remo Agreement in 1920 decided that Iraq and Syria should be divided into two states. Thomas Edward Lawrence (1888–1937) proposed in 1918 that the countries be divided based on ethnicity, but the British and the French did not listen. There is no doubt that it would have meant a lot for peace in the Middle East today if they had listened. He played an influential role in organizing Arab revolts against the Sultan.
Saudi Arabia was promised an Arab kingdom, but the British did not keep that promise. Apart from that, the British had brought a large army from India in both the First and Second World Wars, with which they defeated the Middle East. After the border divisions, both Syrian and Algerian nationalism experienced severe massacres by the French. Lebanon came out of the situation better, and Iraq, which was the favorite of the British, got a puppet king who was originally from Saudi Arabia (Faisal I of Iraq). He believed that Iraq had never been a nation and never would be. It went so well in the Kingdom, and while the countries in the Middle East were under kingdoms in Afghanistan, Iran, and Iraq, they ensured stability and a high level of welfare.
Democracy did not last long because most parties were minions of the West and Soviet communism. How should a Western-invented democracy work in the Middle East? A party that works for an ideology can never work for the people because where does loyalty lie? With the people or with parties? Of course, it worked in the West, for, as said before, the West got much financial help from the USA, and communism was financially blocked by Yugoslav nationalism. Nor was the West constantly under colonial intentions.
On the other hand, the West was already industrialized. The Middle East was on the way to industrialization and was deeply dependent on its oil, which was also very interesting for the West. The strait of Hormoz in the Persian Gulf is strategic because of the oil. The West created the whole Middle East because of its importance.
The West created the word Middle East, usually dated to 1900 (Alfred Thayer Mahan) or 1902 (Thomas Edward Gordon); it is widely believed to have already been in use in the mid-19th century; hence, neither Mahan nor Gordon spent much time explaining their use of the term.
As I mentioned, the Middle East’s problem is borders and populism. It has also always been a question of ethnicity and nationalism. How can one be loyal to one’s ethnicity and sectarianism while at the same time being nationalist and pan-Arabic? Things went better for the Iranians. This is because their nationalism and pan-Iranism were limited to Iran. However, democracy did not last in Iran because of communism and the American coups.
In addition, Iran also suffered from separatism, which, in turn, suffered from Iranian nationalism. The majority in Iran are Persians, but after the Islamic Revolution, Iran was Islamized and tried to move towards Arab identity, but this was not accepted by Iranian nationalism, and the Islamic regime lost its popular support. This is why Iran does not want a direct war with its made-up enemy, Israel because the regime does not have popular support.
Things went somewhat better with Turkey compared to all the other countries in terms of democracy, nationalism, and Islamism. This is because Turkish nationalism is integrated with Islam. After all, the Turks did not have a civilization before Islam. Turkish greatness started in tandem with Islam. Under the Ottoman Empire, they sailed around and made countries Muslim, while Spain did the opposite and fought for Christianity (Philippines). Before Islam, Turks had a shared identity with the Mongols, who were nomads.
Additionally, the Turkish identity was formed by Iranians and Arabs since they had been in Iran before they took over Constantinople (the Seljuk dynasty). Unlike Turks, Shia Islam in Iran is not an Iranian identity because Shia has nothing to do with Iranians but was created in the Islamic world after the death of Muhammad. Sunni Islam is also a doctrine that was created. Both Egyptians, Iranians, Syrians, and many others had a civilization before Islam; therefore, Islamic parties were banned in many Arab countries, such as Egypt under Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918–1971). The Islamic Brotherhood had become very popular after its anti-colonial struggles in the Middle East. Islamism was severely cracked down on in many Arab countries. They cultivated fictitiously created nationalism and the Arab identity first and foremost. It went entirely wrong for countries with several minority groups. Saddam Hussein (1937–2006) in Iraq killed many Kurds and did not recognize the borders. He had both problems with Iran and Kuwait, which resulted in a war between both countries. The Americans could use that to their advantage.
On the other hand, the conflict in Ukraine with Russia and Armenia with Azerbaijan is a result of Joseph Stalin’s original border division, which was later regulated by the others. The Gulf States, which never existed before, are a British invention. The British had already entered into agreements with the Arab tribes in the 19th century after they had occupied those areas. Pakistan and Afghanistan were created as buffer countries by the British. Kurdish nationalism first began to emerge in 1946 (Republic of Mahabad). The Kurds succeeded, for the first time in history, in establishing their state with Soviet support. It lasted only a year before it was struck down hard by Iranian nationalism. Before that, Kurds had fought for more rights and equality in vain. Oppression and division of minorities by authoritarian states, which they inherited from the British, is the root cause of Kurdish discontent and separatism. Under the Ottoman Empire and the Persian Qajar dynasty, the Kurds were more independent and had more self-determination due to decentralization. After nation-states and high centralization, they were suppressed and accused of being traitors due to populism.
Turkey constantly bombed Kurds to strengthen its popular support for Turkish nationalism, while Iran bombed Kurds because Iran cannot bomb Israel and is forced to respond to Israel when Israel bombs Iranian generals in Syria. This populism is necessary to maintain popularity. Iran also responded to the US but had notified the US before its attack.
Moreover, all Muslim countries, including Iran, trade with Israel on the black market. Iran has been shipping pistachios to Israel for decades. In addition, Iran is still executing people who participated in the Women, Life, Freedom demonstration,” Waging War Against God.” Iranian populism is strongly supported by Arab populism because of Palestine. As I mentioned before, Palestine became a victim of Arab populism. There is no doubt that Palestinians did not experience a better life under Arab nationalism. They suffered in Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt. They were victims of double standards. European double standards were no better either. Israel wants to wipe out Hamas, but how can Israel wipe out an ideology? History has shown this is impossible. Even communism was never wiped out and inspired Nazism. Populism is unfortunately prevalent today, where the states use misinformation and disinformation to neutralize their opponents. People who fight against authoritarian states are accused of being traitors to nationalism. Palestine never became a state due to “Force majeure.”
Furthermore, a two-state solution looks impossible. Weapons are smuggled to Palestine from Ukraine and Iran from Syria. Iranian sniper rifles. AK-47 assault rifles from China and Russia. North Korean- and Bulgarian-built rocket-propelled grenades. Anti-tank rockets were secretly cobbled together in Gaza.
Popular revolutions in the Middle East against authoritarian states were severely cracked down on because the working class was not influenced due to the high oppression, and the money was concentrated with the elite due to the high corruption of crony capitalism. Social media opened the doors to the world. The new generation in the Middle East wants democracy and welfare.
The more significant part is neither religious nor pan-Arabic. Most people practice religion as a part of a project and only practice the holidays because of the blessing “Barakat.” They cultivate nationalism. Several intellectuals believed that, intact with the EU and unrestrained movement, nationalism is no longer valid in European countries, and due to Islamization in the Middle East, nationalism is out of the picture. However, demonstrations in the Middle East and the Ukraine war in Europe showed that ideologies never disappear from society.
