The article presents a two sided argument about the Middle East and Asia. The article picks up the argument by suggesting a preferable name for the region to be West Asia (Friedman, 2006). The suggestion bases its premises for the conclusion made that the term Middle East disguises or even compromises the growth of ties between the regions claiming that the term too old and less precise.
We will write a custom Research Paper on History: Middle East and Asia specifically for you
301 certified writers online
The article also expresses the validity of the criteria employed in the location of the place of publication for one of their famous article commonly referred to as the “The National Newspaper.” The criteria of relying on the mere decision of an individual (American naval strategist) was not satisfactory since it had no basis in any of the region’s business especially with reference to the GCC countries (Owen & Pamuk, 2008).
Additional shortcomings associated with the name, “Middle East” are discussed within the article with the relevant details. Some of the further discussions highlighting reasons why the name is less popular include the fact that the name entirely fails to capture the region’s major commercial bases.
This follows yet another failure of the name to put forth the relevant emphasis on the cultural geography of the historic intermingling with countries such as India, Iran and China during the early years of Islamic growth and expansion (Friedman, 2006).
With regards to this situation therefore, the article gives a recommendation that the states would be better considered part of West Asia as it may technically appear. The recommendation is supported by the fact that it may prove most useful in the future trading activities between East Asia and South Asia. From a report by an Economist Intelligence Unit, Asia is predicted to be largest trading partner among the GCC countries by the year 2017 just as earlier elaborated by Nisan (2002).
The article further discusses a calling by the Western commentators in which the 21st century has been referred to as “The Asian Century” (Friedman, 2006).
The article supports the assertion about the 21st century stating that rising trends and the growth of China and India as well as the Asian tigers such as Singapore and South Korea are to provide a fertile ground for economic prosperity. The article additionally supports the union of the states in the trading activities as a means to fuel their economic progress stating categorically that GCC countries will provide a major source of oil to Asia than any other place in the world (Owen & Pamuk, 2008).
The union also promotes a major academic exchange programs with the new arrival of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in the Saudi Arabia. The article wraps up its major arguments provided by supporting the growth of stronger and closer ties between West Asia and East Asia. The article enlightens a fact that the growth of the two states depends on their ties and exchanges.
Based on the argument and position of Khater (2011) on the naming of the Middle East, I therefore disagree with the facts and the arguments brought forward in this article. The basis of the disagreement is linked right to the initial parts of the argument. The entire article highlights the major reasons as to why the name, “Middle East” should be eradicated and the West Asia be adopted.
If the name was to be abandoned and another name embraced on the basis of age of the existing name and personal or ideological differences, then justice and liberty will have been flawed (Khater, 2011). The criteria for naming, whether done at an individual basis or at a group or in a conference meeting does not matter. The most vital component of the entire process of naming is whether the name under consideration provides the relevant and distinct identity required or intended (Owen & Pamuk, 2008).
Friedman, S. (2006). A History of the Middle East. North Carolina, USA. McFarland & Company, Inc, Publishers.
Khater, A. (2011). Sources in the History of the Modern Middle East. Boston, MA: USA. Cengage Learning Publishers.
Nisan, M. (2002). Minorities in the Middle East: A History of Struggle and Self-Expression. North Carolina, USA. McFarland & Company, Inc, Publishers.
Owen, R. & Pamuk, S. (2008). History of Middle East Economies in the Twentieth Century. Victoria House, London. I.B. Tauris & Co. Ltd.