Introduction
All through history, the impact of religion and foreign influence has been of fundamental significance. The Middle East is perhaps the only geographical region located on the axis of religious-political-war. In most instances, religion, foreign influence, or politics under their control, has been an influential factor in the occurrences in the Middle East.
Religion
Regardless of religion being a vital aspect in shaping the Middle East into a battlefield, it was backed by other factors, which are closely associated with the sociological/technical structure of the region. The scope of conflict has been established by the region’s position at a crossroads and the existence of oil over and above the religion component (Ciftci and Tezcür 374-376). The greatest element in the provocation of conflict is the existence of three main religions in the Middle East and their worship places, which are deemed holy.
The existing disputes shape the political processes and are anchored not just in divergences amid the main religious groups, but also on the differences among the followers of a given religion. Such conflicts ought to be assessed with the consideration of the issues amid three religions: Muslims and Christians, Jews and Muslims, and disagreements amongst Muslims.
From the Christians’ point of view, their religion began in the Middle East when Jesus and His disciples resided in Jerusalem and other areas in the region. Christians who considered Muslims to be usurpers embarked on a strategy of removing unbelievers from the area (Smith 23-25). Nevertheless, the Christian population has not been powerful enough to assert its dominance in the region. Crusades and warfare in the Middle East emanated from religion with power conflict being greatly felt among Christians. Catholics, Syrian Orthodox, and Protestants fight for their superiority and supremacy in the region. Such religious groups hold distinctive causes favorable to conflict.
The differences between Jews and Muslims exist under numerous titles such as racial, spiritual, and geopolitical. Some of the Jews are convinced that lands in the Middle East, encompassing the ones that people are presently residing on, belong to them because God gave them. This makes them feel that they have to recover their land from the other intruders. In contrast, the Arabs own part of the land and have no plan of sharing it with the Jews (Ciftci and Tezcür 378-382).
Jews consider Arabs mediocre people irrespective of the racial relationship with them (perhaps because of their religious convictions or cultural motives) and fail to acknowledge them as compeers in interpersonal dealings. Judaism is taken to be the religious group that connects its followers with God through their faith and any other group that has resurfaced after it is deemed dissident. Historical occurrences between Muslims and Jews form bases for conflict. For instance, Prophet Mohammed drove out Jews from Medina and led to the massacre of three Jewish tribes, in addition to the deportation of Jews from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
The Middle East is believed to be the first place where Islam started to spread and is thought to be its initial cultural hub. Apart from Medina and Mecca in Saudi Arabia, Jerusalem, Baghdad, and other locations are the crucial settlement and cultural centers (Ciftci and Tezcür 384-386). Attributable to repressive authoritarian regimes that connected with religion, such places did not have the chance to showcase their religious characteristics.
Presently they have been controlled by the occurrence of a radical and political Islam that is influenced by Wahhabism. The elites in the Gulf and Saudi Arabia regions have approved Wahhabism to be the official philosophy. Moreover, there exist indistinct affiliations amid the ruling classes and their subjects. For example, Saddam Hussein is portrayed as a Sunni leader who headed a Shi’ite majority whereas Hafez Asad is depicted as a Shi’ite head who led a Sunni majority.
As evident from a broad point of view, disagreements among religious groups in the Middle East have made it a region where the contented and disgruntled live together. The area, with its issues and warfare along with the vast economic affluence, is continually open to aggravations and conflict. Judging by the current situation in the Middle East, it does not appear as though the religion-based clash will end anytime soon (Smith 28). This means that the existence of lasting peace in the region is impossible. Warfare, similar to peace, is procedural; and tranquility, just like war, will be hard and painful to realize in the Middle East.
Foreign Influence
The US foreign influence in the Middle East began as early as in the Barbary Wars of the first years of the United States’ existence and turned out to be more extensive after the Second World War. The US policy in the course of the Cold War endeavored to thwart the influence of the Soviet Union through backing anti-communist authorities and Israeli against Soviet-supported Arab nations.
Except in Iraq and Libya, who sometimes back were under foreign military intrusion, issues of foreign interference are not in any way precedence (Krieg 97-98). Hardly one percent of residents in Iraq, Tunisia, Yemen, and Egypt mulls over shunning foreign influences despite it posing a tremendous challenge.
There is no justification for the polarizing impacts of global pressure being exceptional to the Middle East although it is notable that there is inadequate research on the issue. The region acts as a place where foreign players take sides. Qatar and Iran are mostly believed to lean in support of Islamic forces and, although they may offer minimal backing to democratic philosophies, they are not nations that are known to promote democracy (Krieg 100-103). On the contrary, the US and European countries are usually believed to get involved on the part of secular forces but claim to support democracy in the Middle East.
The dedication of the US and European countries in supporting democratic principles in the Middle East is hesitant and is mainly mingled with substantial backing for regime continuance. Nevertheless, the United States and European countries provide support for democratic programs associated with activities such as civil society, elections, and the participation of women in politics to mention a few (Krieg 104-108). Since many foreign nations in the Middle East tend exerting international pressure while doing it in competing ways, it is easy to notice how they polarize the domestic arena. However, comparable forms of polarization emanating from foreign influence appear to be taking place in other regions of Africa and Europe.
Conclusion
Throughout history, the impacts of religion and international pressure have been of fundamental implication. In most cases, religion, international pressure, or politics under their control, has been a dominant factor in the happenings in the Middle East. There is a need for effective control of both religious forces and foreign influence in the Middle East to ensure an enhanced development of the region.
Works Cited
Ciftci, Sabri, and GüneÅŸ Murat Tezcür. “Soft Power, Religion, and Anti-Americanism in the Middle East.” Foreign Policy Analysis, vol. 12, no. 3, 2016, pp. 374-394.
Krieg, Andreas. “Externalizing the Burden of War: The Obama Doctrine and US Foreign Policy in the Middle East.” International Affairs, vol. 92, no. 1, 2016, pp. 97-113.
Smith, Dan. The State of the Middle East: An Atlas of Conflict and Resolution. 2nd ed., Routledge, 2016.