Why was control of the region important to the British and French?
The Gulf region was of particular interest to the British Empire because it linked India and the western world. As the significance of British India rose, the Empire’s desire to control the entire region increased accordingly. In particular, it was influenced by the need to deal with France’s interest in the region. In the beginning, the British aim was to commercialize the Indian Ocean trade route because it provided the commercial control of all the regions around India. The British had invested heavily in India and Pakistan, with a presence spanning over 100 years (Belgrave, 2006). In fact, Britain considered a trade with India as one of the most profitable overseas ventures. However, the trade was faced with a number of problems, especially due to increased piracy on the Gulf coast. Therefore, to save the Indian trade, Britain had to control the Gulf region by signing treaties with a number of Arab states to help fight pirates along the Gulf coast.
On the other hand, the French developed a great interest in the Gulf Coast several years before 1917. France initially sent its troops on an expedition to Egypt early in the 1800s (Belgrave, 2006). They wanted to challenge British control in the region, especially in North Africa and the Middle East. From here, the French wanted to establish and control trade routes between Western Europe and the Gulf regions, especially after realizing that the British had consolidated the Indian Ocean trade route through their control of the Suez Canal (Belgrave, 2006).
What was the effect on Arab views of the West from the 1954-1962 French/Algerian war?
Prior to 1954, the French population in Algeria was decreasing in numbers while the number of Arabs was increasing at a high rate. For instance, there were only 900,000 Europeans and more than 4.5 million Arabs. Secondly, the rivalry between the Arabs and the West was evident. There was no equality of social and economic opportunities. For example, the French established about 1400 primary schools to cater for about 200,000 European children and only 699 schools to cater to more than 1.25 million Arab children (Horne, 2006). Thus, when the war burst out in 1954, it was clear that the Arabs were not only interested in claiming their rights, but also in forcing the west out of their land.
Thirdly, the reforms passed by the French parliament failed to function, with the local authorities rigging in major and minor elections. Some of the educated Arabs in Algeria realized that it was impossible to deal with the Frenchmen. They understood that the French were not applying the rules and laws they had been making. They believed that the French Republic was cheating on Algerian citizens (Horne, 2006). For instance, Ahmed Boumdnjel wrote, “the French Empire has cheated on us” (Horne, 2006). Thus, the Arab world believed that the West, particularly France, was not fair. In addition, the Islam-Christian rivalry played a significant role in developing Arab perceptions towards the west. The Arab world and the Europeans hated each other based on religious and cultural differences. Thus, many Arab men joined the war in order to defeat and drive out the French out of Algeria (Horne, 2006).
What was the effect of being a British protectorate on the Gulf coast?
Although the “exclusivity agreements” made between the British Empire and the Trucial States in the Gulf Coast were not a formal protectorate, they enjoyed the same rights enjoyed by other British protected states. Britain had the responsibility of protecting the Gulf States from external aggression. On the other hand, the British obtained exclusive rights in the region. For instance, the social and economic systems in the British protectorates on the Gulf coast were heavily influenced by Britain, despite the presence of local laws (Balfour-Paul, 2010). The Indian rupee was the de facto currency in the region, including Bahrain, Qatar, Oman as well as the Trucial States. Trade between Europe and the Gulf region increased significantly because the British were using the Suez Canal as the main trade route. Thus, the Gulf States enjoyed direct trade with Britain, which improved their economies.
Secondly, the British allowed the locals to exercise their own laws. Local rulers retained their political and social positions, while the British worked with sheikhs and emirs at the national level (Balfour-Paul, 2010). The British avoided direct rule, which made it possible to retain good relationships with local rulers.
In addition, the states obtained social and cultural influence from Britain. For instance, the English language became common in the region, with most states using both English and Arabic for academic purposes. Moreover, a number of locals were sent to Britain and other British occupied areas for higher education, which influenced the local culture and social and economic perceptions (Balfour-Paul, 2010).
What was the political climate in the region after the British departure?
In 1968, Britain announced its intention to terminate its protectorate in the region. The departure of the UK caused a number of political events. For instance, some sheikhs wanted to retain a united Gulf Coast while others objected to this idea. The sheikhdom in the Trucial States attempted to establish a union under a centralized government. For instance, the Trucial sheikhdom was interested in retaining Qatar and Bahrain as a federation of Trucial states by emulating the British system of governance (Balfour-Paul, 2010). However, local leaders in Qatar and Bahrain were against it, citing possibilities of political conflicts. Thus, the attempts did not materialize. Moreover, after the British left the region in December 1971, the seven members of the Trucial states willingly joined to form the United Arab Emirates under an agreement that the federal leadership would be based on rotation (Balfour-Paul, 2010). However, Ras al-Khaimah refused to join the union. Nevertheless, most citizens wanted to remain part of the union. In addition, within a few months, the local leaders realized that they could not do without the union (Balfour-Paul, 2010). Thus, the state joined the UAE in 1972.
What was the primary reason for the formation of the UAE among the separate Emirates?
After the exit of Britain, it was clear that the emirs of the seven members of the Trucial States could not defend their kingdoms from external aggression. In particular, they attempted to persuade Britain to retain its military in the region. However, the Labour government in Britain, under Prime Minister Edward Health, disappointed the emirs. Moreover, the emirs were afraid of an attack from Saudi Arabia and Oman because they had border disputes with the two countries (Balfour-Paul, 2010). Saudi Arabia was interested in ensuring her right to control a number of regions bordering the Trucial states, which the British had offered to the Trucial protectorate. Britain had sided with the Trucial states during their conflicts with Saudi Arabia. Thus, it was clear that the departure of Britain would result in a major conflict between the seven emirs and their neighbours (Balfour-Paul, 2010).
This fear made it possible for the seven emirates to retain their union. They believed that when they being united, it was difficult for Saudi Arabia and other external forces to attempt a military intervention (Balfour-Paul, 2010).
Dou you think that Arab Unity is necessary in the modern world?
After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the unity of the Arab world remained a dream to many Arabs, scholars and leaders. Currently, the idea of Arab unity is still relevant to most people. The Arab world is made up of a complex amalgamation of about 22 countries. The initial idea of uniting the region was to ensure that the departure of western colonialists would result into a powerful Arab state with the capacity to defend itself from future external aggressions, especially from the west and their allies, such as Israel. Proponents of the idea intended to free the Arab populations east of the Ottoman Empire. Nevertheless, after the fall of the Empire, the idea of Arab Unity remained significant.
Currently, it is clear that most Arab nations share a number of social, cultural, economic and historical backgrounds. Thus, the social, political and economic problems affecting these nations are fairly related. Although several Arab nations have always been in conflict with each other, it is important to note that their differences can be solved from a common perspective.
In modern times, the need for unity is not necessarily based on providing military power. Rather, economic and social cooperation is possible under a union. It is possible for the Arab nations to share economic policies under a union. By emulating the European Union, the United Arab world can achieve a number of social and economic goals. For instance, the 22 countries making the Arab world have a large population, which is larger than the population of the EU. If an Arab Union is established on an economic and social basis, it is possible to create a large market for the member states. It is important to note that most of the nations have diverse economic activities. Although oil is the chief economic sector in more than 90% of the member states, it is clear that the dependency on oil is reducing significantly making it possible for the nations to venture in other sectors (Gause, 2011). If the nations unite, they can develop a good market for products and services produced by some member states and not available in others.
In addition, it is possible for the member states to claim regional and international positions as a union. For instance, the position of the European Union in the world economic system improved after the member states agreed to work as a union. Since most of the Arab states are small economies, they cannot claim a significant position on the international level (Gause, 2011). However, it is possible to improve its international recognition as a union.
Therefore, Arab unity is necessary in the modern world. However, it should be based on the social, economic and cultural ideas rather than political and military grounds.
Is it possible?
The possibility of establishing an Arab Unity is quite difficult due to a number of factors. For instance, the relationship between the member states is not necessarily good, despite the fact that they share common social and cultural backgrounds (Gause, 2011). For example, the relationship between Iraq and some states in the Gulf, such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, has remained volatile, as demonstrated by the Gulf War of 1991. Secondly, the relationship between members of the Arab world and the west, Israel and other Asian nations differs significantly (Gause, 2011). For instance, while the Gulf coast, Saudi Arabia and most nations in North Africa have a good relationship with the west, a number of others like Sudan, Iran (and previously Iraq and Libya) had poor relationships with the US, the UK and their allies (Gause, 2011). This has made the relationship between some of these member states remain poor. Thus, it is difficult to form a union of all the 22 member states.
What are the alternatives?
Rather than aiming to unite all the 22 members of the Arab World, it is better to start with a few states under common interests. For instance, the member states with similar needs for modernization and economic cooperation are likely to attract others to join the union. It is important to emulate the EU. For instance, the EU started with a small member union but expanded to include other nations, consisting of those that are outside of Western Europe. It is important to base the union on the economic, social and cultural basis but avoid political union, which is likely to cause conflicts in future.
“Internal Conflict was rarely created by foreign meddling; the root of ethnic conflict in Arab Countries is due to social, political, economic, and cultural inequities. Foreign meddling just exacerbated pre-existing problems.
This statement is quite true due to a number of reasons. Prior to the invasion of the region by the western world, political conflicts were common. Although the Europeans defined the modern political boundaries in the Arab world, most communities existed by isolating themselves from others, primarily based on ethnic differences. For example, in North Africa, the Berbers in Libya were constantly in ethnic fights with other groups. This was common throughout the Arab world, where tribes kept fighting for the control of resources, especially land, trade and water. In addition, religious conflicts were common. In countries like Iraq, constant conflicts between the Shia and the Sunni Muslims were an ordinary thing. This phenomenon was also evident in Pakistan and India, where Muslims were in constant conflicts with the Hindus. Therefore, the coming of the Europeans only exacerbated pre-existing problems.
Relate question 4 to question 2
The existence of conflicts based on ethnic, political, social and cultural differences and inequalities in the Arab World before the coming of the Europeans provides evidence that it is difficult to realize the dream of an Arab Union. Since the Arabs were constantly in conflicts with each other, the European colonialists took this advantage to influence the local’s systems. They defined the modern boundaries based on the political, socioeconomic and cultural differences that existed when they arrived. They used these differences to govern and exploit the locals. Thus, they exacerbated pre-existing problems. Therefore, these problems make it difficult to realize the dream of an Arab Union because their causes are based on the history of the region.
References
Balfour-Paul, G. (2010). The end of empire in the Middle East. London, OUP.
Belgrave, C. (2006). The Pirate Coast. London: G. Bell and Sons.
Gause, F. G. (2011). Oil Monarchies: Domestic and Security Challenges in the Arab Gulf States. London: OUP.
Horne, A. (2006). A Savage War of Peace: Algeria, 1954-1962. New York: Cengage.