The term ‘the Middle East’ was coined in the very beginning of the twentieth century. It was quite suitable at that time as there was no such close cooperation between different regions in the world. There were rather relations between empires and their colonies (Davison, 1960). Relations between western countries and countries of the so-called Middle East and Asia changed several times during the twentieth century.
At present, the relations are quite different as they are said to be based on principles of cooperation (Adib-Moghaddam, 2006). In the twenty-first century, states and regions need particular boundaries as about one, or another region influences political strategies employed by other countries (Stewart, 2005). Therefore, such a vague term as ‘the Middle East’ cannot be suitable anymore as it adds ambiguity to the geopolitical situation in the world and there is a certain need in introducing a new specific term that could help identify boundaries of the region.
Firstly, the existence of a specific term that clearly describes the region will positively affect the geopolitical situation in the world as the states will shape their policies accordingly. Thus, Davison (1960) states that many countries will be able to develop proper relations with the region if the boundaries are cut.
The USA government will be able to identify specific “countries to which the Eisenhower Doctrine would apply” (Davison, 1960, p. 675). Furthermore, understanding which states refer to the region which is now called the Middle East, other countries will also be able to shape their policies as they will take into account peculiarities of the countries in the region.
Secondly, irrespective of changes associated with globalization, regional peculiarities play a very important role in political study and analysis, which makes clear terms crucial for defining the overall geopolitical situation in the world. According to Adib-Moghaddam (2006, p. 69), “the ideational structure of the region is ontologically superior to the global level” and, as such, analysts need to focus on environments in different regions rather than on the global environment. This approach will provide a complete picture of the development of societies. Admittedly, focus on regions brings to the fore the necessity to identify the regions perfectly well. Vague terms and unclear boundaries prevent analysts from tracing important trends.
Finally, the introduction of a specific term for the region will help ordinary people participate in the political life of their countries more actively, which can prevent a variety of international conflicts based on specific interests of particular groups. Thus, the 9/11 attack changed the American society greatly and made Americans hostile to everything associated with terrorist and their home region, which was identified as the Middle East (Stewart, 2005).
Such a vague term made Americans as well as other people in the west develop quite a wrongful image of many countries in Africa, Asia, and in-between. This contributed greatly to the start of the military conflicts in Iraq, which, in its turn, led to instability in the region as well as in the entire world.
On balance, it is necessary to note that the Middle East cannot be used as a term defining the region as it does not identify specific countries the term applies to. This ambiguity has quite a negative impact on the overall geopolitical situation as it contributes to vagueness in international relations, it also prevents scholars from tracing important trends, and it affects public opinion. Therefore, a new term should be introduced to address all the issues mentioned above.
Reference List
Adib-Moghaddam, A. (2006). Narrating region in West Asia. Journal of Social Affaires, 23(91), 55-73.
Davison, R.H. (1960). Where is the Middle East? Foreign Affaires, 38(4), 665-675.
Stewart, D.J. (2005). Geography and the Middle East. The Geographical Review, 95(3), III-VI.