Thursday, October 4, 2012
Weekly Reflection 10/3 - Mike
Looking back upon this week, I found myself swamped with work from other classes and unable to stay up to date on issues in the middle east, but I find that this class swamps my mind more than almost any other. I was discussing the emergence of different regions in the world with some of my friends from World Politics, and found myself defending the MENA region as an emerging force in the world. After listening to all of Professor Hardig's lectures I find myself thinking more and more of MENA as crucial to IR, and I wish more people could sit in this class and get this insight. After getting over the high level of readings and work, this class really grows on you, and I'm s happy and feel so fortunate to have taken it and have this opinion shifting opportunity presented to me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I relate to your thoughts that the Middle East is becoming an important force in World Politics. I am using the information I learn in World Politics to understand the workings of the Middle East. If one uses the realist perspective, one notices that the conflict in the Middle East is based on power. One group of people is fighting against another for land and power. It can be hard to see that this will change however, because I believe that power will continue to be necessary. Still, stability is possible, if the power struggle between groups like Sunnis and Shi'as equals out. What do you think about the realist perspective in understanding the workings of the Middle East?
ReplyDeleteMike and Hayley, I'm glad the class is making you think - that's sort of the purpose! I'm also very happy to see you making links to IR theory, it's very important to make links between theory and practice. As you move from the realist perspective in your WP class, and engage with constructivist and critical theory frameworks, I hope you try to make the same connection. You see, a major problem with realism, in my view, is that it tends to understand the world as a chessboard.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, reality isn't black or white. The "Sunni-Shia" divide, which is widely discussed in relation to the MENA region, is in my view a gross simplification of reality. Collective identities certainly play a role politics, but we need to question the fundamental assumption that a Sunni will - simply by virtue of being Sunni - share interests with others of the same denomination. Consider the conflict in Syria, which is increasingly becoming 'sectarianized,' there is a significant urban-rural divide that is getting much less attention. Sunnis in Damascus are not at all likely to be comfortable with Sunni rebels from the countryside. In fact, they've done quite well under Assad. A Sunni in Bangladesh is not likely to feel all that much kinship with a Sunni in Saudi Arabia - in fact, judging by the treatment of South Asians in the region, other, ethnic identity markers, appear to take precedence for the most part.
The way collective identities are mobilized in conflict is frequently misunderstood and it's important that we understand them as mobilizing structures (i.e. they can be used to mobilize support for particular political ends in times of crisis), rather than causes of conflict. I tried to make this point in relation to the offensive 'film' the other week, but it's true when it comes to 'sectarian' conflict as well. So while on the surface, the balance of power theory seems helpful in understanding the region, it will obfuscate the complex realities on the ground and suggest unity in communities that are actually not at all that unified, while leading us to believe that the sources of conflict are to be found simply in the differences between the Sunni and Shia communities.
So, in conclusion, keep pushing yourselves on these complex issues and think of college as a gym for the brain - when you've been lifting weights, your muscles hurt, right? Well, its the same for your brain - it should be hurting a bit, it only means it's growing!
Studying constructivism with Professor Nicholson has made me question everything now when studying World Politics, so thinking through that lens and then contemplating upon your comment about the rural-urban divide made me think about conflict in Syria more Professor. Why does the media focus so easily on the Sunni-Shia divide, I get that its easier to make group identities instead of trying to explain differences or make multiple categories, but I feel like in Syria the rural-urban divide is much more telling and could be much more relatable to an American audience that has some sense of relation to that conflict. Americans (aside from a few Catholics and Protestants that study their history) have little sense of an internal religious conflict (a difference of opinions within a religion), but the rural-urban divide is easily seen anywhere in America.
ReplyDeleteI don't know, maybe its just pointless thinking, but I feel like all of these conflicts go so much deeper than what the average American sees, and its the media's role to educate the people, it's a shame they can not step up to the plate more at such a critical juncture of our globalizing world.