Just a bit of my paper that I wrote. If you want the full version ask. This deals with the Middle East in general, while the rest of the paper focused specifically on a few countries. Not my best work, but I pumped this out in less then 7 hours. That is 12 single spaced pages with research. Procrastination is addicting and every time I get away with it, I worsen my addiction.
Feel free to email me with your comments! I know a few people interested in Middle East politics and I’d love your response to this.
—
Globalization. We hear this word thrown about daily, by politicians and businesses alike, with both positive and negative connation. Yet despite whether one believes it to be a change for the better or otherwise, the effects are undisputable. People in various states around the world are more interconnected and states are more connected then ever before in history. As each day passes this sense of interdependence grows stronger and more information and money is flowing in between states then ever before. Good and services produced in once inaccessible countries are now easily accessible in all part of the world. International travel is no longer considered a luxury, rather a daily activity for business and individuals alike. States are forced to coexist and are subject to the daily effects of international markets and isolation is not longer possible let alone practical. This spectacle has been titled “globalization”.
The time we live in is increasing being known as the “Era of Globalization”. Contrary to popular belief, globalization does not just impact business. Never before were there such vibrant cultural combinations: Afghan food can be purchased in Idaho, and American music can be found in Fallujah, Iraq. “Globalization is not just a phenomenon. It is not just some passing trend. Today it is overarching international system shaping the domestic politics, foreign relations, and culture of virtually ever country, and we need to understand it as such”. Just as there was the Great Depression, the Cold War Era, the Space Age, and the Roaring 20′s, the political, cultural, and most importantly the economic mixture of various countries methods today is best defined as the Era of Globalization.
Globalization has been compared to a fire. It has its danger and dark side; however it can also bring opportunities and benefits. Just like capitalism and free economics require governmental monitoring, globalization also requires governing by states, yet there are instances where states cannot control globalization. Globalization just like anything has its shadows and thus it is crucial to study it carefully. While the benefits may be simpler to see on a global scale, most of the downsides are only visible by examining a particular state on an individual level. Not only must individual governments be receptive to globalization, but the populations must be willing to accept both sides of the coin. This paper will attempt to analyze the effects of globalization on the Middle East by addressing why it has failed in the general context of the Middle East and then specifically within two countries that have been able to globalize to a much greater extent then their neighbors: Israel and Turkey.
The Middle East in the past few decades has been attempting to resist globalization. Some scholars argue successfully, while others say the efforts have been futile, however it is undisputed that the Middle East can be considered one of the most resistant areas in the world. The majority of government and religious groups are anti-global on different scales. Furthermore, “there is no part of the world where violence is more often used in the anti-globalization struggle, most notably by Osama bin Laden but generally by all radical movement”. It is crucial to look at the culture of the Middle East to understand why collectively it is one of the sole violent opponents of today’s globalization.
As outlined earlier, globalization is not only economic dependence, but also cultural and political mixtures; customs, ideas, religion, attitudes are all portions of it. Currently most of the ideas and belief that come hand in hand with globalization are western, pro-capitalist, pro-democracy, notions. Thus is it easy to view globalization and Westernization as synonymous. Other regions of the world, such as Asia, South America, Africa, and ex-USSR Europe, are much more open to globalization because many of the components that globalization relies on are already present: Strong central government, free economy, educated populations, and diverse cultures. Most Middle East governments to date are very authoritarian and most of the Middle East is content with the current system. Contrary to western notions most are not actively looking for change and thus the influx of Westernization which comes hand in hand with globalization is “seen as [a] challenge to a nation’s ethos”.
Another reason is that Westernization can mean modernization when the state being affected by it is considerably “old-fashioned” in the face of the new ideas being brought forward. Much of the Middle East is rooted deeply in tradition due to both local traditions more importantly Islamic religious views by. These views while considered by the west to be old-fashioned are followed actively the populations of states in the Middle East. For example in Turkey, an estimated 85% of people are religious and of that nearly 99.8% are Sunni Muslim. Thus due to the fact that much of these people are strongly religious, globalization is seen “as a major thread to tradition” as well as a force that calls for the “defense of religion”.
Thirdly another major reason for Middle Eastern rejection of globalization is that while the West weighs the benefits of globalization more then the losses (primarily because it culture of globalization is western), it the opposite in the Middle East. Globalization for the most part has two dimensions: First it attempts to makes overall life better, improves housing, the standard of living. The second dimension is that it has a concept of “cultural synthesis” which means that the host states existing ways can be blended with new western ideas to make a “stronger hybrid”. However most of Islamic tradition, at least radical tradition, does not allow for the blending of two cultures. Ultimately the bottom line is that “globalization is accepted if and when it is perceived not as destroying the local society but helping it to survive and flourish in a partly new form.”
There has been a “lack of cultural penetration of the Islamic Middle east by Western culture, ideas, and institutions”. This is not to say that globalization has been completely rejected by the Middle East but rather that it has not been completely successful. For example, in Iran, there has been much reform over the past decade; from the point of women having to cover up completely too now when they are free to dress more or less in a Western fashion. However, as a generalization, the impact of Western culture is much less prevalent in the Middle East when compared to the rest of the non-western countries.
History has shown that countries that are much more open to foreign religions and language are much more receptive to globalization. For example, in India and much of the Asian sub-continent, English, Christianity, and Democracy have been much more widely tolerated, if not completely accepted. In the Middle East this is not the case. Nearly everywhere in the region, “Christianity has remained a marginal religion, and even where it exists has either little national influence” despite the fact that Judaism and Christianity were at the roots of Islam. Furthermore, Islam “sees itself very much apart from a global consensus and retains its own claims to hegemony”. This is not to say that Christianity is necessary for globalization to be accepted; rather that history has shown that states that are more open, or states with populations of various religious backgrounds, are relatively more open to globalization. Thus the Middle East being composed of countries of strong Islamic tradition with very little variance build themselves a “cultural wall” against globalization. Another aspect is the lack of non-native languages in the Middle East. It is widely accepted that the language of Globalization is English. However in the Middle East all European languages for the most part are absent. The most widely used language in the Middle East is Arabic (with the exception of Iran), and this fact creates another artificial barrier against globalization.
Still yet another problem that was briefly mentioned above is the prevalence of dictatorship and authoritarian rule in the Middle East. In Europe and much rest of the world, modernization, industrialization, and ultimately globalization have wiped out monarchy and autocratic government, however in the Middle East “dictatorships have learned how to survive and mobilize mass support.” To the detriment of the populations of the Middle East, most have been either forced or convinced that their current governments are not only successful but rather are they correct way of doing so. It is in the benefit of those in power to prevent the ideas that are associated with globalization such as democracy from entering into the system. In reality these autocratic governments often use the “trump card” of claiming that resisting to globalization is the only way to defend Islam and their way of life.
As a result of the reasons listed, the Middle East as a whole harshly rejects globalization and considers it a dangerous idea and often resort to violence to prevent it from infiltrating the culture. Globalization is seen as a surrender to a “dominant, non-indigenous standpoint” and is seen by individuals in the Middle East as a system that attempts to undermine their currently equilibrium. While the above is true for the Middle East as whole, this essay will now analyze particular countries that may have had a different reaction for various reasons.