The West, Middle East And Orientalism Essay Example for Free

The westward, eye eastern And Orientalism EssayThe sum East has become a focal point in the last fifty years beca intent of concerns regarding the regions role in economics, international security and politics. There is urgency in spliting peacefulness and development for the region its position in the worlds oil markets and its role as gateway between Europe and Asia argon critical reasons for the interest. There has been an exhaustive amount of literature aiming to analyze and develop solutions for the region developing a consensus to what has to be done has proven to be difficult and even if accomplished, death penalty has been problematic. One point of suggests that the difficulty in the region stems from pagan reasons. Orientalists contend that the polish of the people in the Middle East which is predominantly Islamic is one of the reasons for the developing conflicts. The purpose of this paper is to survey animated views on this perspective and to assess the va lidity of the arguments presented. In doing so, the paper will be able to adjust how purification affects the peace, order and development in the Middle East based on historical and authentic studies of the region.Perspectives of Orientalism The term orientalism was coined to delineate the geographical divide between the Europe and the Americas with Asia. This reflects the more than than late use of the double-u to refer to the occident and east to refer to the orient particularly during the colonial expansion in the twentieth century. Though the term was originally essential as a geographical term, the more significant occupation is in its use to imply a cultural divide that in turn is the core of conflicts held against the tungsten.In Coles review of Bernard Lewis What Went Wrong Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response, he cites that Lewis uses orientalism to characterize and develop his insights regarding the Middle Easts situation . Lewis uses the west as a well-wo rn to define what is wrong with the policies in the region. The approach is non just used to assess the legitimate subject of affairs in the region just now reaches back historically with the study of the Ottoman Empire versus commutation and Western Europe.According to Ismael Hossein-Zadeh, orientalist perspectives have had resurgence after the September 11th attacks. He considers that development an drift to understand the reasons behind the tragedy and at the same time an effort to develop the protagonists and antagonists of what was to be the struggle against terrorism. In this light, the Middle East and Afghanistan were modeled according to their remainder with the Allies and the most distinct difference creation the culture of the region .Stefan Lovgren reflects that this view of the Middle East is steeped and tale as evidenced as far back by the Crusades . Ideologically, there are significant similarities in the middle ages, the focus was to throw in the region from the domination of Arabs of Christendoms birthplace and today, the objective to liberate the region from the supporters of terrorism. Evaluating Orientalism In Edward W. Saids review of Samuel Huntingtons denomination The Clash of Civilizations he criticizes the War of the Worlds scenario presentation of the cultural and religious conflicts .Huntingtons approach is distinctively orientalist because of his use of cultural or civilizations to illustrate his theories. Saids view is that Huntington is altogether reinforcing defensive self-pride than for critical understanding of the bewildering interdependence of our time . One of the key difficulties in orientalism is that there seems to be besides much focus on superficial differences. This is non to imply that cultural differences have to be considered nevertheless rather, there is little historical perspective given to the economic, political and strategic factors.For example, Nanda Shrestha and Kenneth Gray reflect that the s tream conflicts between the West and the Middle East and all separate conflict in recent history belie a two hundred years of good relations in terms . development an orientalist approach, one culture or group is evaluated based on what is considered a more superior culture. In such a scenario, one group ultimately is considered to be superior to a nonher thus its use as a standard.This then leads to conflict because either of the perception that a culture is being judged as inferior or because of the action on enforcing judgment or the will of the superior nation to the other in what is seen as in consideration of the interest of the other. It should be noted that this is not the motive of orientalism but is often used as the justification of extraterritorial action not just in the Middle East but the rest of the world as well. Conflict and OrientalismCole points out that one of the difficulties in orientalism is that it tends to lumps together issues and then gives it a cultura l or ethnic label that rarely represents all the individuals elusive in the issue. According to him, when the terms Middle East is used the connotation is of Islamic insurgency which does not represent the majority of the countries in the region in either religion or sentiment . Bernard Lewis considers the current points out that this has lead for Moslems to fell that they are being persecuted and has led to resentment and mistrust of the west, particularly the join States .The cycle then continues on with Middle Eastern leaning towards orientalist views in dealing with other countries. Which, to be expected only further encourages conflict and misunderstanding among the parties involved. In Shrestha and Grays evaluation of Huntingtons article clash of civilization theory is that it should be considered as an ideological work underpinning a neoconservative order of business for a global American Empire than a work of scholarship or accurate government agency of historical accre ditedity .Evaluating the Conflicts Lewis suggests that the evaluation of the conflicts should not focus so much on the disparities suggested by orientalist but rather on the competition because of common interests in terms of economy, politics and security . His view is support by Lovgren whose study of the city of Jerusalem, one of the most contested cities in history and a infract microcosm of the region, reflect that history has shown that various cultures and civilization have co-existed well enough.He cites that most conflict has certain from territorial, economic and political disputes rather than from cultural differences . Furthermore, Kunihiko Imai that there has been greater tension not only in the Middle East but in the world as a whole because of greater moving-picture show and interdependence among nations . Common stakes and conflicting interests are considered as one of the main causes of conflict. The discrepancies between the developed and lesser developed countr ies is creating tension and brings to the surface questions regarding the fairness of todays global economics and politics .At the same time, J. J. Nance points out that there is also realization that issues like terrorism are global issues that have gained the attention of the international community that may not necessarily be in the interest of some countrys sovereignty . Nance uses as an example the aviation intentness which has been among the hardest hit after the September 11th attacks the aviation industry is typically one the highest grossing industries of any country, generating billions of dollars in tax revenue.Educator Henry A.Giroux also points out that the conflicts that develop can also be attributed to the privation of cultural literacy which is the development of context and understanding of other cultures which has created politics of difference that gives little margin for real communication . Hossein-Zadeh supports this view he believes that there has been litt le effort in addressing the root of the conflicts and religion and culture are used as a convenient scapegoat for the conflicts . There is no denying the impact of culture and civilization. It affects all aspects of society, creating the dimensions and forces that shape individuals .Orientalists perspectives have merit in that societies have their own motivations and capacities that either allows them to become more developed than another. However, considering communication and technology today which has created unprecedented channels for global interaction the distinction of what the West and Middle East encompasses is becoming blurred. As much as one would want to consider the Middle East as a far off and alien region to the West, the irony is that most recent leaders of the region have been educated in the West .Conclusion It is easy, if not convenient, to use cultural or regional characterizations to explain conflicts but this provides little option for the creation of satisfact ory solutions. The real albeit more difficult issues to deal is whether there is fairness in economic policies whether there is basis of foreign legions presence whether there is religious, racial and social discrimination whether there tolerance for differences and whether issues are not being misconstrued because of differences in perspective or objectives.There is little consideration of the underlying issues that was created the existing status quo and leaves as well much to speculation and assumption. Therefore, any attempt to tackle with the issues in the Middle East must not be limited to this perspective and if used, should not consider it as indicative for the region. In conclusion, issues can not be fully assessed and solution can not be fully developed from orientalist perspectives alone. These perspectives consider only a snapshot of the issues that have to be dealt with.Referencehttp//www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/533230/postshttp//news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2004/10/1028_041028_jerusalem_conflict.html