Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Vitaly Naumkin, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies
In the Middle East, on the one hand, there were many unexpected events; on the other hand, there was a sequence of surprises in the sense that the situation of instability, unpredictability, lack of control and the crisis of nation-states, as we say, continued.
This trend continued, so consistency and continuity in this instability and crisis in general have been preserved, and they have received new evidence that suggests that this crisis situation will be maintained for quite a long time.
Now people often talk about the crisis of the Sykes-Picot system. I think this is not quite the correct expression, because the Sykes-Picot system and actually the division of the Middle East are not actually the point, although this is important, too; but still, those nation-states that became the basis of the world order many decades ago in the Middle East were born due to the colonial powers.
And despite the fact that we consider the boundary between them final and stable, and these states are developing in those borders, they developed, as well as the societies which today exist as national communities, which have their sovereignty, their identity, and this identity is growing, but yet, as we can tell, this system has seriously ruptured.
And this rupture is not only in the Middle East, it may concern the whole world. In other regions of the world, it also can be seen obviously but in the Middle East, perhaps, this process is most noticeable.
So today many analysts and people living in the area ask if it is possible to predict (you probably often hear this question) the destruction of these limits, after which something new will come, perhaps, some states will collapse, and some new ones will be created, and perhaps there will be some unexpected association.
And we see that such processes are possible in principle. If they are possible in Europe, why cant we assume that in the Middle East the example of, say, the split of Sudan into two states could be not the only example?
I do not want to be a pessimist. I'd like the Middle East to remain stable. And I would not want anyone to question the current system of states which exists here.
But the obvious crisis that is happening here is an obvious break-up of the existing order, instability and even unmanageability, and many states today poorly control the territory for which they are responsible.
And as part of this they have national sovereignty. I am afraid that such a challenge to states and the world order today was born here.
Everyone reacts differently to this challenge. We know that there are forces that are trying to use the existence of this challenge to their advantage.
I will not point a finger at the states for which it would be beneficial that this instability could be as deep as possible.
And at the same time I do not want to exaggerate the importance of the external conspiracy.
This concerns all states in the region, we're not just talking about the Arab world, there are at least three non-Arab states in the Middle East - Turkey, Iran and Israel, so we are talking about all the states.
And everywhere there are various challenges.
There is a very serious worsening in bilateral relations, inter-ethnic and inter-faith ones, as well as the relations within religious communities.