Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Thomas Friedman's "Tribes With Flags": Only Intervene in the Affairs of "Real" Countries?

In an op-ed in today's New York Times entitled "Tribes With Flags" (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/23/opinion/23friedman.html), Thomas Friedman contends:

"[T]here are two kinds of states in the Middle East: “real countries” with long histories in their territory and strong national identities (Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Iran); and those that might be called “tribes with flags,” or more artificial states with boundaries drawn in sharp straight lines by pens of colonial powers . . ."

But consider for a moment how the borders of the U.S. were ultimately established:

• Wars between European colonizers: Britain, France, Holland and Spain.
• Conflicts with and the displacement of numerous aboriginal tribes.
• Wars and prolonged conflicts at sea with a European colonizer: Britain.
• Territorial purchases from colonizers: France and Russia.
• Territorial purchases from a neighboring state: Mexico.
• Suppression of a war of secession in which rebels received arms from Britain.
• Wars with neighboring states: Mexico and Spain (Cuba).

Query to Mr. Friedman: Given all of the above, is the U.S. a "real" country with "real" borders?

I would observe, however, that the U.S. has a tradition of religious tolerance that is conspicuously absent from the Muslim Middle East, including those countries which Mr. Friedman lists as "real" countries. Note Egypt's persecution of its Copt minority (some 10% of its population). Also note Iran's brutal oppression of its Baha'i and Sunni minorities.

The U.S. should decide to intervene in the Middle East on the basis of "real" or "artificial" country? Or, as was the case in Libya where a dictator threatened civilians with "no mercy", the U.S. should consider basic interests of humanity?

Also to be considered is the threat posed to U.S. interests even by "artificial" countries, e.g., the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.

1 comment:

  1. Friedman is on something here! Whatever USA is, it is not a tribal country. Tribalism is an opposite to tolerance: everybody who is not us is against us. It is just happened that in the Middle East the shape of borders can signal the type of country. The sharp lines of the border is a sign, not a cause of the problem. The cause is the culture, the history of the people. USA inherited European culture, which was thousands years in making. In Europe, every person becomes an independent actor, so the "tribe" is less important. Tribal people did not have this development, they live the same as thousand years ago. Islam conserves and spreads this tribalism. So, as a great countries as Iran and Egypt become Islamic, they gets this tribal culture of intolerance as well.

    ReplyDelete