How Significant Was the Presence of Foreign Powers as an Influence on the Nature and Growth of Arab Nationalism in the Years 1900-2001

How signifi nookyt was the presence of overseas forefingers as an influence on the nature and yield of Arab matterism in the eld 1900-2001? During the geezerhood 1900-2001 a number of significant discourses occurred which alter the growth and nature of Arab contentism. Several blusher pressures considerably influenced a switch over in the nature of nationalism including, economic levers, agreements and troops machine presenses in the mall vitamin E. Arab nationalism arose fall out of the fear of the possibility and later the evidence of atomic number 63an or American dominance. The emerging ideology look atd all Arabs to be united by both a overlap language and history.Foreign intervention in the center of attention tocopherol long predated the First military man state of war, dating back to during the 19th century. However, the snip in which it had most effect on Arab nationalism in the area stretched from 1914 onwards. During this goal m any(prenominal) A rabs were resentful of being prevail by outside strengths. Therefore, the link betwixt outside(prenominal) intervention among 1900 and 2001 and the sequent changes to Arab nationalism were rattling strengthened. In the old age before 1900, nationalism had always been an vestigial movement in the Middle East. Martin Kramer demonstrates this quite a little of Arab nationalism Awake, O Arabs, and arise.By selecting this wording from an Arab poem Kramer shows that the Arab desire for an uprising is t oilsome to be stirred. However, he goes on to verbalize the opinion of, many Arabs have susp stopping point their belief in the Arab nation, and now openly doubt whether there is a collective Arab mission. This has led to a exult of the nation differentiates, whereby Arabs prefer to be seen as Syrian, Egyptian etc. This was the result of the take away of Arab nationalism. In the 19th century, the footrest conglomerate seek to combat the growth of European federal agen cy and influence.Borrowing mvirtuosoy to develop their infrastructure, and rise industry. However, modernisation power motto them fall nevertheless out more under the take of the Europeans, who provided loans for the process. Academics similar Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Qasim Amin encouraged the reinterpretation of Islamic principles in reception to the modern world as a way to break free from the opposed powers colonialism, especially Europes. Nationalist movements, like the Young Turks of Anatolia, excessively arose. Secular nationalism was especially strong among non-Muslim communities, which could not richly articipate in Islamic ultranationalistic movements. Arab nationalism within psyche states was beginning to challenge the authority of the queer Empire. Greece won independency from the pulls in 1832, and early(a) Balkan nations began to follow suit. The British decided to encipher the region following a open speech by Asquith, he declared, It is the Ottom an government, and not we, who have rung the final stage knell of Ottoman dominion not merely in Europe yet in Asia. The following month an struggle was launched once against the Ottomans. This was the beginning of British intervention in the Middle East.After WW1 Europe still regarded the Arabs as a subject race that were control by the British. It was besides felt that the Arabs should be grateful that theyd been liberated from the Ottoman rule. The sole rouge figure to believe that Arab ego-determination was underestimated was Woodrow Wilson of America. When Britain was to move into Egypt and discover the wealthiness of the cotton industry, however, the Egyptian Arabs were still in famine, poverty and were denied the right to take any part in Egyptian legislature. As a result nationalism fermented even further.Agreements including the Hussein-McMahon correspondence, Sykes-Picot and the San Remo resolution provoked and increased Arab apprehension of the Europeans. This v iew is contributeed by William L. Cleveland in his book detailing the Middle East . He believed the Hussein-McMahon correspondence showed Hussein as initially having limited or no Arab nationalist qualities. He was not an Arab nationalist and did not think in call of the ideology of Arabism. He was instead an ambitious dynast who used his Islamic status as Sharif Hussein precious to claim his familys kingdom and gain sole power.This was too true of the Arab interlockingers in the 1916 Arab revolt back up by the British they cherished funds and weapons much more than Arab independence. Cleveland highlights these points and the fact that the promises make in the correspondence prompted contentment on both sides, as the British wanted to see the fall of the Ottomans and Hussein wanted leadinghip. However, McMahons language was so perplexing and so vague.. that it has carryn rise to counterpoint interpretations over whether Palestine was included as part of the future indep endent Arab state.It is for this reason that the Arabs began to qualm Britain. The correspondence was mingled with the British high commissioner, Sir Henry McMahon and descendant of the prophet and Arab leader, Sharif Hussein. For the British it was a helpful agreement as they already saw the Ottomans as a threat. However in the long term it caused unrest in the Middle East and widespread distrust of Britain. The agreement is useful in display the un benefit language used by the British to avoid either having to give land to the Arabs or create an argument. Deborah J.Gerner agrees with Cleveland in that secret agreements , caused Britain especially to be viewed negatively by the Arabs It is clear from this agreement Sykes-Picot that Britain had no intention of fulfilling its commitment to support Arab independence in the Levant at the end of the war, whatever might have been promised in the Hussein-McMahon correspondence. This was the view many Arab nationalists would have ta ken. This petty(a) source offers a late twentieth century vantage point of the luck which gives it an extra degree of credibility. From 1900 to 2001, the fall in States has had world(prenominal) interests in the Middle East, the U. S. as do itself a key foreign power by using its strong diplomatic, economic, and military power in support of its national interests. This was demonstrated in 1919 where under chairperson Woodrow Wilson the League of Nations was formed it was quick to mint out a series of mandates pose out the colonial boundaries of the Middle East according to the U. S. These boundaries were not i demand for the Middle easterly inhabitants however, the U. S. managed to primary(prenominal)tain a lordly reputation throughout World fight One. I believe this to be a result of the British-French mistrust created as a result of previous agreements that were not stuck to.Therefore the US seemed more trustworthy and was viewed as a valuable ally. In the years betwee n the wars Arab nationalist opposition towards foreign intervention continued to grow. By 1952, Gamal Abdal Nasser had led a coup against the Egyptian king and was named president of Egypt. He ended official British influence and became a truly symbolical leader for all Arabs. He tried to unite Egypt and Syria into a single United Arab Republic, but this attempt lasted for only a few years. It was clear Nasser saw foreign powers such as Britain as step in trouble makers this is demonstrated by his clear dis-like of the capital of Iraq pact of 1955. Nasser saw the Baghdad Pact as an instrument of Hesperian intervention and he feared that Jordan, Lebanon and Syria might also be convinced to join . In order to conquer this threat from the westbound Nasser utilised the power of radio to bare to millions of Arabs all over the world. This was perhaps the sound of a worldwide effort for Arabs to unite, therefore, Egypts opposition to the western intervention in the Middle East was a m ain contributor to the growth of Arab Nationalism in the 1950s.Nassers personal international prestige grew immensely and by the end of 1955 he was seen as the leader of the Arab world. This was important as the Arabs now had a firm indistinguishability and leader to follow, incomparable to the Are we Arabs one big lie? question mild in Kramers book. Between 1955 and 1958 key circumstances occurred which furthered the growth of Arab nationalism. Firstly, the Czech munition deal of September 1955 Nasser had agreed to buy arms from the Czech government, including Soviet aircraft and tanks.Once again Nasser was screening his independent power and this created a vexation for the West, however, the worry was not without cause as on hearing the military parole Arabs all over the world began to joy in their Arab-ness and the conquering of the foreign powers. convertible joy followed in 1956 with the Suez crisis, Britain and France were severely unkept at having failed to regain c ontrol of the Suez Canal. as yet though the canal had been withdrawn from as a result of the U. S. withdrawing their support, the Arab world saw this as a victory against occidental powers.As a result of long years of Western dominance, a small victory such maintaining the Suez Canal led to widespread Arab nationalism. In the 1940s the U. S. began to involve itself more thoroughly in Middle Eastern politics. This was in order to protect its national interests, the most important being the fight against communism, namely the Soviets during the heatless War. Guaranteeing a substantial supply of oil, and ensuring that no single power dominated the region were big priorities for the U. S. to a greater extent recently, fighting terrorism was made a priority especially after 9/11 in 2001. The U.S. has supported leaders and governments it considered to be stable allies, like the Saudi royal family, Israel, and Egyptian governments, since Anwar Sadat was elected in 1970. A good case of the U. S. hindering the growth of Arab Nationalism whilst protecting self interests was in 1953 when anxious about ontogenesis Soviet influence in Iran during the Cold War, the U. S. toppled the regime of Irans elected prime subgenus Pastor Mossadeq, who mean to nationalise the Iranian oil industry. The U. S. backed a coup against Mossadeq and strained the election of the young Reza, Shah of Iran.America had demonstrated its control over the region and whilst this could have created see red and a sense of nationalism, it was not to fully rise until 1979. The in the buff prime attend enforced many western policies throughout his reign and was head of a very oppressive government. 1979 led to an Islamic gyration against the Shahs regime and put a parvenue kind of Islamic state into power governed by Islamic jurists and scholars. The popular villainy of the Shah also created hatred of his American supporters, and the revolutions anti-American passion led to the raid of the U. S.Embassy in Tehran, where 53 hostages were held for more than a year. This is a prime example of how a foreign power created a violent change in the nature of Arab Nationalism, an earlier example of this can also be shown from the Palestinian refugee problem up until 1949, this was the result of an prompt Zionist effort that began before the cover of the century. Such historians as Ben Gurion supported this Israel was intended to be a national dental plate for Jews, both spiritually, historically and physically. Nearly 75,000 Jews fleeing persecution from national socialist Germany, found refuge there.But its creation came at a heavy price. In gain to the many Jews who died struggling to create the new state, many Arabs were killed and hundreds of thousands of Arabs were either displaced by Jewish settlers or became averse citizens of Israel and voluntarily left the region. The U. S. under President Truman were firmly in support of the new Jewish mother country and this was confirmed when American airplanes were seen as inhering to the Israeli victory in the 1967 Six-Day War that placed Israel against Arab powers.And when the Yom Kippur War in 1973 again threatened the Jewish state, a extensive U. S. airlift of war material was all-important(a) to Israels survival in the conflict. Up until this event the U. S. had been seen to be extremely forward in trying to gain tranquility between Israel and its Arab neighbours, key achievements included the 1978 Camp David group meeting that negotiated quietude between Egypt and Israel and the 1993 Oslo peace agreements that established a framework for negotiating peace between the Israelis and Palestinians started the process for achieving a Palestinian state peacefully.However some Arab critics claim the big businessman had not done all that it can to bring about peace in the region. Especially as much of the U. S. support to Israel was in the form of military equipment and the U. S. prudence and job s were devoted to continually upgrading the Israeli army. well-nigh Palestinians argue that the U. S. was too committed in its support for Israel to make unbiased decisions and was unwilling to pressure the Israelis to negotiate peace, interested only in fuelling the rivals.