Yesterday’s decisions are today’s problems. The wars in the Middle East, the conflict between Pakistan and India and the widespread instability in Africa are the outcome of artificially constructed borders, baseless identities and divide et impera. Of course, the past is not the sole reason of today’s problems but it nonetheless performs a persistent, determining and detriment role in amplifying today’s challenges.
Most of today’s challenges would not be as extreme as they are if it wasn’t for ignorant and insensitive imperialist outsiders imposing their will on former colonies. ‘The colonial powers drew artificial borders on paper, completely ignoring the physical realities of the region’, wrote Tim Marshal accurately in Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Tell You Everything You Need To Know About Global Politics. In other words, a great number of nation-states that exist today in Africa, the Middle East and the Indian Subcontinent are completely made up with little inherent cultural foundation. To add insult to injury, these state are the product of European policies, not the desire of the people who are living in those recently constructed states today. Two key states illustrate this fact: Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Regardless of what one hears in the main-stream-media, Pakistan is the creation of British foreign and colonial policy, with the aim to continually exert influence in an officially “post-colonial society”. Even the word ‘Pakistan’ was coined in Britain in 1933, as noted by Anatol Lieven in Pakistan: A Hard Country.
Aside from this linguistic invention, Britain did everything in its power to leave behind a partitioned India. While native Muslims did advocate for a separate Muslim majority state, there was no overwhelming majority for this course of action. In fact, the demand for a separate Muslim state was greatly inflated and amplified by the British government of India in the preceding decades to 1947.
In Secret Affairs: Britain’s Collusion with Radical Islam, Mark Curtis extensively documents how Britain ‘deliberately promoted partition and the creation of Pakistan to secure its strategic interests’. Practically, this was carried out by assisting the Muslim League on the ground and by countering the Indian Nation Congress’ aim of keeping India intact and in one piece. Some of the methods that were used in attaining this aim include: quota systems, imprisonment of anti-partition activists and financial as well as material aid to pro-partition advocates.
Events surrounding the creation of Saudi Arabia are somewhat reminiscent of the aforementioned points.In the aftermath of the Ottoman Empire, the French and the British drew the boundaries of today’s Middle East. In what came to be known as the Sykes-Picot agreement, numerous artificial states were constructed with new boundaries and territories. Foreign interference was so extreme – claim historians and academics -that Saudi Arabia has become known as a largely British creation.
In fact, the Kingdom is ruled by the House of Saud because that’s whom the imperialists favoured as opposed to other contenders. To put it bluntly, the will of the Arabs is the will of the former imperialists. As a matter of fact, the only way various conflicting and opposing tribes, sects and religions have been united in Saudi Arabia is through extensive human rights violations.
Why is this a catastrophic Problem?
Putting aside the internal issues these states have, there are huge implications for international peace and security these two countries pose as a consequence of their artificial construction.
Firstly, Pakistan is the second biggest threat to global peace according to a survey conducted by Gallup International in 2013. It is a threat not only to the region but to the whole wide world due to its nuclear weapons arsenal, frequent military dictatorships, a lack of nation-wide identity and poor governance.
This is exactly what happens when an identity, a state, a country is imposed upon people: there is a lack of cohesion, an absence of checks and balances and a very little sense of responsibility.
Turning to Saudi Arabia, it has led a lethal, destructive and inhumane war on Bahrain and Yemen for the past few years. It aligns itself with the foreign policy of those countries that are far away and do not emphatically understand the region, meddles in neighbouring countries through covert means and attempts to export its ideology far and wide. Even Donald Trump (before he became President) rightly stated that the “world’s biggest funder of terrorism” is Saudi Arabia.
These two examples illustrate how artificially constructed states (by colonial outsiders) are the source of many of the world’s problems today. Both countries are being compelled to exhibit the interests of their master, a state which is thousands of miles away. While some of these interests are not bad in an absolutist principle, they are detrimental in the relativist sense as they ignore the realities of the regions in which Pakistan and Saudi Arabia exist in today.
There are a number of steps that can be taken to enact a positive change: (a) Acknowledge the role colonial powers have played in constructing the respective countries and thereby understand the shallow identity these two states claim to represent (b) Construct identities based on the locality (c) Advocate policies that are in the region’s interest – not in the interest of the former colonial powers.
______________________________________________________________________________
Muhammed Raza Hussain is an award-winning writer: he is the Extra-Mile winner of the News Quest Young Reporter Scheme 2014 and received a certificate for Talent for Writing by Young Writers. Twitter @MuhammedRaza786 | Instagram: M.Raza.H_ | Facebook: @MRazaHOfficial
