The American newspaper the New York Times presented a new map of the Middle East. It is composed of scientists of the U.S. Institute of peace Robin Wright. Previously on "brain centers" of the United States such maps have been circulating a lot. The first project, which involves the redrawing of borders in the middle East, was described in the times of President bill Clinton's administration in the monograph of the American researchers J. Kemp and R. Harkavy "Strategic geography and the changing middle East" (1997). After the events of 11 September 2001 was circulated report Douglas Feith, and then his book "War and the resolve", where the question was raised about the need for redrawing of borders in the middle East. Was also published by the American General Wesley Clark's "winning modern war", where in a list of "condemned countries" were listed Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Libya and Somalia.
But all of these work by many experts was perceived with suspicion and irony. Yes and in the future, hardly anyone would give them serious consideration, if not announced, on 6 November 2003 at the National endowment for democracy (National Endowment for Democracy). U.S. President George W. Bush the project "greater middle East" (Greater Middle East ) It was "linked" to Iraq and was also perceived with great suspicion. In June 2006 in the journal Armed Forces Journal provides the publication of maps of "greater Middle East", prepared by a retired Colonel of the National United States military Academy (2006) Ralph Peters. Many of his positions looked sensational.
Peters was called upon to analyze the course of events in the region based on the problems that have left us the results of territorial redistribution as a result of the First world war, recommended to restore the border, "the times of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson," to create a situation which would enable the peoples and to many ethnic groups of the "greater Middle East" back to the "natural historical borders" that, in his opinion, "would eliminate the causes of many contemporary conflicts".
According to the plans of Ralph Peters from Syria and Iraq should be cut out of the territory in favor of "Free Kurdistan" and the coastal territory of Syria to depart Lebanon. Part of the "Great Kurdistan" must be logged and Eastern Turkey, and possibly part of Western Iran. A little later the American Professor Michael Davey "upgraded" card Peters: on the coast of Syria, a small state of alawites, depart the Golan heights in Israel, on the territory of present Jordan create a Palestinian state in exchange for Israel's refusal from his claim to East Jerusalem. Lebanon will be divided into two States, one Shia and Maronites. This was followed in this project, the former American diplomat Dennis Ross, historian David Fromkin and political analysts Kenneth Pollack and Daniel Byman made their additions: a section of Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and the division of Egypt into two States, one city-region in the Nile Delta, and Western tribal region, the inclusion of Kuwait and Qatar to the United Arab Emirates, the proclamation of the area of the Levant in the Eastern Mediterranean.
In July 2006, U.S. Secretary of state Condoleezza rice publicly announced the plan of "rebuilding" the Middle East region, however by introducing the term "New middle East". But even in the U.S. the proposed projects continued to be perceived at the level of "exotic geopolitical puzzle" designed "for only the academic exercise officers from the National military Academy and military planners". It changed the phenomenon of so-called "Arab spring".Things began to change. This point and recorded by Robin Wright in the New York Times. According to him, in the middle East instead of 5 should appear 14 States.
In place of Saudi Arabia designated five countries: South Arabia, North Arabia, Western Arabia to the Holy places of Islam, Eastern Arabia, where the main reserves of Saudi oil and is inhabited predominantly Shia, and Wahhabists with the capital Riyadh. Syria and Iraq are divided along ethnic and religious lines, Yemen will be included in Wahhabity. However, Wright's map of Iran remains intact. But he is referring to the Kurdish factor, which covers Southeast Turkey, Northwest Iran, Northern Iraq and Syria, hinting that the marked scenario "ripe Turkey.
Outset: can different attitudes to those more refined geopolitical projects identified so far only on a certain part of the "greater Middle East". If not for one circumstance. Many of them become a reality. And this is the main feature of the emerging situation, or rather, the political heritage that I want to leave the USA in this region of the world. By the way, warned about this in the summer of 2013 the Turkish President Abdullah Gul, who , unexpectedly for many, tied the multi-faceted growing radicalization in the region that "the world order has changed and the balance of power has shifted from USA and European countries towards Asia".Now the main thing, he said, as countries in the region will survive this "transition process".
Now in the middle East is really gaining strength several complex parallel processes: multiple nationalisms, inter-confessional confrontation, ideological, mixed with Islam for terrorist. All this mixed with fierce armed struggle which covered an area from Gibraltar to Pakistan. Such mixing problems, the history of the region never knew. Therefore, it is possible that the redrawing of the map of the "greater Middle East" will become a real way out, although this process may be accompanied by armed conflict. But the most intriguing fact is that Syria's President Bashar al-Assad - if you hold power - may be the only obstacle on the way of collapse. It is no coincidence that Russia and the United States began to negotiate on the Syrian subject. The danger is that the course of events in this region creates a temptation to translate the epicenter of the confrontation to the borders of Iran, Russia and the Caucasus, to external centers. But who will be able to stop the impending geopolitical mystery?
Tags: assessment , geopolitics , Near East