Are the Sykes-Picot borders that bad?

[Anatur]

You think this would have been that much better?

The previous state in the area left awful institutions in place after a rule of hundreds of years - weak central authority, nobility of tax farmers and general neglect. Sure the British and the French were certainly no help but the situation on the ground was already terrible. It sure is cool to hate on the colonising imperialist Westerners, but for the Middle East I think we should recognise that the borders are not that different to what the Ottomans had set up, and that the latter left next to nothing of a foundation on which to build a functioning state.

I dont think the Western Powers would get half the blame they do if they didnt just turn those lands into expansions of their empires and proceeded to meddle in them for decades in what was blatant imperialism.

 

[olm]

I think it is sort of unfair to blame Sykes-Picot for not foreseeing what a mess religious divides would become. I believe at that time the main topic of day was "Arab nationalism", and in that sense Iraq, Syria, Jordan division makes geographically sense, with only Kurds being really screwed over.

Now, with glorious power of hindsight, I guess better arrangement would have been:
1. Shia-Arabistan = South-Iraq
2. Southern-Arab-Sunnistan = Jordan + South-Syria + Palestine Arab areas
3. Northern-Arab-Sunnistan = North-Iraq + North-Syria
3.5? Kurdistan = either as independent, autonomous in Northern-Sunnistan, or even some Austria-Hungary style arrangement with Northern-Arab-Sunnistan
4. Something clever for coastal Lebanon+Syrian-Alawite+Syrian Christian+Hatay area, maybe some confederation style arrangement.

 

[VineFynn]

I suppose the proper question to ask is how many and how much better were the alternatives?

 

[Conanteacher]

there are lots of good maps here:
http://gulf2000.columbia.edu/maps.shtml

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

With all due respect, how are a bunch of demographic maps from this century supposed to help England and France carve up the Ottoman corpse in 1916?

It was a secret accord, non-official, non-binding; shadowy, just the way governments like to do business. Plausible Deniability is a wonderful thing, to some folks.

 

[Easy-Kill]

A wise man might listen to what other people, who live in countries that do not bathe in blood on a generational basis, have to say; rather than blindly swinging at an imaginary pinata that every single individual in this thread is telling you does not exist.

While I have read the majority of this thread in amusement at how Anatur's argument has been deconstructed by Abdul and yourself, this particular post is seeped in ignorant arrogance reflective of 19th century imperialist thinking. Just because you were brought up in a nation that has a different perspective, it doesn't automatically make you correct. I would strongly suggest to you to come to terms with the fact that you are not as clever, knowledgeable or charismatic as you think you are. If you disagree with someone that is great (its what makes humans so interesting), but please do not claim your opinion is any better or more informed due to some arbitrary reason such as where you were born.

Also, your point on North Korea earlier in the thread is wrong (and indicative of your enlightened ignorance). By and large, the people of North Korea are both happy and proud of their nation. No doubt the isolation is the reason for this, but the majority do not want you to come and free them. I recently went there and was surprised at how my perception was very different from the reality.

 

[olm]

Also, your point on North Korea earlier in the thread is wrong (and indicative of your enlightened ignorance). By and large, the people of North Korea are both happy and proud of their nation. No doubt the isolation is the reason for this, but the majority do not want you to come and free them. I recently went there and was surprised at how my perception was very different from the reality.

Did you reach to this conclusion through months of free travel through North-Korea, meeting with all kinds of different people from all over country? Do you know Korean or how did you communicate with average people? What was your impression of prison camps?

 

[Easy-Kill]

Did you reach to this conclusion through months of free travel through North-Korea, meeting with all kinds of different people from all over country? Do you know Korean or how did you communicate with average people? What was your impression of prison camps?

No, I reached this conclusion by travelling all over the world over a period of decades, having lived in a number of countries and having spent time in some quite eye opening places. What I saw in North Korea was a population of people that were proud that their nation had fought an existential war against the super power and had maintains territorial integrity and autonomy for over 70 years.

Most of the people I spoke to were very keen to interact wherever possible. This ranged from border guards who wanted my sunglasses, tour guides who wanted my shoes, army officers who were keen to tell me where they learnt English, the guys learning coding (dota 2 hax?) at the national library or the thousands of people at circuses, funfairs and other places who were generally just looking happy.

I don't doubt that there are some unhappy people in the country, statistical theory alone suggests that at least 1/2 of people are less happy than the other half. And I imagine that nobody is happy to be in prison

All I am saying is that if you base your opinion entirely on news reports made by people who are unlikely to have even been in the country, you are as biased in opinion as the north Koreans.

 

[Herbert West]

Relevant

 

[olm]

Ah, "people generally looked happy" at your government approved tour in country where political dissent is brutally suppressed? I guess that settles it. Absolutely no possibility that there is some discontent hiding under the facade. I am pretty sure that for an average foreign tourist people also generally looked happy in Syria in 2010, in Iran in 1975, or in USSR in early 80s.

 

[Easy-Kill]

Ah, "people generally looked happy" at your government approved tour in country where political dissent is brutally suppressed? I guess that settles it. Absolutely no possibility that there is some discontent hiding under the facade. I am pretty sure that for an average foreign tourist people also generally looked happy in Syria in 2010, in Iran in 1975, or in USSR in early 80s.

Now you are just strawmanning. The point of discussion has nothing to do with Russia or Syria. You are trying to divert from the point that you only know what you see in the news.

I can assure you that we were in no way important enough to warrant having thousands of people forced to go to a funfair simply to show us they can have fun too. I got the impression that they were more bemused than anything. I have no doubt that they showed us the best parts of their country ... But isn't that what we do?

I think you are projecting your need to be the most knowledgable person in the room to a topic you have a very limited understanding of. You have seen what's on BBC news. I have seen what's on BBC news, and I have been down range. Only on experiencing the country did my perception change.

 

[Easy-Kill]

Thanks for posting. I only c

Relevant
]

Thanks for posting. I only caught the first 5 minutes because I am on my mobile. However, it looks quite interesting and he is right ... Before visiting I only knew the caricature of NK. I was pleasantly surprised at how the visit broke down my prior perception. I should post some photos!

 

[olm]

I think you are projecting your need to be the most knowledgable person in the room to a topic you have a very limited understanding of.

Absolutely opposite actually, I have no damn clue what average North-Koreans think about their country and its political leadership. I could make some guesses but it is also highly probable that I would be completely wrong. You on other hand made a sweeping statement: "By and large, the people of North Korea are both happy and proud of their nation" That is no different from people who think that Norkies must absolutely despise their government. Both are just assumptions based on extremely limited information.

 

[Conanteacher]

Absolutely opposite actually, I have no damn clue what average North-Koreans think about their country and its political leadership. I could make some guesses but it is also highly probable that I would be completely wrong. You on other hand made a sweeping statement: "By and large, the people of North Korea are both happy and proud of their nation" That is no different from people who think that Norkies must absolutely despise their government. Both are just assumptions based on extremely limited information.

Do not forget that there are happy and unhappy citizens everywhere, some people have decent lifes while others suffer. One should not draw conclusions made on assumptions and generalizations. How many people are there in prison in the US? How many are dissatisfied with their government? how many riots? How many social problems?

One could claim that the US is a hellhole full of poor people with drug problems, insufficient healthcare, incredible oppression by state authorities and that the population would welcome the toppling of the regime. Especially the hundreds of thousands of prisoners - not to mention executions.

At the same time, many foreign travellers only visit the top sights and noone dares to walk around the slums.

Many Americans cannot afford to travel, though they are "free" do to so. That does not make America a hellhole of its own - it always depends on who you are in each country and on countless other factors.

Numbers count, too. Happy and wealthy people also exist in Somalia and Afghanistan, impoverished homeless drugaddicts can be found in Austria as well. That does not make Somalia a great place to live and Austria a hellhole.

Political bias is also a factor - I guess social conditions in many countries are much worse than in the DPRK - even without a trade embargo - but I haven't seen many stories of 'President of X-country feeding his minister to 120 dogs and executing his uncle with AA guns" being made up for their respective leaders.

 

[Andre Bolkonsky]

While I have read the majority of this thread in amusement at how Anatur's argument has been deconstructed by Abdul and yourself, this particular post is seeped in ignorant arrogance reflective of 19th century imperialist thinking. Just because you were brought up in a nation that has a different perspective, it doesn't automatically make you correct. I would strongly suggest to you to come to terms with the fact that you are not as clever, knowledgeable or charismatic as you think you are. If you disagree with someone that is great (its what makes humans so interesting), but please do not claim your opinion is any better or more informed due to some arbitrary reason such as where you were born.

Also, your point on North Korea earlier in the thread is wrong (and indicative of your enlightened ignorance). By and large, the people of North Korea are both happy and proud of their nation. No doubt the isolation is the reason for this, but the majority do not want you to come and free them. I recently went there and was surprised at how my perception was very different from the reality.

So, let me read this again: You say you visited North Korea. This means you stayed in a tourist approved hotel, shopped in the tourist approved shops, and visited the tourist approved landmarks; yes? You spoke with North Korean nationals carefully vetted to speak with foreigners, and they say how great North Korea is and how proud they are to stand alone against the entire world. Your entire viewpoint is changed, it is now a land of Milk and Honey to you with Freedom for all.

Were you able to get the opinion of the tens of thousands of political prisoners held in work camps? No? Ah, big surprise.

Do me a favor: Google; Catherine the Great's visit to the Potemkin Villages.

I might ask about the morality of you giving hard Western currency to the Korean Regime to fuel their ability to expand their rocket and nuclear programs. (Think about that the next time North Korea launches a missle over Japan) However, you seem more interested in dressing me down for calling out an individual who repeatedly supports the use of genocide to solve his nations problems than handing your cash to a dictator who might just do the same thing, so I'll leave you to reflect upon your priorities.

 

[Conanteacher]

I can see another topic derailment here, myself contributing as well. Lets all forget about DPRK and focus back on the Sykes Picot agreement...

 

[Fanstar1]

anyways, Colonialism, with its complete disregard for the native inhabitants of the land being colonized, is the source of most conflicts today.

 

[JodelDiplom]

anyways, Colonialism, with its complete disregard for the native inhabitants of the land being colonized, is the source of most conflicts today.

Disagree. People are the source of most conflicts today. People are more than their pre 1960s history.

 

[DoomBunny]

anyways, Colonialism, with its complete disregard for the native inhabitants of the land being colonized, is the source of most conflicts today.

Ironic, given the tendency of the local inhabitants to kill each other like flies both before and after colonial rule. Almost like it's human nature rather than the fault of one shadowy almighty foreign oppressor who makes a convenient scapegoat.

 

[VineFynn]

anyways, Colonialism, with its complete disregard for the native inhabitants of the land being colonized, is the source of most conflicts today.

Implying horrible wars didn't happen as frequently before colonialism? Those African/Chinese/Indian/Japanese/American empires didn't just peacefully unite themselves, you know. The same forces that drove Europeans to colonise drove and drives other countries to do terrible stuff in the past and today.

Colonialism is absolutely to blame for several wars, yeah. Its to blame for a lot of awful stuff. But to imply that something like that is at fault for most conflicts today is basically exonerating the terrible people who actually perpetuate conflict and moreover to give a free hand to people like that to blame colonialism/Europeans whenever they commit atrocities/start some stupid border war.

Countries/warlords and their leaders are motivated by the same thing they have been for a long time, colonialism wouldn't strip them of those motivations, it'd just change the stakes and the states.