Is it possible to have secular, non-ethnic states in the Middle East?

[rug]

[msongs]

1. it's not ethnicity, it's religion, so the answer is....not likely nt

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Igel]

3. It's both.

Kurds, Iranian Arabs, Iranian Azeris ...

Shi'ites in Yemen and Iraq ...

Far too tangled a knot.

[LostinVA]

2. Iraq came the closest re: the secular part

But there was still a sharp Sunni/Shiite/Kurd divide.

[Pavulon]

4. Turkey is close.(nt)

[liberalpragmatist]

5. Turkey's hardly "non-ethnic" - nt

[Pavulon]

8. secular(ish)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Well Ataturk Worked Hard To Secularize The State.

He even outlawed the wearing of the hijab but now many women are wearing the hijab as a form of protest and to show their solidarity with other Muslims.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

13. He also outlawed religious meetings

of Sufi orders. They are still done in secret there. Too bad, as Sufi Orders tend to be international, and Sufis in general tend to be moderates to progressives in their outlook.

[The Magistrate]

29. The Old General, Sir

Hanged men for wearing old fashioned hats. It is, at any rate, an indication of the extremities required to impose a thorough-going secularization eighty years ago....

[madame defarge]

6. Learning a lot about (20th century) ME history now...

Just watched "Lawrence of Arabia" & am reading "The End of Iraq" by Peter Galbraith... And from what I've learned so far, there never has been, nor can there ever be, a good solution for the Middle East. Religion indeed has been the crux of the problem, but throughout history, they've had warring tribes striving for dominence (for whatever reason).

BTW, I highly recommend Galbraith's book. He does an excellent job explaining the history behind Iran & Iraq and how much the Reagan administration is to blame for the mess we're in now.

[rug]

9. A state neutral toward religion is not possible?

It seems to me that neither Islam, nor Judaism, nor Ba'hai, nor Christianity sets the agenda in any of those governments. Religion is the old familiar hoary flag that's always invoked.

Given the density, lack of water, and general human problems that are rampant, I don't see why a government can't function there without calling itself Islamic or Jewish. That adds nothing to the problem of governing and becomes an excuse for hatred.

This whole mess seems like maggots crawling from the long-dead corpse of the British Empire.

[madame defarge]

16. You're right...

Religion is used as an excuse, but just like here in the US, the fundies of any religion do seem to find ways to set government agendas, perhaps to divert the attention from the true problems of overpopulation, poor natural resources (except oil, of course...), human rights issues, etc.. And yes, I too believe that the Brits really messed it up after WWI. Just watched "Lawrence of Arabia" last night and was absolutely blown away. Great film: historically accurate (mostly), great actors, great cinematography, & very important in helping me understand some of the problems in the ME now.

[w4rma]

7. Everyone is Semantic over there, so ethnicity doesn't come into play.

It's a conservative religious war over land and power. Jewish, Sunni Muslim and Shai Muslim with the many denominations of Christianity as a minority.

And every single one of these religions worship the same God who is in each case believed to be a compassionate and loving God. Their religous differences are mainly one of whose messenger from God should take priority.

And then there are the ones behind the scenes who are manipulating these folks to gain their own personal power.

[blonndee]

12. Heh. You mean Semitic.

:)

[w4rma]

19. Heh, oops. Yes, everyone is Semitic over there. (nt)

[NuttyFluffers]

20. but it's a brilliant freudian slip

considering their interrelationship in culture and religion is so tightly knit, the only worthwhile differences are the hyper-magnified semantic ones. :D

[w4rma]

31. Thanks.

:)

[Liberal_Dog]

11. Iraq Was A Secular State

until we destroyed it.

[rug]

14. So was Iran, for that matter, before 1979.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[liberalpragmatist]

15. Secular, but hardly fair

Granted, I don't think we ought to have taken out Saddam Hussein; I opposed the war. But let's not looking at Saddam with rose-tinted glasses. Saying "but he was secular" is a little like asking "But Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?" Moreover, it was a pretty false secularism, one that included widespread repression of political dissidents and wholesale repressions and killings of Shias and Kurds on sectarian grounds.

[Liberal_Dog]

17. I Never Said It Was A Paradise

nt

[liberalpragmatist]

18. Fair enough

I probably shouldn't have implied you were saying something you weren't; I just get annoyed that this comes up several times on DU; YES, invading Iraq was a bad idea, YES we opened a Pandora's Box, but no need to start trumpeting Saddam because he was "secular," which many do.

[porphyrian]

22. Of course it's possible, it just probably won't ever happen. - n/t

[nealmhughes]

23. Secular by definition, should trump hereditary superstition and tribal

alliances. Good luck, look at how long it took the "secular" West...

[Bushwick Bill]

24. We destroy such states.

"The Soviet Union aspired to modernity through a massive mobilization of productive resources and industrial development. This was also the project of the Arab nationalists. Autarky, that is, self-sufficiency and independence for the oil states and their neighbors, were anathema to the United States and Great Britain. The House of Saud was equally alarmed by Nasser's idealism and daring.

And so Arab nationalism and communism were seen as twins by the Americans and the Saudi rulers. The Saudis operated in a modern world even as they exerted domestic control through pre-modern conventions. Modernism in the region would surround them with the notions that inevitably accompany modernism - scientific criticism of religion, secular political projects, and the dangerous dreams of popular sovereignty."
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070204_jurrassic_park.shtml

[AlphaCentauri]

25. Soviets did try but....

The commercials were promoting freedom of religion

[Just Me]

26. When capitalistic ASSHOLES stop trying to control it,...

,...the Middle East will create peace. BUT NO!!!!! The region has been used, bombed, abused, humiliated, oppressed,....as is the Asian and African extensions.

The whole world now has the capacity to actually SEE what's been happening.

BushCO and the neocons, along with their brethren are pursuing a LOSE/LOSE goal.

ASSHOLES!!!

[LynneSin]

27. No - we invade those countries (ie - Iraq)

For all the bad things we can say about Saddam, the one thing he ws trying to do was create a secular government which is WHY so many islamic fundamentalists like Bin Laden couldn't stand the guy. We basically did the job for Bin Laden by removing him from government.

And if some asshole freeper posts about how may people were died and tortued under the Hussein regime let me remind you that it's still happening to day except now WE'RE doing it instead

[leftofthedial]

28. apparently not

either the natives start killing one another, or the oil companies use our military to start killing them.

[Herman Munster]

30. yes

This is not widely known but the population of Israel is 40% secular. Many jews identify with their jewish culture and history and not their religion. In fact, a very significant percentage of jews are atheist and agnostic, especially those who lived the atrocities of the Holocaust firsthand and their descendants.

[rug]

32. Welcome to DU

[TygrBright]

33. Whoa, LOOK!! Up in the air!!! A pig with WINGS!!! n/t