Regional Geography

(Africa topic 2)

Asking what lies within a name is more of a subjective question than it is objective. Yes, all names have some sort of meaning or origin behind them, but it isn't always relevant. I doubt that my friends really ever wonder why my last name is Hobson; they just use it to refer to and identify me. On the other hand, a genealogist might take great interest. Similarly, it seems as if the dispute of regional names, such as Israel and Palestine, has a similar contradiction: some just want to refer to the region in the easiest, most familiar way possible, while others take it directly to heart. Perhaps more of a distinction should be made between physical and political naming conventions. An example would be classifying Israel and Palestine to both be in the physical region of Palestine, whereas certain areas (which are still being debated) should be referred to as Israel when speaking politically.

While this comic is clearly done in jest it really highlights the importance a name holds to people. Their are some issues which heavily divide people, in this case the tensions between Israel and Palestine and lead to the formation of very strong opinions. With these opinions come the aspect of properly assigning a title to them. In some cases the same thing is known by many names and is highly contested.  

I enjoyed this video. I never really understood why these groups were fighting. It was an easy video to understand and I learned that the fighting is not just about religious but cultural differences as well. 

Although I try to keep up with world events, Iraq has puzzled me. This was spectacularly helpful, although I still don't feel like I have the full picture. For instance, I understand that three ethnic groups were forced in to a new country, Iraq, after World War I and that the country has been in turmoil ever since. However, these ethnic groups were all a part of the Ottoman Empire before there was an Iraq, so why did the trouble start after the formation of Iraq?

These ethnic groups had their own provinces within the Ottoman Empire. I'm assuming these groups thought they'd establish their own separate nations after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, but were not given the chance to decide for themselves since Iraq was a product of "European powers." If this is accurate, then European nations have a horrible track record when it comes to dictating foreign boundaries that lead to unrest abroad. 

Iraq is a complicated country. The current differences and disparities in culture, ethnicity and resources has led to some harsh rivalry between people within the borders of the country. This shows how borders can be artificial and just because a map shows a region as one unit, it is not always the case. After the Ottoman Empire fell many groups of people were thrust together and this is why we see these divisions so clearly.

Laws like this are not only tearing families apart, but they are also creating more tension in a region that really doen't need any help in that department. In order for these families to stay together, it seems their only option is immigration, which is difficult and costly.

Amazing to see what people will do to survive.  They are doing this out of necessity.  Many goods they are smuggling are what I believe should be allowed in through normal means, food, water, medicine and anything needed for basic human needs.  I understand the blockade in stopping weapons and items of that nature, but stopping basic foodstuffs is just plain wrong.  The people are living and surviving by these tunnels and built an economy on them.  One thing that was really interesting was at the end when the man seemed he wanted the blockcade to go on or else it would close his tunnel and he would have to get "a real job."  The effects of this blockcade are on both ends of the spectrum, people want it to end so things can return to normal and others want it to go on to continue to make money.

What some media has led the "western world" to perceive is that many of the people living here would be trying to smuggle illegal goods such as bombs, drugs, etc.  Sure that may be true in some cases, but many times there are respectable citizens which simply need food or necessary items to sustain their lives.  Because of the tight security measures regarding people and goods, the people of Gaza simply try to find a way around the authorities, and the best current option is by tunnels.  Situations like this show that if people really need certain things, with some help and determination, they can achieve that goal.  In the end, hopefully it is for good more often than bad.

These tunnels give the Palestinians a way to access a world that has been politically blockaded from them. Connections that allow the sharing of goods are not something that should be avoided. Food and goods could be a way to make a pseudo peace and interdependence between both sides of a centuries old conflict.

Interesting that they showed a map of 1886.  Palestine didn't exits in 1886 either, it was under control of the Ottoman Empire and the Ottoman Turks.  Egypy controlled this area at one time, around 3000BC, Then there was a Kingdom of Israle around 1050 BC, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Macedonains, Romans, Byzantines, Sassanids, Muslims of the Caliphates, Seljuks, Europeans during the Crusades, Saladin, Ottomans, Europeans again after WW I, then the state of Israel after the end of WW 2 all controlled this area.  This area has been under control of many different rulers, empires and cultures.  I know I must have missed some.  It is not as simple as Palestininians lossing land, the issue goes wat back before anyone today cares ot even remember.  If Im right there was never a state called Palestine under modern times, but there was a Kingdom of Israel.  I know that is not a justification for the right to exist or not exits, but it shows a history of a nation of Israel.  If the Palestinian people want a state, why don't they recognize that Israel has the same right?  One that might be grounded in history more than theirs.  I do believe the Palestinians have the right to  state, but they need to recognize that Israel has the same right that they want. 

Could this be just a matter of what it means to be European and that some Europeans feel that Turkey just doesn't fit??  Turkey has long been an ally of the West since its admission in NATO.  It fact along with the US, UK and Greece it sent major forces to Korea during the Korean War.  It helped stop the USSR from spreading, during the cold war, when it joined NATO and toady it has the second largest standing army in NATO, behind the US.   It has also been a help to the US and Europe in conflicts in Iraq and Afganistan.  To be part of the European Union only makes logical sense and economic sense.  Access to Asian markets given its geographical location and just the opening of the Turkish domestic markets to free trade.  Seems that old prejudices of what it means to be European is rearing its ugly head..last time this prejudice gained momentum of what it means to be something in Europe...Hitler!

Turkey wanting to join the EU will change political geography drastically. Turkey would provide the EU with a border town with the middle east as well as add power and span of the European Union. With some countries like Greece showing that EU economies are dependent on one another and I'm not sure that makes Turkey an attractive or unattractive prospect.