Understanding the Middle East

A few days spent in Washington last week reminded me that some seemingly simple things can be frustratingly difficult to define.

Take 'the Middle East', for example. For a long time those of us who worked on or in the region were able to describe it in pretty straightforward terms: the Arabic-speaking countries, Israel, Iran and, maybe, Turkey. For several generations of students, diplomats and journalists this seemed to work pretty well.

In Washington, however, the post-9/11 world has given birth to a new region known as the 'Greater Middle East'. The term remains a bit amorphous but generally refers to what we might call the 'old Middle East' plus Afghanistan, Pakistan and the five Muslim republics of what used to be Soviet Central Asia.

Nobody argues anymore about whether to include Turkey (it's in), but reasonable people can differ over whether the Caucuses (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Chechnya) make the cut.

Thus, as the Obama administration moves forward over the coming months it is worth remembering that when American and Arab officials talk about 'the Middle East' they are often discussing markedly different things. This is not, in and of itself, a bad thing, but it is something Arab leaders need to bear in mind when they are dealing with the United States, because how one defines a region geographically has a lot to do with how one defines priorities in that region.

Using a, for want of a better term, 'traditional' definition of the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Iraq are inescapable. Both touch on the region's emotional, political and geographic core. Iran, while obviously important, can often look like a secondary issue.

Expand the horizon, however, and the picture changes dramatically. In the 'Greater Middle East' no issue is more immediate than the growing instability in nuclear-armed Pakistan. That upheaval, in turn, increases the importance of Iran, whose influence around the region seems sure to grow if the countries to its east continue to fall apart.

Having said all that, the real danger is not so much that Washington and its Arab allies will let geography get in the way of mutual understanding. It is that America's ever broader definition of the region will lead it towards policies that are too broad and superficial.

Whenever one defines a region - any region - there is a temptation to generalise. Define the region more broadly and this habit tends to get worse. It is bad enough to say that people from the Middle East, or Europe or anywhere else 'do this' or 'think like that'. As 'the Middle East' and 'Europe' grow ever-larger the quest for common traits inevitably leads to an ever-vaguer set of generalities.

Making broad statements lumping together, for example, Emiratis and Jordanians is short-sighted. Making even broader statements that seek to explain, say, Uzbeks and Moroccans in a single breath is just plain silly.

It ought to be said that organisations like the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Conference have not exactly helped this situation. Both have long been noted for making sweeping pronouncements about the 'Arab' or 'Islamic' position on this or that issue.

Reaching the consensus these statements require usually means either watering down the final product to the point of meaninglessness - or taking a bold stand to which members give nothing more than lip service. In either case the organisation perpetuates a myth of common thinking and common interests, even as it demonstrates its own impotence.

If there is a good side to this it is the hope that a geographically broader approach to the Greater Middle East will lead Washington to a better appreciation of the region's interconnectedness.

One size certainly does not fit all, but any coherent American approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan is going to have to take Iran into account. Once Iran is brought into the equation that alters the dynamic between Washington and the Gulf states& and on and on.

If taking the broadest possible view of what constitutes 'the Middle East' leads America's policymakers towards a more subtle appreciation of the region's complexity, then this latest rebranding may yet serve a useful purpose.

Gordon Robison is a writer and commentator based in Burlington, Vermont. He has lived in and reported on the Middle East for two decades.