Conflicts in the Middle East since 1945

Milton‐Edwards, Beverley

doi:10.4324/9780203163634

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At first sight the Kurdish case, one of the most prominent examples of an internationalized ethnicized conflict, and in particular the PKK sanctuary in Iraqi Kurdistan, seem to fit this pattern of ethnic alliance formation as if taken from a textbook and consequently is routinely cited as a model case for these dynamics (Gurr & Harff, 1994;Kaufmann, 1996;Kirisci & Winrow, 1997;Byman, 1998;Freij, 1998;Helsing, 2004;Husain & Shumock, 2006;Milton-Edwards & Hinchcliffe, 2008;Rear, 2008;Salehyan, 2009). Of the countless instances of banditry, pillaging raids, minor insurrections, insurgencies and rebellions, one or another self-proclaimed Kurdish NLM has been involved in the border region of Iran, Turkey, Iraq and Syria since World War I; hardly any has not had an international dimension or has not escalated to the international level, that is, sought shelter across the border, shared intelligence, received logistical support and armaments, and joined forces on a temporary basis.…”

Section: The Ethnic Alliance Modelmentioning

confidence: 91%

Ethnic Alliances Deconstructed: The PKK Sanctuary in Iraqi Kurdistan and the Internationalization of Ethnic Conflict Revisited

Černy

2014

Ethnopolitics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a critique of how the dominant paradigms in international relations (IR)-neo-realism, neo-liberalism and systemic constructivism-approach and explain ethnic conflict. It deconstructs one of the most prominent explanatory frameworks that mainstream IR has contributed to the analysis of the internationalization of ethnic conflicts, the ethnic alliance model, and demonstrates theoretically and empirically, by way of a case study of the Kurdistan Workers' Party sanctuary in Iraqi Kurdistan, the epistemological and ontological deficiencies of this approach. Furthermore, by dissecting the inherent 'groupism' of this model and related frameworks, it problematizes how scholars as co-protagonists of ethnic conflicts substantialize and reify the ethnicized discourse and politics of ethnic division, and thus contribute to the construction of a normativist and essentialist 'reality' of the conflicts that they set out to describe.

show abstract

Section: The Ethnic Alliance Modelmentioning

confidence: 91%

Ethnic Alliances Deconstructed: The PKK Sanctuary in Iraqi Kurdistan and the Internationalization of Ethnic Conflict Revisited

Černy

2014

Ethnopolitics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The immediate neighbors were trapped in territorial issues, such as the Shatt al Arab river (Yetiv, 1997). Since 1937 it was under the control of Iraq, but the growing military power of Iran compelled Iraq to accept de-facto use of these waterways by Iranian ships (Milton-Edwards and Hinchcliffe, 2008). However, Iraq reacted and termed the abrogation of the 1937 treaty a deliberate violation, considering the disputed territory as a part of its sovereign territory (Karsh, 2002).…”

Section: Case 2: the Iran–iraq Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

Steps-to-War Theory and Interstate Wars in the Middle East: Is State-Sponsored Terrorism Another Escalating Step?

Khan

2020

Journal of Asian and African Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I employ Steps-to-War theory to analyze interstate wars in the Middle East by adding an additional escalating step: state sponsorship of non-state actors. Remarkably, however, the present scholarship completely overlooks a comprehensive assessment of the impacts and roles of state-sponsored terrorism on escalation of interstate militarized conflicts. None of the conflict studies focuses on state-sponsored terrorism and escalation of interstate conflict. This gap still exists despite a remarkable growth in the conflict literature. This article argues that the Steps-to-War thesis is a useful framework for understanding why states end up fighting wars by answering the questions: How does state-sponsored terrorism escalate interstate conflict? And how does each step intertwine with other steps and make war more likely? This paper’s primary argument is that state-sponsored terrorism increases the likelihood of war by providing another escalating step in conjunction with other steps and, therefore, aligns with Steps-to-War theory, and is one of the leading escalating factors. Ultimately, this article argues that this claim has a solid basis, and the Middle Eastern cases vividly demonstrate the escalatory ability of state-sponsored terrorism because state-sponsored terrorism interacts with and reinforces other escalating factors.

show abstract

“…All of these issues have coloured the region's image to one that is not the safest or most stable region in the world. These confl icts have, at times, been high intensity and, at others, low intensity, masking the underlying political failures, the resource disputes and the refractive interface with western societies where sanctions have provided 'the unnatural friction to development' (Milton-Edwards and Hincheliffe, 2001). Dobson and Marsh (2001) describe the Middle East as 'a theatre of violent competition and high stakes'.…”

Section: The Middle Eastmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deterrents to tourism development in Iran

Morakabati

2010

Journal of Tourism Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are parts of the Middle East that can be regarded as being among the least preferred tourism destinations in the world. Research shows that travellers' perceptions of the region, as a whole, have been damaged and that, for some nations, the situation has gone from bad to worse. The combination of a hard-line attitude towards religion, oil and water shortages have led to the onset of war and confl ict, either among countries within the region, or have resulted in countries from within the region having confl icts with countries located outside of the region. This paper looks at the Middle East in general and Iran in particular in order to review its tourism potential and explains how the process of its development as a tourism destination has been hampered. This research also attempts to discover why, in spite of several attempts by the Iranian government, tourism has failed to develop to its true potential. The research is informed by a questionnaire survey of travellers together with a Mini-Delphi Study of tourism academics.

show abstract

Conflicts in the Middle East since 1945

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Ethnic Alliances Deconstructed: The PKK Sanctuary in Iraqi Kurdistan and the Internationalization of Ethnic Conflict Revisited

Ethnic Alliances Deconstructed: The PKK Sanctuary in Iraqi Kurdistan and the Internationalization of Ethnic Conflict Revisited

Steps-to-War Theory and Interstate Wars in the Middle East: Is State-Sponsored Terrorism Another Escalating Step?

Deterrents to tourism development in Iran

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About