Individual essay by Eduard Ortiz

The region of the Near East, what kind of region it is?

Before categorizing this region according to the main features and associate it with some of the definitions of the different ways of classification of the regions, we should understand accurately what the Near East means and if we can make an analogy between this term and some type of region. Can we include Near East in some previous mentioned regions according to its prerogative characteristics?

Regionalization of the world also means simplification. The human behaviour makes that we sort all the observables thinks in a way that is easy to us to understand in a brief manner the tangible way, creating a dichotomic signification between reality and “the world of ideas”, as Platoon would say.

On one hand, the Near East as a concept is a controversial, blurring and non-defined one nowadays. The usage of this term started equidistant to the expansion of the Ottoman Empire. The Near East region was understood circa 14th century to all the expansion of the Ottoman Empire, to its hinterlands, puppet regions and influential zones. We could speak about the Near East as the region that had interdependent relations between the Ottoman Empire, including this last.

This term highlighted in the scene in that time since the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Since this year to approximately to year when the Ottoman Empire reached its peak, about 1700, the Near East was understood in an ethnocentric way of the European definition and description of “the others” as long as this term is a European coined one. Europeans should have differentiated the territory among Asia and Europe; this territory that it was during a long-time period property of the Ottoman Empire and other empires like Safavid. This huge portion of earth was called Near East, Near (it is not so far as Asia) and East (it is located in OUR East), so Near East was a eurocentric way of covering all the land among Asia and Europe.

So, if we understand the Near East as the concept explained before, it is a Naively Perceived Region, created externally and putting together people who share some characteristics, in this example, they share the “official” condition of belonging to the Ottoman Empire. Also, in the other Near East mentioned (that territory between Asia and Europe), exists the characteristics that a Naively Perceived Region must follow, the bond between the physical territory and the inhabitants.

On the other hand, this term has suffered a lot of transformations. This term was officially used after the War of Crimea (1853-1856), when the United Kingdom administration decided to classify this region as the Near East region, to delimitate the Ottoman Empire influence zone and the Far East, where the East India Company developed its activity. Also, it was used to delimitate the frontier of Europe, to know what countries were under the Ottoman rule and what countries are under the European realm, solving partially the so called Eastern Question, isolating the Ottoman Empire from Europe and setting the name of the sick man of Europe.

Regionalization is also based on another criterion, like the historical context, the people who makes the classification, the people who is receiving the classification… For that reason, the Near East term has no longer sense since the time that the Ottoman Empire disappeared; it is for that reason that the term Near East does not fit nowadays, in the signification it has. But the time, the oscillation of power, the modification of borders, the cultural approach and the global focus triggered a signification change in the world Near East. Nowadays, Near East defines the Mesopotamic region and its environment in a scholar way of describing the first civilizations, especially in an archaeological way, reducing this term, nowadays to a Denoted Region created to englobe some characteristics of the culture and art of a determinant area.

Although, Near East is used as a synonym of Middle East. The unique change of the signification between this words are the perspective from which the “ruler” see this region, before it was an eurocentric vision, now it has a North-American-centric vision. In that case, the Middle East is also a Naively Perceived Region conceived externally.

Overall, it depends on the context of the word, we can understand this Region as a Denoted one (when we are in certain scholar aspects) or in a Naively perceived (if we speak about the Middle East, about the extension of the Ottoman Empire or the area between Asia and Europe)

The complexity of this term makes that we cannot classify clearly and empirical this Region. Nowadays the usage of this world could be also understood as a mistake.

Comparison between another similar region: The Middle East

As mentioned before, the Middle East and the Near East can be use as the same word, being the Near East a synonym of Middle East. But in this part I will compare both terms as they were no the same. I will compare the current Middle East and the antique region of the Near East (as the whole expansion of the Ottoman Empire).

First of all, the Middle East is a Naively Perceived Region, the conception is similar than of the Near East. We could also appoint that Middle East is the term Near East that it has progressed through the time, due to the change of world power (Europe to the USA).

Middle East is a region conceived as the group of countries which have more or less the same religion, they are Islamic but of different tradition (Sunni and Shia). The exception is the existence of Israel. While the Near East grouped countries of the Ottoman Empire, mostly Islamic but not at all, European Christian regions were also incorporated to the Ottoman Empire, so they are considered part of the Near East.

Also, the concept Middle East treats about countries that have the same climate condition, orography, resources… This term is used in an economic meaning of delimitation of the region where the oil is located. Near East instead was a historic and politic conception. Middle East includes the countries who have conflicts between them (Israel-Arabs, Iran-Iraq, KSA-Iran…), the use of Middle East is used in a pejorative way, while the Near East region under the rule of Ottoman emperors allowed in a certain measure the coexistence of ethnics and religion.

Middle East is like the region where all the events are involved in terms of internal conflicts of this region, while the Near East acted like a one (they were under the rule of an Empire). Middle East is a political term, for example, when we use it to group countries with the same phenomena (like the Arab Spring, the arise of Ba’ath ideology or the local conflict war becoming a regional war, as the current Syrian War shows us or the Hezbollah conflict (Lebanon Civil War) in which Iran was indirectly involved). Near East is only a term that defines a geographical region that was under the same rule, it has diversity but it acted like a one.

The Middle East region has a highlighted gap (inequality) between the countries that forms the region, while the Near East had not a pronounced difference, as the technological progresses did not arrived and the economics were based on the agriculture and livestock.

Both concepts are used to group several regions that don’t share common cultural realms, in some cases regions are different in ethnicity, language and religion. It is all an external decision to include all these regions in one bigger to make the world better understandable. Both terms also, includes the same ethnicity in the meaning that it exists differences between ethnics but no so pronounced.

Usage of both terms in the media, in what contexts

We can found several kinds of application of this terms in real life. For example, if we understand the Near East as a scholar region that is defined to be studied as a culture realm that shares common culture treats like art, architecture, origins, writing we can found that this word is used in some scholar articles in Universities or in a disclosure general article. We take the example of an article that speaks about the recent discovery about the origin of the first farmers (discover by UPF). In the figure 1 we can appreciate that it appears the word Oriente Próximo (Near East), to define the region that shares common origins.

Another usage of this term is the one that confuses Middle East and Near East. For example, in the figure 2, this article wrote by the FAO, tell us about a meeting concerning Near East countries to discuss shared food security priorities. In this case, Near East is confused or is working as a synonym of Middle East. This article speaks about countries of the Middle East, and not the Near East of former regions that were under the rule of Ottoman Empire.

If we want to look for media that speaks about the region of Near East was the one conceiving the Ottoman Empire, we must look in the media from the time that Ottoman Empire existed and Middle East did not supplant yet the meaning of this region. In the figure 3, news about the Ottoman Empire, particularly in a policy conducted by Kemal in a way of creating the Republic of Turkey. The news speaks about Turkey, but the notices is located in a time space when Mustafa Kemal Atatürk was transforming the Ottoman Empire to the Republic of Turkey. Near East in this news refers to the region of the expansion of the Ottoman Empire by that time.

Nowadays, the usage of the term of Middle East is usually mentioned in the westerner news, especially in the written press and online press. Some newspapers, international concretely, also included a section to speak only about this region due to the high political, economic, social, and military action that happens in this place. Middle East is understood as the union of the countries in the same geographical area that share common troubles (most news are about war), but it also includes common treats of the inhabitants of the region, as the religion, the idiom or the ethnicity. In the figure 4 we can appreciate that the Reuters news agency dedicates an entire section to speak only about this region, with constant refreshing data. This term is used to speak usually about conflicts either about Islamic terrorism, oil prices or another regional conflict.

Bibliography

Figure 1: Agencia SINC (2016), “Demuestran el origen de los primeros agricultores”, Agencia SINC online version. Latest update: 2016-07-26. http://www.agenciasinc.es/Noticias/Demuestran-el-origen-de-los-primeros-agricultores Based on:

Lazaridis, I. et al. Genomic insights into the origin of farming in the ancient Near East. Nature http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature19310 (2016).

Figure 2: FAO news (2016), “Near East countries gather to discuss shared food security priorities”, FAO online version. Latest update: 2016-05-09. http://www.fao.org/news/story/es/item/413653/icode/

Figure 3: TIME Magazine (1923), “Foreign News: THE NEAR EAST”, TIME Magazine online version. Latest update: 1923-03-24. http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,726976,00.html

Figure 4: Reuters (2016), “Middle East and North Africa”, Reuters online web. Latest update: 2016-11-08. http://www.reuters.com/subjects/middle-east