Back to the Feudal

At Bloomberg, Glen Carey observes that “The Middle East may be sliding toward a warlord era, with nation-states increasingly struggling to control all their territory and millions living under the rule of emergent local chiefs and movements.”

He quotes Chatham House fellow Nadim Shehadi’s claim that “It is almost like the whole regional order that was built in the 20th century is collapsing. Non-state actors are filling the vacuum.”

ISIS has grabbed most of the headlines, but it’s not the only “non-state” player: “Other non-state forces have also emerged, especially since the Arab revolts of 2011, which plunged Syria into civil war. The latest fighting in northern Syria pits Islamic State against Kurdish irregular forces that have also won de-facto autonomy from Damascus. They’re battling for the town of Kobani near the Turkish border, a region where the Syrian government has had little presence for more than two years. In Iraq, where the collapse of central authority dates to the U.S. invasion of 2003, much of the fighting against Islamic State has also been done by non-state forces — Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, or Iran-backed Shiite militias.”

On this analysis, the current turmoil in the Middle East begins to look somewhat familiar, analogous to the independence movements popping up around Europe and the Balkanization of the US. The political dynamics are dramatically different, of course: In the Middle East, warlords take over because there is a vacuum of power, while ethnic concerns drive independence movements in Scotland and values drive the separatist impulses in America. 

But the resulting landscape is similar: In the Middle East, Europe, and the US, it looks as if we’re all moving back to the feudal.