Semester Wrap Up

I found this class to be very interesting, especially as we began to learn about more modern events that have taken place in the Middle East. The one thing that I found to be most striking about the class is the way that conflicts were presented and how this presentation really opened my eyes to the other view points on certain situations. I think anytime a class is able to widen a students perception of events and situations, regardless of whether or not anything else was taken from the class, the class was successful. Although these blogs were tedious and difficult to keep up with, I found them interesting, especially when going through and reading classmates opinions. The only thing I would suggest to be done differently would be requiring students to comment on everyone's blog. Students are going to look at other people's blog just out of pure interest for what other people think, how they present their own ideas, and for a background on what they can write their own blogs on. The video's watched in class were interesting and were good in the sense that it wasn't a constant lecture every class.

Ayatollah Khomeini

Ayatollah Khomeini was considered to be a huge threat to all that the United States had worked so hard towards in obtaining a strong Middle Eastern ally. He felt that America and Great Britain was the backbone for all that had gone wrong in Iran and that they’re hands should be taken out of any Middle Eastern issues. Every American president since the takeover of Khomeini has vowed to not allow Iran to raise in power and that if the country and its leaders do obtain more power then it will be an incredible threat to the entire world’s ability to maintain peaceful relations. President Obama is quoted in the YouTube clip as saying, “I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.” Khomeini, although exiled from Iran for fourteen years was able to combat the Shah and his government, which enabled the revolution to begin. Khomeini was so well accepted by the people because of the injustices that the Shah allowed to happen to the country, specifically in the financial realm. In addition to this, he was able to unite the Iranian people; people from every sector of life. Iran in many aspects of life did need this revolution to take place, but whether or not Khomeini was the right person to do this is still a matter of question.

Gate of the Sun

As Americans, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is portrayed in a very biased and particular manner. To be Pro-Palestine as an American is not only rare to find, but in some cases might even be looked down upon. The American media outlets are controlled by the governments of the United States and Israel, which does not allow for the access of a counter opinion, which in this case is the opinion of the Palestinian people. “Gate of the Sun” is one of the few novels released that not only explains the point of view taken by Palestinians but also shows the hardship these people have been facing for over six decades.
In 1948, it was decided by a series of nations that the Jewish people who had been exiled from their homes and countries due in large part by religious persecution from the Holocaust would be allowed to establish their own state; Israel. In theory, this is fine idea, give a group of people who had been thrown out of their homelands and displaced a country to call their own. It was a sort of retribution and sign of condolences from the major powers for not being able to stop this terrible regime from murdering millions earlier. The entire world felt bad for these people, why didn’t they deserve land as payback for their severe losses? The problem with this is that although it seems feasible, how feasible is it to take another peoples land away from them and just simply give it to another people? That would be like saying since Native Americans had been so badly persecuted and murdered that they deserve the entire country of Mexico as retribution, and that the Mexican Government and citizens had to deal with it. Not only do they have to deal with it, but now they are having their homes taken away and are losing their jobs to these Native Americas. Additionally, traditional laws made up by the Mexican Government are now null en void. How well would the Mexicans take to this? Would they not immediately fight back and try to get their land back?
It’s easy to blame the Israeli’s for this mess when the situation is explained in such a manner. But when closer examined, it is pretty evident that the external powers that set up this establishment of a Jewish state are to blame. They handed the Jews a piece of land and told them it is theirs. The Jewish people had already been through as much as a whole, between initial persecution from the Germans and even the Russians, to the Holocaust. Any group in their same position would have done the same thing; they would have taken the land given to them, regardless of whether it was Palestine or Texas.

Iranian Revolution

The Iranian Revolution was unique and typical all at the same time. It has many of the same characteristics as the Russian Revolution of 1917, particularly the problems with the classes and the overbearing government system. In both instances, this was a widely accepted and rejoiced takeover, although there was slightly more doubt by the public in the Russian revolution. What was incredibly unique about the Iranian Revolution was the fact that it was replacing a centuries old Monarchy for a Theocracy. Generally in most modern revolutions, the theocracies are the governmental institutions that are being replaced. Another interesting part of this overthrow was how significantly powerful the Iranian military and government was prior to the revolution. This revolution was necessary according to the people because of the government’s oppressive and corrupt structure. It was a common theory that Iran was being control more by outside Western powers such as the United States and Great Britain, which was leading to the demise of the state. In situations of great tyrannical government policies and a lack of civil liberties and rights to the citizens of the nation, it becomes necessary and evident for a revolution like this to occur.

UN asks Israelis to stop demolishing Palestinian homes.

BC just had an article in reference to the United Nations request that the Israeli government stops demolishing Palestinian homes. The current regulations set up for Palestinians as of now state that they must first obtain a permit to build a house, a permit of which only approximately 50% of Palestinians actually have. Any house built on land without a permit can be legally torn down by the Israeli authorities without hesitation, leaving many thousands of Palestinians homeless. Well why don’t the Palestinians just obtain a permit? The problem with these permits is that they are only given out in particular parts of East Jerusalem, to be exact, only 13%. The UN says that a major problem with the conflict between the two sides it the lack of adequate living for the Palestinian people. The mayor of Jerusalem says that while these permits are heavily affecting the Palestinians, that all citizens of the city, Jews, Christian and Muslims are treated equally and are all equally at risk for having their homes torn down. The mayor also goes on to say that if an illegal structure is built, it must be removed from city property. The problem is it’s not only very expensive to gain these permits but time consuming as well. To demolish homes and leave a vast number of citizens, almost half children, homeless is ethically wrong and not equal treatment of all citizens.

Touba

As a Western society, most American’s have a specific, narrow perception of what women in Middle Eastern societies are like. It is assumed that these women allow themselves to be walked all over and given absolutely no rights. There is also the common misconception that men take complete advantage of these women and treat them poorly, leaving the women with nothing to do about the situation. Just like in American society at the beginning of the twentieth century, social strata’s were evolving within Iran, making it easier for women to involve themselves in society and gain respect for themselves, while also gaining it from others. The main character in this novel, Touba, is a perfect example of what it means to be a woman who is changing with the times and helping herself develop and enter into society with knowledge and respect from men, while still maintaining a sense of traditional behavior.

Touba is a distinct woman during the period of her youth. Not only is she intelligent and well educated, but she is outspoken and self reliant. After some severe family issues that included the loss of her father, she was forced to help her mother run the household and maintain a level of normalcy for the family. Iran during this time period, like many other nations, gave women limited or no rights at all. Women were still considered to be inferior and unable to survive without a male counterpart or be educated to the extent of which men were. Due to this commonly held opinion of women’s need to have a male guide them through life, when Touba’s father died, it was necessary for a male influence to take over the residence for their survival. Completely out of the range of what any woman would do in a Muslim country during this time, Touba took it upon herself to propose marriage to a man, who was not only significantly older than she, but a member of her family. There was no genuine love interest in this marriage, more like a business arrangement. Not much time passed and the marriage ended in divorce. Traditional Islamic beliefs would say that this woman is looked down upon, and that divorce is condemned, but with the slight modernization of Iran, this was not as terrible as it had once been.

To Die in Jerusalem

After watching “To Die in Jerusalem,” it made me really sit back and think of the difference between American culture and citizens and the Palestinian way of life. It’s amazing to think of how completely different in ideology we are. Most American’s would never think to give their life for a cause. Why is this? Are we not passionate enough as a nation, or so spoiled that there is nothing more we care about then ourselves and those close to us? This in no means is defending suicide bombings or the outright murder of innocent civilians but it’s just interesting to think about.
It’s completely amazing to me that people think that their way into heaven or the acceptance by God is somehow tied into killing other human beings. Walking into a supermarket filled with people of all ages, innocence and harmlessness, and setting off a bomb is actually sickening. It would be really interesting to know what is said to these people to get them to commit such intense acts. As an American, it is incredible to think of what it would be like to have to actually worry about whether or not it is too dangerous to go to the grocery store and pick up a few things for dinner for your family. These people who are being killed are being killed in everyday situations that should not require any fear, but due to the situation are inundated with the possibility of actual death.
Although George Bush does not always say the best things, it was really gripping when the documentary had him saying that “…when an 18 year old is induced to be a suicide bomber, the future of the Palestinian people is dying; when she kills a 17 year old Israeli girl, the future of the Israeli people is dying… .” This is completely true and heartbreaking at the same time. To have two groups of people have actual malice towards one another it is striking, but to see a mother cry over her seventeen year old daughter’s death is unimaginable.