The Natural Map of the Middle East
“Apart from political maps of mankind, there are natural maps of mankind. … One of the first laws of political stability is to draw your political boundaries along the lines of the natural map of mankind.”
So wrote H.G. Wells in “What Is Coming: A Forecast of Things After the War” in the year of Verdun and the Somme Offensive.
In redrawing the map of Europe, however, the statesmen of Versailles ignored Wells and parceled out Austrians, Hungarians, Germans, and other nationalities to alien lands to divide, punish, and weaken the defeated peoples.
So doing, they set the table for a second world war.
The Middle East was sliced up along lines set down in the secret Sykes-Picot agreement. But with the Islamic awakening and Arab Spring toppling regimes, the natural map of the Middle East seems now to be asserting itself.
Sunni and Shia align with Sunni and Shia, as Protestants and Catholics did in 17th-century Europe. Ethiopia and Sudan split. Mali and Nigeria may be next. While world attention is focused on Aleppo and when Bashar Assad might fall, Syria itself may be about to disintegrate.
In Syria’s northeast, a Kurdish minority of 2 to 3 million with ethnic ties to Iraqi Kurdistan and 15 million Kurds in Turkey seems to be dissolving its ties to Damascus. A Kurdish nation carved out of Syria, Iraq, Turkey, and Iran would appear to be a casus belli for all four nations. Yet in any natural map of the world, there would be a Kurdistan.
The Sunni four-fifths of the Syrian population seems fated to rise and the Muslim Brotherhood to rule, as happened in Egypt. The fall of Assad and his Shia Alawite minority would be celebrated by the Sunni across the border in Iraq’s Anbar province, who would then have a powerful new ally in any campaign to recapture Sunni lands lost to Iraqi Shia.
With its recent murderous attacks inside Iraq, al-Qaeda seems to be instigating a new Sunni-Shia war to tear Iraq apart.
The fall of the Alawites in Damascus would end the dream of a Shia crescent — Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Hezbollah — leave Hezbollah isolated, and conceivably lead to a renewal of Lebanon’s sectarian and civil war.
The losers in all this? Certainly Iran, which seems fated to lose its only Arab ally, Syria, and its land link to Hezbollah.
That would make Israel a winner. But Israel’s situation appears more perilous than it was a decade ago.
In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has replaced Hosni Mubarak, who kept the peace in Sinai and the lid on Hamas. Recently, new Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi met with Hamas’ Khaled Meshaal at the presidential palace in Cairo. The Sinai is becoming a no-man’s land where terrorists plot and Africans cross to Israel.
To Israel’s east, there is no true peace with the Palestinians, and the Jordanian throne has rarely been shakier. On the Golan Heights, quiet for decades, the future may see Syrian troops loyal to a militant Sunni regime in Damascus. Hezbollah sits on Israel’s northern border. Beyond is a Turkey no longer friendly.
Israel is blaming the atrocity in Bulgaria, in which Israeli tourists were massacred, on Iran. But neither the Bulgarians nor the Americans appear to know who did it. And why would the Iranians, who, following the slaughter, publicly denounced such atrocities against civilians, do it?
Were an Iranian hand to be found in this act of barbarism, it would give Israel justification for an attack, igniting a war in which America could be dragged in.
Why would Iran want a war with the United States when that would mean destruction of its air force, navy, missile force, and nuclear program, a crippling blockade, and perhaps destruction of its vital oil facilities on Kharg Island?
Whoever was behind the attack on the Israeli tourists seems to want a war between the Jewish state of Israel and the Shia state of Iran.
Who would benefit from such a war?
Answer: Al-Qaeda, which, during the Iraq War, urged the United States to bomb Iran back to the Stone Age. An al-Qaeda affiliate has also attacked Israeli vacationers before, at Egyptian resorts on the Gulf of Aqaba.
“There is an international plot against Gulf states in particular and Arab countries in general … to take over our fortunes,” says Dubai’s chief of police. “I had no idea that there is this large number of Muslim Brotherhood in the Gulf states.”
What is al-Qaeda’s goal? Ignite Sunni-Shia wars and Muslim-Christian clashes in Arab states. Draw in the Americans to smash Iran. And when the Sunni are ascendant, expel the Americans and Christians, isolate Israel, and set about creating the caliphate of Osama bin Laden’s dream.
If a U.S. war on Iran is good for al-Qaeda, how can it be good for us?
COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM
Read more by Patrick J. Buchanan
- What Should Americans Die For? – May 16th, 2013
- Who Are the War Criminals in Syria? – May 6th, 2013
- Their War, Not Ours – April 29th, 2013
- Is War With North Korea Inevitable? – April 4th, 2013
- Goading Gullible America Into War – March 21st, 2013





Johnny in Wi.
August 6th, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Another great essay by Pat Buchanan. Nobody gets ahead in such a group of wars, except the most radical Sunni sects. With friends like the twin terror states Saudi Arabia and Israel the USA needs no enemies. Saudi Arabia is the funder of the most radical Mosques all over the world. Israel thinks it can kill people anywhere, anytime it wants. The USA and it's taxpayers are the ones that will carry the burden in blood and money.l Enough !
Duglarri
August 6th, 2012 at 10:16 pm
I don't buy this natural lines argument. Some would suggest that natural lines would include a line well-known to Americans: the Mason-Dixon line. Religious and yes, even ethnic lines are ephemeral: do the Hugenots still need a country? The Alans, the Avars, the Burgundians, the Huns, the Cimbri, the Vandals, the Visigoths?
People with sense don't draw new borders based on ancient tribes: they make the ones they have work.
The Natural Map of the Middle East | politicsandpolls-com
August 7th, 2012 at 1:55 am
[...] H.G. Wells in “What Is Coming: A Forecast of Things After the War” in the year of [...] Antiwar.com Original Tags: east, Middle, Natural Posted in Pundits | No Comments [...]
musings
August 7th, 2012 at 5:47 am
And, needless to say perhaps, the US Southwest is "naturally" a part of Mexico, along with all that nice Colorado River water. I'm sure though that our politicians are canny enough not to apply this "natural law" premise to the US.
Dahoit
August 7th, 2012 at 6:05 am
My take is it's all about demonizing Iran,we are alCIAda,,and Israel is the impetus for all our disaster.
And Syria,doesn't border Iran,so I don't see that land connection.
It's all alCIAda and Israeli divide and conquer, look at America,and its division,since that fateful day of infamy.
tom dee
August 7th, 2012 at 7:26 am
The problems in the middle east goes back to Sykes-Picot agreement and the great betrayal. It was not enough to provide for a homeland for a group who were never more than bit players but they would not provide a homeland for those that actually died fighting the ottoman empire. Today the same greedy groups are creating wars of choice. It is time to stop those that are the problem from creating a bigger problem so they can profit. It would be smart for Israel to make peace. The IDF could not hold Lebanon when the fighting went to a knife in the dark. The IDF is better a quick run across the border during a sneak attack. All the movies in the world will not matter when the fight is one on one in the dark. 300 nukes will not save Israel when the fight is in a place were they will kill more Israeli than men with knives
The Queen was so wonderful at the games. Lets hope England becomes a big show because as nation builders they suck.
Is It All Over? (and other news…) » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog
August 7th, 2012 at 11:15 am
[...] Pat Buchanan: The Natural Map of the Middle East [...]
JoaoAlfaiate
August 7th, 2012 at 1:45 pm
But Iran would still have an Arab ally, Iraq, thanks to Dick Cheney.
“Arab Spring” – Challenge and Opportunity… « YERELCE
August 7th, 2012 at 1:58 pm
[...] The Natural Map of the Middle East [...]
Sam
August 7th, 2012 at 2:58 pm
Despite the mistakes due to elite greed and normal human imperfections, the liberal order granted by the US , corrected ,less violent and more integrative should prevail. What would be the alternative? Fact is, humand kind has made immense progresss in the last few decades. The world has always been a very complicate place. We should not forget, life is a masterpeace and we must overcome wars.
We are all brothers and sisters, despite the power money holds on us all.May God help us all.PEACE.
MoT
August 7th, 2012 at 4:23 pm
"Answer: Al-Qaeda"? Really, Pat? I'd venture that AQ is nothing more than a CIA creation. So when you say "who benefits?" you already know the answer.
John_Muhammad
August 7th, 2012 at 8:04 pm
As a Muslim I would love to see a newly formed Caliphate arise; at the same time, though, I'm somewhat less than thrilled with the methods that are being used to bring it about. A basic tenet of Islam is 'that which is haraam(forbidden) cannot be made halal (permitted)'- in this case, the formation of a Caliphate does not justify murder and mayhem.
DO IT RIGHT, BROTHERS or don't do it at all.
Duglarri
August 7th, 2012 at 9:07 pm
Yeah- that part of the US some people (like Zinn) call "US-Occupied Mexico". There's lots of foreign powers that would happily exploit that little "natural feature" of the world, the same way they might exploit the fact that "any natural map of the world would include a Kurdistan". Natural borders are a wonderful excuse for great powers to get involved and get large numbers of people killed.
Hexexis
August 8th, 2012 at 5:48 pm
Simply amazing that Mr. Buchanan bemoans the statesmen of Versailles failing to take advice from a good socialist like H.G. Wells.
james
August 9th, 2012 at 4:18 am
You said it Tom, the betrayal of the Arabs be it muslims, christians or jews at the hand of the brits and the french after WWI with the Sykes-Picot agreement is not paralleled in modern or even ancient history. To add a lot of insult to injury, they created a shitty little state to keep the "peace". I just wish for Karma upon two political elites who did this.
Enter the US after WWII and the place is up in flames. When will that all end?
Once again I scream: Leave us the F*ck alone.
rossvassilev
August 21st, 2012 at 8:51 am
maybe the Burgas bombing was carried out by Turks who wanted revenge for the Mavi Marmara killings?
rossvassilev
August 21st, 2012 at 8:51 am
maybe the Burgas bombing was carried out by Turks who wanted revenge for the Mavi Marmara killings?