Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Introduction
The Middle East region has witnessed massive importation of arms and human capital from nations in Europe, Asia and the United States of America which has been used as a strategy of pursuing political and economic interests as well as initiating reforms believed to be lacking in the region.
According to Fisk, the Middle East region has experienced rampant importation of arms in addition to the fact that its military expenditure is comparatively similar to demographic and economic size (21). Various studies of the region indicate that since the Afghan War of 1978-92, the demand for weapons to equip regimes, initiate reforms and bringing new order in the Middle East have caused many nations to gain interest in supplying arms and human capital in Middle East as part and parcel of offering the required services.
As explored in this paper, the array of interests that the United States of America as well as some nations in Europe have in the Middle East have led to massive supply of both arms and human capital into the Middle East region. However, those interests are affected by Arab-Israel conflict and the tensions between the Arab world and western economies.
The Middle East region has so far attracted a lot of international attention in various aspects over the years. Due to the protracted conflict that has dominated the region for a long period of time, several studies have been used to investigate the cause of the unending conflict between the western world and some nations in the region. Such studies have dwelt on the economic, political and social aspects that drive the Middle East region as a whole.
The resultant studies have also attempted to define the region from the dimension of capabilities, potentials, expenditures and international trade practices. As such, past statistical evidences have pointed out that this region is highly unified in terms of trade and consequently its business practices are within specified territories.
Citing the accelerating cost of resources such as petroleum and minerals, the Middle East is characterized by intensive use of other resources in exploitation and protection of these natural resources. As a result, there has been increasing demand for human capital for utilization and maintenance of these resources (Gause 1).
Given the high demand for human capital and defense against the prevalent insecurities in the region, it has become clear that a lot of money has been spent on labor and defense industries. Basing on how this region carries out trade, it has also been found out that there are a lot of economic benefits that lead to attraction of external interests. Acquisition of foreign human capital thus becomes relevant with a view to understand how much is spent in terms of hiring human resources.
Due to the kind of violence experienced in the region, it has been estimated that military budgetary allocations involve heavy expenditures in regards to security and territorial protection. While putting these factors into consideration, it is, therefore, important to examine how resources such as human capital and arms that are part and parcel of the basic needs are secured by this region.
It is also against this backdrop that this paper examines the resources which are being used by the European Union and the United States in the Middle East with reference to human capital and arms importations as well as how they protect their interests.
Arms importations
Budhwar and Mellahi point out in his publication that government spending on military and arms importation among the economies and societies in the Middle East is currently higher than in other regions of the world (82). After the 1991 Gulf war between Iran and Iraq, the world oil prices went down drastically and most nations felt the necessity to make reductions in their military spending levels.
However, that changed as many nations developed interest in the oil rich nations in the Middle East and felt the need to protect their interests. Today, one of the most militarized areas where both human and arms resources are used is the Gulf region. Studies indicate most nations in the Middle East began using their military in 1995 to protect their resources and continue steadfastly to exceed 4.2 % which is the world’s average (Klare 140).
Reports from the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) in the United States indicate that importations of arms in the Middle East by other nations that have political or economic interest have massively increased in the recent years. Fuller and Lesser indicate that between 1992 and 1994, the amount of arms that were imported into the Middle East were approximated to be worth $ 34 billion, arms that represented almost half of the total arms in the world (44).
Many nations in the Middle East have benefited from the arms imports which they have used to establish and protect their territories as well as fighting terrorist groups and the western world. Some have used imported technology to develop weapons of mass destruction, with others like Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran obtaining significant capacities of surface to surface missiles.
The Middle East is regarded as the world’s leader in arms and military expenditures in regards to GDP and also high levels of imports. Given reasons such as continual rifts and violence in neighboring nations, it has become a matter of concern to each nation for security to be prioritized.
Quite a number of nations in this region have shown continual interest in arms expenditures which was a progressive trend until the 1991 Iraq-Iran war. Since then there have been reductions in military spending but the overall expenditure still remains relatively high. According to the United States disarmament agency known as ACDA, the estimated budgetary expenditure on arms in the period of 1992-1995 was more than forty percent of the world’s total.
Given that research on the amount spent on arms in this region provides figures standing at US$34 billion, the region is still considered as one of the leading militarized regions of the world. Many of the countries in the region consume an average of more than 10% of their GDP on importation of arms (Budhwar & Mellahi 10).
Countries such Iraq, Iran, Syria, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel, Turkey and Yemen account for more than 70% of the gulf’s expenditure in arms importation. The reasons behind the military expenditures include neighborhood hostilities, territorial disputes, latent disputes among other factors.
The former cause has been previously experienced in wars between Iraq and Kuwait, Yemen and Saudi Arabia; Bahrain and its immediate neighbor Qatar. Such exaggerated military budgetary allocations give an indication of the importance of security in the Middle East.
This means that domestic security must be provided at all times to keep the ruling regimes in power. As such, the involvement of powerful people in the process of arms importation leads to formation of cartels whereby these individuals end up as the sole beneficiaries of the whole process.
In the last three decades, the level of expenditures in arms importation into the regions has drastically reduced due to a variety of reasons. To commence with, Gause (2) points out that UN sanctions on these countries coupled with revenue restraints have made these countries to lower their arms import needs in the recent past.
Abundance of petroleum fuel in the seventies and eighties made these countries invest heavily in their militaries but with the decrease of petroleum prices in the mid eighties, these countries struggled to keep the trend. Continued hardships later forced them to make borrowings and exploit other reserves to continue their heavy expenditures in arms.
Exploitation of the reserves was not unanimously agreed but was only reached at after some serous contentions. Eventually situations worsened and thus a cut down in budget was the only option left. These related cut downs, which were also disputed, came to affect the involved countries confidence. Up to the present, arms import and military expenditures are considered highest in the Middle East than in any other region in the world.
Recent statistical evidences
Over the last decade, reported military expenditure of the region rose by 34%, that is, from the period of 1998-2008, there was a rise in all countries but only Turkey. The rises were solely government burdens such that sharing fell slightly with countries in the Middle Eastern which expressed the highest amounts of expenditure.
Budhwar and Mellahi (12) indicate that the Middle East accounted for approximately twenty one percent of the total world arms imports, with the subsequent four years showing a slight decrease in this trend. From 2004-2008 period, statistics showed that major destinations of the weapons included the United Arab Emirates- accounting for more than 29% of the total imports into the region, followed by Israel as third respectively.
The UAE ranked third in the world as regards to military imports, with Israel placed sixth and turkey placed eighth. Previous arms import dealing agreements by the UAE have hit media attention. The largest of such deals began in 2004 with an initial deal of $5billion US dollars and a second one made with France that amounted to $3.4 Billion dollars which was aimed at making provisions for weapons such as combat aircrafts, 62 Mirages and other systems.
Israel’s largest expenditures include a $5billion dollars two-stage deal involving its Marble program and a subsequent $1.3 billion dollar deal for dolphin submarines (Gause 4).
These imports have been driven by some special driving forces which include high oil prices, economic growths and insecurities brought about by the invasion of Iraq by the United States of America in 2003 and consistent rows between neighbors Palestine and Israel. Partly, the high levels of imports for countries such as Israel and Egypt may be attributed to direct aids gained from superpower countries such as the United States of America (Gause 6).
Imports for domestic security
Arms analysts point out that today, the Middle East is by far the largest and most thriving regional market where world’s weapon trade is taking place. The weapons imported in this region have been used since 1980 in many events that have taken place including two major wars, and active territorial and latent disputes between gulf dyads like Yemen and Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Iran, and Kuwait and Iraq.
Indeed, it would be easy to understand massive expenditure on arms importation which is still happening in the Middle East. Klare points out that the high spending levels on arms imports by nations in the Middle East reflect how important it is for them to protect their sovereignty (140). Nations that supply them with weapons also play a major role of providing ruling regimes with weapons for domestic security.
Suppliers of arms
O’Sullivan indicates that the largest and major supplier of arms to nations in the Middle East is the United States (67). Between the years 1999-2003, it supplied about 46% of major convectional arms, and this figure has been increasing over the years with recent volume of delivery estimates of 53% in 2008.
Besides the USA, other major suppliers of arms imported by nations in the Middle East are France, Germany and Russia which supply at 16%, 8% and 7% respectively (Klare 140). It is imperative to point out that all the deliveries of arms made in the region by these nations account for 84% of arms.
Figure 1: A chart representing an overall supply of arms in the period 2006-2010
Massive arms supply in the Middle East especially in the UAE, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Israel, Iraq, Israel, Egypt and Bahrain has been considered the major practice by the US government. Esfandiary, Fakhro and Wasser indicate that the US does not sell its arms to Iran or Syria, rather sell in large quantities Israel.
Statistics indicate that 35% of its arms deliveries in 2008 were supplied to Israel and 29.5% to the UAE. In general, nearly 99% of arms supplied to Israel as imports were major convectional weapons some of which have been used by Israel against people in Hezbollah and Palestine (Klare 140).
In the period 2004-08, all major convectional weapons from France were supplied to the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and which accounted for about 79% and 20.5% of deliveries respectively (Klare 140). Esfandiary, Fakhro and Wasser indicate that in the same period, Turkey imported the 92.6% of supplies from Germany. Deliveries from Russia were supplied to nations such as Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Iran.
It is imperative to note that Syria and Iran have been major dependants of arms that are supplied by Russia, even though at times Iran receives weapons from China. In other words, it can be argued that the supply of arms and other elements of weaponry have involved multiple players.
While some suppliers have greatly benefitted from this form of trade due to high demand of the same in the Middle East region, it is imperative to point out that the latter may not be the case especially among those suppliers who have been close dependants of the Middle East.
Supply of weapons into the Middle East is not single point oriented. Different suppliers are involved in manufacture and delivery and the largest suppliers include the USA, Russia and France. During the period of 2004-2008, the US supplies to the region drastically dropped to only 3% from 46% in the preceding four year period due its invasion in Iraq.
Budhwar and Mellahi (34) argue that major supplies from the USA were never destined for neither Iran nor Syria but mainly three countries which include Israel, the greatest recipient with approximately 35%, followed by the UAE with approximately 29.5% and Egypt with approximately 17% of the total US supplies.
Subsequent years indicated the USA as still one of the leading suppliers of arms into many countries including Bahrain, Egypt, Israel and the UAE among others. Other suppliers to the regions according to rank include France and Russia and with regard to conventional major weapons, statistics indicates that the US supplied Israel with approximately 99% of its needs while France made supplies approximating to 79% percent to the UAE.
Russia supplied conventional weapons to four countries in the region with varying percentages with Iran being the highest recipient with 59% followed by Iraq with 16%, Syria 10% while Kuwait closed the group. It is, therefore, indicated that the two countries, Iran and Syria, have been highly dependent on Russia for provision of weapons and other armor materials for a long time (Budhwar and Mellahi 15).
What the imported weapons are used for
Used in armed conflicts In Israel
In his publication, O’Sullivan indicates that in the Middle East, wars that being fought are intensive and involve extensive and massive use of imported armaments. The most recent assault carried out by Israel happened on the Gaza strip in January 2009 where it used the US imported equipment such as the white phosphorus shells, guided bombs, hellfire missiles and the F-16 aircraft.
In its war with Lebanon, Israel used the US imported armored vehicles to defeat the Lebanese and maintain the West Bank as its occupation. Indeed, Israel has used weapons from the US to commit mass murders which caused serious violation of human rights. Reports from the International Humanitarian Society indicate that through the US supplied equipment, Israel’s victory in conflicts on the Gaza Strip and Lebanon have shown increased violations of human rights.
Fisk indicates the US has been a major supporter of Israel and a supplier of weapons that have been used in Gaza for colossal human rights violations (21). The Middle East history indicates that the region has largely been shaped by political interest deeply entrenched in war relationships between nations.
After the World War II and establishment of the state of Israel, politics in the region shifted to the current running conflicts with some Islamic administrations such as Lebanon and Palestine, Iran and most of Islamic extremist groups vowing not to recognize its legitimacy.
Reports from the Amnesty International indicate that the US has been supplying Israel with munitions and military equipment that Israel forces use against their enemies. In 2009, president Obama agreed to a contract with Israel to supply them with military aid of an increased 25% bringing the amount to $ 30 billion (Klare 147).
In Lebanon
Hezbollah, the Lebanese opposition movement has been using major convectional weapons supplied by Syria and Iran to fight their enemies such as Israel. Studies indicate that some of the weapons that they use include surface to air missiles, anti-ship missiles and short and medium range rockets (Klare 143).
Since its formation in 1982, Hezbollah has maintained steady violent attacks on Israel and its allies that are seen as a great obstacle to elimination of Israel. In 1992, Hezbollah was involved in attack that killed 29 people at Israel Embassy in Buenos Aires. Its wars and violence also extend out of Middle East and clearly indicate how the arms strengthened their position as a global threat.
Klare indicates that Hezbollah could become worse should it realize the possibility of strengthening itself through cooperation with other terror organizations having superior weapons (150). With such possibility, the UN Security Council imposed an embargo using the 1701 resolution on transfer of arms to non-UN and non-governmental groups in Lebanon.
As a matter of fact, should free and unrestricted importation of arms been allowed in the entire Middle East region, it is definite that the level of peace in the region would be worse compared to the way it is now.
In Palestine
The militant group in Palestine known as Hamas has been launching rockets in Israel which are believed to have been imported from China. Other possible arms it uses include Al-Fadjr rockets imported from Iran, Grad rockets from Russia and Quassam rockets produced locally. Budhwar and Mellahi note that most of the weapons that Palestine uses are not supplied by the countries of origin as most of them are smuggled from Egypt via tunnels linking it with the Gaza strip (100).
Human Capital
The role of human capital in the Middle East has is a complex and yet interesting issue as many nations that are supplying weapons also invest in human capital to protect their resources and interests. Policy makers and planners in the EU and US strategize for their security needs in the Middle East to augment present and future forces to protect their interests or fight in the battle field.
Fisk indicates that since revolution came into America, it has used humans in every conflict, for provision of services and goods. It has used the private security contractors and civilian support when fighting its conflicts to offer services in areas primarily away from the war zones where there are hostilities.
The late economic booming in the Middle East coupled with factors such as social wellbeing and the demand for more workers for absolute exploitation of petroleum resources within the region have led to increased interest in immigration by individuals from all over the world.
Over the last decade, statistics indicate that there have been hundreds of millions of immigrants into the Middle East. Currently, approximately forty percent of the total population of the region in the six countries is comprised of foreigners (Budhwar & Mellahi 75).
Budhwar & Mellahi (25) posit that the major industries attracting foreign workers vary from region to region but the main activity of attraction is the oil and construction industries. Due to the size of the oil industry and its expansive demand for extra labor, there have been increases in immigration interests.
Secondly, due to low populations in countries within the Middle East, there is therefore automatic requirement for the increase of the size of the labor market. Other industries of great interest which demand more laborers include thriving social, community and personal services industry as well as those industries that deal with entertainment packages.
From statistical evidences available, the number of foreign human capital in Saudi Arabia in the eighties was relatively high, more than five million (Jehl para.8). Since immigration is only based on the line of duty, the average per capita income has reduced from $19000 in the eighties to approximately $11000 as measured few years ago.
This fall has been attributed to a lot of immigration into the country. Foreign labor is estimated to be worth about $9 billion dollars. Similarly, with continual immigration into Jordan, there have been considerations for deportation of some of its foreign workforce which is comprised of almost 45% of Jordan’s total workforce. The reason for deportation has been attributed to the high numbers of unemployment which stands at twenty five percent.
It has been estimated that the worth of Jordan’s foreign workface is more than $10 billion US dollars. Preventive strategies have been put in place to lock out foreign human capital from getting employed in fields such as administrative, medicine and engineering. There is, however, stiff competition in low paying jobs by Jordanians and foreigners.
The United Arab Emirates population as per the report published in 1996 comprises only one third of the total population while the two thirds were foreigners. Currently the number of foreign workers has increased to 3.8 million, approximately seventy five percent of the workforce population of the country (Budhwar& Mellahi 78).
In addition, there is speculation of illegal immigration, estimated to be tens of thousands a year thus leading to additional hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants into the country. The value of the total foreign work force is estimated to be the highest in the region. Similarly, Israel is not an exception to immigration and importation of human capital. From past reports, there have been reports of hundreds of illegal immigrants arrested for lack of documentation and separated to camps (Jehl para.12) set up for arrested aliens.
As evident in the capital, Tel Aviv more than half of the pupil population of the country is comprised of children illegally living as per the period. It has also been found out that more than three thousand immigrants into the country enter through fictitious marriages every year. In Israel, women automatically receive NIS2000 individually for marriages to foreigners.
The majority of the Israel foreign population consists of immigrants from Philippines, Thailand and African countries imported by Israel but their overstaying periods and fear to return to their impoverished countries result in illegal immigration in Israel (Budhwar& Mellahi 80).
The number of foreign workers in Saudi Arabia exceeds the number of Saudis in the industrial sector. As per the 1996 tabulated report, there was laid a plan to create 30,000 jobs for Saudis from the foreign workers, implying dismissal of foreign workers. Currently, the figures have dropped drastically to almost levels of equal numbers.
Similarly at that period, Kuwait had more than 63% foreign workers in the country but engaged an immediate deportation exercise after finding out that about 200 thousand were infected with HIV (Jehl Para 5). Currently, the figures are estimated to have reached 500,000 foreign workers, implying reduction levels. This population, from it’s per capital income is estimated to be worth $5billion dollars.
Illegal immigration
Despite the diversity in findings, there seems to be convergence towards acquisition of human capital. There is formal immigration acquisition and the recently discovered human acquisition through legal but engagement in illegal activities like slavery. From a recent approach to understanding the situation of forced slavery especially in the Middle East, reports have indicated that the region has the highest number of illegal immigrants who are later forced to slavery (Budhwar& Mellahi 93).
The industry, which has become one of the most thriving, is estimated to be worth tens of billions of dollars, making it one of the most expensive human capital industries. Despite its illegality, the most attractive industries of such labor include the social and personal services industry.
Although immigrants are subjected to lots of work, their per capital income is not pre-determined since the majority of them are paid peanuts while the rest undergo no-paying duties, with only food and accommodation as the only benefits.
Statistics have revealed that every year, there are approximately more than one hundred thousand illegal immigrations into the Middle East region, most of whom are subjected to forced labor. Other industries with reports of forced labor include the construction industry with the majority of victims from countries such as India, Africa and Thailand.
Later reports have also indicated that the rate of illegal immigration intended for forced labor is becoming profound in Saudi Arabia. The thriving industries under this influence include casual labor industries, the personal and services industry. Since most of Saudis are economically well off, coupled with their physical incompetency, they have come to desire help in physical duties.
Human capital for protection of business operations and investments
As indicated, Middle East has over the years developed cold relations with the western nations. Consequently, businesses of investors from the west or their friends are often met with massive hostilities (Klare 140). Since the first gulf war to the 2003 war on mass destruction and the constant reference to Middle East as a terrorist region has made the entire population to be highly polarized against western linked businesses.
In Iran, the political leadership is highly biased to American linked businesses for pointing that the country supports terrorism. Indeed, since the failed hostage rescue of the United States embassy hostages in Tehran, Klare reports that the cold relationship has extended to other regions as Iran supports any efforts against the West (147). This has prompted the US to increase security for its business operations in the region and protect its supplies.
According to O’Sullivan, in order to limit spending on human capital, western investors have congregated more in nations that are friendly to their nations to avoid being an easy target. As a result, countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have seen great influx of investors from all over the world.
Neutral politics in these nations have consequently been associated with faster development which makes them outstanding amongst others in the region. A good example is the United Arab Emirates which has proved that objective politics can encourage businesses, support them and lever national development with speed (O’Sullivan 67).
Indeed, with its GDP growing from US $ 130 billion in year 2005 to US $ 270 billion in year 2008, the nation has become the third largest economy in the region after Saudi Arabia and Iran (Fuller & Lesser 52). By avoiding this polarization and standing out from the rest, UAE has presented the region with a great example on revitalizing their politics for faster growth and development.
In their article “Persian Gulf myths”, Fuller & Lesser try to answer the question why Middle East remains highly polarized against external investors in the region (52). Western countries often post a negative picture to the region; a consideration that is interpreted as targeting them politically.
Good examples include the military carriers in the Persian Gulf which create a sense of intimidation and hate to the West (Fisk 21). With immediate political leaders seeing the military presence as a sense of security for their regimes, external investors will always remain unsafe from people. It is important that the political elite understand that people are the determining factor for development to be successful.
Human capital to foster military operations in the Middle East
Over the years, the US and some nations in the EU have racially discriminate nations in the Middle East because they are largely associated them with terror, extremist movements, and, therefore, consider them as an enemy waiting for the best opportunity to strike.
These opinions have existed for long and have been confirmed by the United States Commission whose report on Middle East terrorism repeatedly mentions Islam, Jihad and Middle East as a hub for Al-Qaida. Against this background, the US Government is used a remarkable number of Human capital in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Fisk points out that the estimated number of human capital including sub contractors and private contractors working in Iraq following funding by the US government is 10 times the number of military soldiers it used in the gulf war of 1991 (21).
Studies indicate that in pursuant of US government contracts in the Middle east, especially in Iraq, about 30 thousand are offering their services in private firms in form of protective security functions (Fisk 21). Others carry out a myriad of functions that include consulting for the US, translator support, execute reconstruction projects and support of the US forces logistically.
Middle East generally holds the largest number of terrorist groups in the globe. Groups designated as terror organizations such as Al-Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Fatah Al Islam and Hezbollah are mainly associated with Middle East. As a result, there is a sense that if an individual is not in one terror group then that person could be in another terror group.
Though this is indeed true for terror members or those willing to join terrorism, it is wrong to generalize it for all members. For instance, most Middle East terror organizations are composed of Islamic radicals. However, a significant part of population is mostly Christians while those who are keen followers of Koran will confess that it denounces harm to other people while calling for harmony and coexistence.
This opinion is, however, not just a stereotype from the US, but equally cherished by the terror groups that want to maintain the status quo (stand off between the US and Middle East) as their only way for survival. Consequently, it will indeed be very difficult to fight racialism because an influential faction rides on it and further use it to achieve key objectives such as inflicting terror.
Proponents of increased funding for human capital in the Middle East argue that effective administration of the region requires the EU and the US to form human capital in form of joint forces. They point out that intelligence during the WWII could not have been effective without the correct code of theatric operations.
Therefore, a logistical underpinning of joint operations is regarded as a major central tower in understanding the enemy and hitting with greater precision (Budhwar and Mellahi 100). To succeed in their winning formulae, the US and EU’s army, navy and air-forces should specially operate as team.
It is from this concept that the role of joint operation in the military has become so emphatic to give the United States and other Allied forces the overwhelming win over many terrorist organizations. Indeed, as Budhwar and Mellahi revisit the failed Operation Crow of 1979 in Iran, he points out that intelligence is presented as a central facet in creating the needed interlink between the military objective, the preparedness of the enemy and the mechanism to be employed.
To sum up, the paper has clearly indicated that the Middle East region receives massive imports of arms and human capital from many nations in the world, key among them being the United States of America. As analyzed in the paper, the weapons that are supplied are being used by the nations importing them to fight conflicts that have bedeviled the region for many years. As already mentioned, large sums of money have been used by nations to effectively sustain supply of weapons and human capital in the Middle East.
The paper has concluded by exploring how human capital has been important in protecting the array of interest and enhancing businesses carried out by nations in the Middle East. It is also evident that from the discussion, resource use in the Middle East in regards to human capital and arms importation is extensive.
The arms import industry is estimated to be worth approximately 34 billion US dollars. In a recent study, it was noted that the rate of investment in military and armory has continued to increase by approximately 34%. Many countries in the gulf have shown commitment towards importation of armory and upgrading their military systems with a big percentage of the budget solely underlying government responsibility through GDP- whereby almost ten percent is spent on military and defense.
As evident in this paper, such actions have been prompted by the recent US invasion of Iraq and the continual tensions between neighboring countries such as Palestine and Israel. These acquisitions have been largely supplied by three main countries which include the United States of America, France and Russia. The United States supply much of the weaponry needs for Israel (99%), the UAE (29%) and Egypt (16%), Russia is providing for majority of the needs for Syria, Iraq and Iran.
To date, human capital imports in the region are experiencing a lot of immigration activities. With populations of foreign workforces exceeding native workforce populations, policies have been put in place to countercheck the foreign population growth in these countries.
However, due to continual economic growth and low native population growth, there has been increase in demand for foreign workforce and thus continual attraction of immigration. Although immigration is allowed, the thriving of personal services industry and demand for casual laborers have led to creation of illegal immigration that is estimated to be worth approximately $30billion dollars. The total value of human capital in the Middle East is estimated to be approximately $60billion dollars.
Works Cited
Budhwar, Pawan & Mellahi, Kamel. Managing Human Resources in the Middle East. New York: Routledge, 2004.Print.
Esfandiary Dina, Fakhro, Elham & Wasser, Becker. “Obstacles for the Gulf States”. Arms Control Today, 41.7 (2011): 22-25. Print.
Fisk, Robert. “This looming war isn’t about chemical warheads or human rights: it’s about oil”. Peace Research 35.1 (2003): 21. Print.
Fuller, Graham & Lesser, Ian. “Persian Gulf myths”. Foreign Affairs, 76.3 (1997): 42- 52. Print.
Gause, Gregory. “Arms Supplies and Military Spending in the Gulf”. MER20, (2009) 1- 20. Print.
Jehl, Douglas. “Foreign Workers in the Middle East”. Migration News, 3.12 (1996) 20- 40. Print.
Klare, Michael. “The next great arms race”. Foreign Affairs, 72.3 (1993): 136-152.Print. O’Sullivan, Matthew. “Nuclear arms experts discuss the new world of proliferation”. The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, 30.8 (2011): 67-68. Print.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.