“What Went Wrong: Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response” by Bernard Lewis

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.

Table of Contents

Abstract
Introduction
European Civilization and Influences
European Colonization
Conclusion
References

Abstract

What Went Wrong: Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response.

Known as the cradle of civilization, the Middle East witnessed the earliest civilization in Mesopotamia. The years that followed saw this region become successful and their power among nations was felt as far as Africa.

In later years, the region experienced dormancy in development that saw other European states flourishing. In his book “What Went Wrong: Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response” Bernard Lewis attempts to answer this question. The entire book talks about the decline of the Middle East civilization and the cause of this decline. It also covers the reaction of the Middle East.

Introduction

The Middle East had enjoyed a lot of civilization developments more than any other region in the world. The other European regions were seen as dark and were referred to as infidels because great achievements of this Muslim world made them feel that they had nothing to borrow from the others. They had advanced in art, commerce, medicine, astronomy, weaponry and in many other fields.

In the meantime, the Europeans worked their way to the top in these fields, overtaking the Middle East. The reason for this is that Middle East had reached its climax in civilization and did not wish to learn new things from the outside world. They feared that their people would be converted in to infidels; a crime that was punishable by death.

The works of famous writers such as William Shakespeare have travelled the planet and have been translated in to many languages. It is however sad to note that this is not the case in the Arab world and especially the Middle East. It is therefore a strong indication that the Middle East had little or no interest at all in other peoples’ cultures.

European Civilization and Influences

Lewis notes that the Islamic Middle East was reluctant to accept European science (Lewis, 2003). On the contrary, western museums are full of Islamic culture. By sticking to their old ways of doing things, the Middle East was overtaken by the European civilization. The one thing that had made them so strong and unique became their downfall.

A strong contributing factor to their fall is the fact that they were divided in to two groups. One group was more conservative while the other one was moderately accommodative to western ideas. The reason I use the word moderate is because the accommodation of western and European ideas was done cautiously within the Islamic boundaries.

The conservative camp viewed their counterparts to be worse than the infidels. Those that had managed to travel to other parts of Europe were astonished by the great achievements they saw. A good example of such includes those who had diplomatic experiences in the ottoman embassies such as Mustafa Sami and Sadik Rifat Pasha. They were quick to note that most European populations could read and write.

They also noted that most of the illnesses could be treated and there were many industries that produced various products in large quantities (Lewis, 2003). These people attempted to bring change by trying to make fellow Muslims see the importance of embracing such advancements. Sadly, their pleas were never heeded.

Lewis succeeds in proving that culture and religion can have such far reaching detrimental effects to development. But his failure sets in when he attempts to prove that culture and religion are the only contributors. Another great flaw in this remarkable unfolding is the fact that Lewis uses the term Arab world to refer to the Middle East alone.

It is not clear whether it escaped his notice or he just chooses to ignore the fact that there are other Muslims in Malaysia, India subcontinent and Indonesia. Had he put these in to consideration, maybe the picture would have been different. Lewis is seen to be too quick to note the failures of the textile industries in Egypt (Lewis, 2003).

He however fails to appreciate that these factories had been successful for a period of about forty years. They also employed more than 40,000 people. The reason for their failure was due to restrictions on tariffs in the treaties of 1840 and1838 placed by the European powers. Other reasons that led to this failure include, the imported machines lacked skilled technicians to maintain them and the exhaustion of coal energy.

On the other hand, the European silk industries outperformed the Egyptian counterparts because Pasteur discovered away of breeding healthy worms. Egypt on the other hand suffered the loss of deceased worms that produced little and low quality silk. This greatly affected the Egyptian silk industries and inevitably led to their closure.

The claim that Middle East’s attempt to catch up with the industrial revolution failed is not substantiated. It is worth noting that the 1960’s witnessed a rapid economic growth in Egypt and subsequent improvement in standards of living. In Turkey, textile industries have been relatively successful and it would be absurd to claim that the developmental efforts in the last 50 years have not amounted to anything.

European Colonization

The European colonization also had its toll on the stagnation of development in the Middle East. This fact however manages to pass Lewis’s attention. Lewis further notes that the colonial period was “comparatively brief”. The actual statics indicate that the British were in Bangladesh for one hundred and ninety years while the French were in Algeria for one hundred and thirty two years.

For the case of Egypt, the British ruled for 40 years but continued to influence the politics of Egypt until 1956. Colonization did not end half a century ago as Lewis puts it. Statistics show that it was only in 1969 that the British left the Persian Gulf. The colonization time frame should not be the only factor to consider. It is imperative to look at how much the colonial powers exploited the economic resources of their victims.

For example, it would have proved wiser for the British to provide refuge to the Jews fleeing from Hitler in one of their protectorate islands. Instead of this, Britain chose to accommodate more than 500,000 Jews in Palestine leading to over utilization of available resources.

There are many accounts of what went wrong in the Middle East much of which is true, but Lewis seems to turn a blind eye at what happened in Europe and other parts of Asia. During the first half of the twentieth century, there was wide spread misery brought about by the first world war, feminism, communism not to mention the world war II that left 61 million dead.

The cold war and the efforts to suppress the ant-colonial movement also had their share of misery. On the contrary, the deaths that resulted from Muslim wars in the same period amounted to about one million mostly in the war between Iran and Iraq in the 1980s. These events however seem insignificant to Lewis as he prejudicially looks at the case of Middle East.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the question “what went wrong” is not precise. In his work, Lewis does not make it clear whether he is talking about the political rigidity, economic underdevelopment, ethnocentrism or dormancy in scientific research and inventions. On finishing reading the book, one is left with more questions than answers.

It is therefore true to say that Lewis has effectively covered the events that took place in the history of Middle East that negatively affected the process of development. It is also true to say that Lewis totally fails to effectively compare these events to what was happening in other parts of Europe and Asia.

In conclusion the answer to the Middle East problem lies in their arms. They are the ones who can decide to abandon the old ways and accept entirely new ones or at least become more accommodative to new ideas.

References

Lewis, B. (2003) What went wrong? The clash between Islam and modernity in the Middle East. New York: Perennial.

Click Here To Order Now!