What do you think?
Rate this book
State, Power and Politics in the Making of the Modern Middle East
Roger Owen has fully revised and updated his authoritative text to take into account the very latest developments in the Middle East. This new edition continues to explore the emergence of individual Middle Eastern states since the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War and the key themes that have characterized the region since then. The book continues to serve as an excellent introduction for newcomers to the modern history and politics of this fascinating region.
279 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1992
13 people are currently reading
263 people want to read
About the author
Roger Owen
49 books15 followersEdward Roger John Owen was an English historian who wrote several classic works on the history of the modern Middle East. His research interests included the economic, social and political history of the Middle East, especially Egypt, from 1800 to the present, as well as the theories of imperialism, including military occupations.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
July 1, 2025
يبدأ كل شيء من العنوان فمن أكثر النقاط اللافتة في هذا الكتاب هي مفهوم الشرق الأوسط بحد ذاته فهو مصطلح غير بريء من التحيزات التاريخية والاستعمارية
فالكتاب يلفت النظر إلى أن هذا التوصيف ليس جغرافي فقط بل يحمل رؤية مركزية أوروبية ترى العالم من موقعها الخاص، فالمنطقة التي تدعى شرق أوسط بالنسبة لأوروبا هي غرب أوسط بالنسبة للهند وجنوب أدنى بالنسبة لروسيا
ويذكرنا الكاتب بأن هذا المصطلح ظهر خلال الحقبة الاستعمارية حين احتاجت القوى الغربية لتصنيف مناطق نفوذها فكان هذا الاسم جزء من مشروع تقسيم العالم بناء على موقع أوروبا في قلب الخريطة. وإذا تأملنا هذا الطرح جيدا ندرك أن المصطلح ذاته يلخص كثير من إشكاليات الكتابات الغربية عن المنطقة ، من يصوغ المفاهيم؟ ولمصلحة من؟ وهل يمكن أن يفهم العرب انفسهم عبر كلمات لم يختاروها؟
كتاب لا بأس به لكن مشكلته تكمن بفرض أيديولوجيا وسياسات ومصطلحات غربية على العرب، وبما أنه يشرح التاريخ فأتمنى أن لا يكون المستقبل مشابه.
فالكتاب يلفت النظر إلى أن هذا التوصيف ليس جغرافي فقط بل يحمل رؤية مركزية أوروبية ترى العالم من موقعها الخاص، فالمنطقة التي تدعى شرق أوسط بالنسبة لأوروبا هي غرب أوسط بالنسبة للهند وجنوب أدنى بالنسبة لروسيا
ويذكرنا الكاتب بأن هذا المصطلح ظهر خلال الحقبة الاستعمارية حين احتاجت القوى الغربية لتصنيف مناطق نفوذها فكان هذا الاسم جزء من مشروع تقسيم العالم بناء على موقع أوروبا في قلب الخريطة. وإذا تأملنا هذا الطرح جيدا ندرك أن المصطلح ذاته يلخص كثير من إشكاليات الكتابات الغربية عن المنطقة ، من يصوغ المفاهيم؟ ولمصلحة من؟ وهل يمكن أن يفهم العرب انفسهم عبر كلمات لم يختاروها؟
كتاب لا بأس به لكن مشكلته تكمن بفرض أيديولوجيا وسياسات ومصطلحات غربية على العرب، وبما أنه يشرح التاريخ فأتمنى أن لا يكون المستقبل مشابه.
May 8, 2018
Work related to factual analysis is inevitably more difficult to review than a work of fiction. This is due to the fact that in a work of fiction there is still a modicum of personal opinion and the question of taste that enter into account; leaving a larger margin for personal opinion and viewpoints.
The current Work by Roger Owen was produced in 2003 with subsequent updates. Although the edition I read had the 2009 copyright listed (and therefore must have been produced at least during that time) there were few or little changes apparent from earlier editions.
The book was well informed and detailed and testified to the knowledge and mastery of the author. There was a comprehensive examination of the economic and political factors involved in the development of the Arab states (including the smaller monarchies, Iran). The four African Arab states (Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, and Libya) were lumped together under the heading of "Middle-Eastern States, although this characterization is technically incorrect and assumes more of an ethno-social and cultural regard, such as that presented in the work of Samuel P. Huntington.
Owen does a fairly good job of presenting the facts as facts and though he veers off course from time to time and makes a few questionable observations, the crux of the book is both solid and informative.
There are several editorial errors in the title that I have taken the liberty of pointing out here:
> p.187 there is no such thing as U.S. £., it is either dollars or $.
>p.189 Bouteflika might managed to curb...should be either might have managed or alternatively just manage.
The author's insistence on employing the term "very much more" is rather annoying and redundant and it appears "very many more" times than it should throughout the text. p. 180
Owen appears to contradict his own rather questionable and cited figure of 40% relating to Syrian GDP and military expenditure, while a statistical table just below cites it at a more realistic 2.49%.
Owen cites Tal Asad on page 159 that "We can be reasonably sure that there has never been a Muslim Society in which Sharia has governed more than a fragment of social life."
This claim seems to come out of left field and gloss over the harsh realities as imposed under the Taliban, in Afghanistan, the Mullah's and Imams of Iran, Nigeria, Sudan, Egypt (religiously legitimized assassinations of 1992 -1993); the religiously inspired GIA massacres of Algeria, various sharia related abuses in Malaysian, Indonesia, the Philippines, and the day to day constraints in States as diverse as Saudi Arabia to the UAE, where sharia not only exists but is a fundamental part of justice and the social fabric of those societies. in this instance, both Asada and Owen are far wide of the mark when it comes to a realistic understanding.
Owen also tends to walk on political eggshells when it comes to the question of the Iranian Religious oligarchy and refuses to recognize it for the authoritarian and oppressive regime it is.
Again on page 165, when speaking on the terrorism inspired by Hasan al-Banna the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, the author makes the grave error of qualifying certain of his terrorist activities such as political assassinations as "'pre-emptive' [against those *thought to be* its most dangerous enemies]" This has the effect of giving the appearance of condoning such activities regardless the authors intent.
From pages 170-173 the author makes yet another grievous error adopting apologist language in relation to the use of the terrorist label by the west, Furthermore, there is a tendency to gloss over and downplay suicide terrorism as a factual historical event exercised by "many different religions." Such an apologist approach fails to account for the actual numbers and the evolutionary history of geopolitics.
This trend of blindness to reality continues over the next few pages where Owen unfortunately parts from his more objective observations and adopts an attitude of moral relativism stating that, "They [most studies of the political role of Middle Eastern armies] have been prone to attach too much importance to specifically local factors, such as the allegedly militaristic nature of Islam or of Arab culture, as reasons for military intervention." Anyone with even a modicum of cultural and historical insight will be aware of the violent and militaristic nature of Islamic culture, be it lapidation (stoning) beheading, removal of the hands for theft, caning (falaka), Diya (blood money), among others.
Finally, Owen often adopts the expression "extremely difficult or highly complex subject, when faced with the unknown or unable to explain clearly the significance of a particular phenomenon. This is not very useful and tends to come off more as an excuse rather than an explanation. If a topic is too complex for an explanation, or understanding, saying so does not render it any clearer.
In summary, while the research presented by Owen is thoughtful, well-researched, and largely competent, the reader should wear their critical glasses while examining the text and avoid falling into the trap of being led astray from the facts as they are, not as others might like them to be.
The current Work by Roger Owen was produced in 2003 with subsequent updates. Although the edition I read had the 2009 copyright listed (and therefore must have been produced at least during that time) there were few or little changes apparent from earlier editions.
The book was well informed and detailed and testified to the knowledge and mastery of the author. There was a comprehensive examination of the economic and political factors involved in the development of the Arab states (including the smaller monarchies, Iran). The four African Arab states (Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, and Libya) were lumped together under the heading of "Middle-Eastern States, although this characterization is technically incorrect and assumes more of an ethno-social and cultural regard, such as that presented in the work of Samuel P. Huntington.
Owen does a fairly good job of presenting the facts as facts and though he veers off course from time to time and makes a few questionable observations, the crux of the book is both solid and informative.
There are several editorial errors in the title that I have taken the liberty of pointing out here:
> p.187 there is no such thing as U.S. £., it is either dollars or $.
>p.189 Bouteflika might managed to curb...should be either might have managed or alternatively just manage.
The author's insistence on employing the term "very much more" is rather annoying and redundant and it appears "very many more" times than it should throughout the text. p. 180
Owen appears to contradict his own rather questionable and cited figure of 40% relating to Syrian GDP and military expenditure, while a statistical table just below cites it at a more realistic 2.49%.
Owen cites Tal Asad on page 159 that "We can be reasonably sure that there has never been a Muslim Society in which Sharia has governed more than a fragment of social life."
This claim seems to come out of left field and gloss over the harsh realities as imposed under the Taliban, in Afghanistan, the Mullah's and Imams of Iran, Nigeria, Sudan, Egypt (religiously legitimized assassinations of 1992 -1993); the religiously inspired GIA massacres of Algeria, various sharia related abuses in Malaysian, Indonesia, the Philippines, and the day to day constraints in States as diverse as Saudi Arabia to the UAE, where sharia not only exists but is a fundamental part of justice and the social fabric of those societies. in this instance, both Asada and Owen are far wide of the mark when it comes to a realistic understanding.
Owen also tends to walk on political eggshells when it comes to the question of the Iranian Religious oligarchy and refuses to recognize it for the authoritarian and oppressive regime it is.
Again on page 165, when speaking on the terrorism inspired by Hasan al-Banna the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, the author makes the grave error of qualifying certain of his terrorist activities such as political assassinations as "'pre-emptive' [against those *thought to be* its most dangerous enemies]" This has the effect of giving the appearance of condoning such activities regardless the authors intent.
From pages 170-173 the author makes yet another grievous error adopting apologist language in relation to the use of the terrorist label by the west, Furthermore, there is a tendency to gloss over and downplay suicide terrorism as a factual historical event exercised by "many different religions." Such an apologist approach fails to account for the actual numbers and the evolutionary history of geopolitics.
This trend of blindness to reality continues over the next few pages where Owen unfortunately parts from his more objective observations and adopts an attitude of moral relativism stating that, "They [most studies of the political role of Middle Eastern armies] have been prone to attach too much importance to specifically local factors, such as the allegedly militaristic nature of Islam or of Arab culture, as reasons for military intervention." Anyone with even a modicum of cultural and historical insight will be aware of the violent and militaristic nature of Islamic culture, be it lapidation (stoning) beheading, removal of the hands for theft, caning (falaka), Diya (blood money), among others.
Finally, Owen often adopts the expression "extremely difficult or highly complex subject, when faced with the unknown or unable to explain clearly the significance of a particular phenomenon. This is not very useful and tends to come off more as an excuse rather than an explanation. If a topic is too complex for an explanation, or understanding, saying so does not render it any clearer.
In summary, while the research presented by Owen is thoughtful, well-researched, and largely competent, the reader should wear their critical glasses while examining the text and avoid falling into the trap of being led astray from the facts as they are, not as others might like them to be.
March 12, 2024
Read for the university course ‘State and society in North Africa and the Mediterranean region’. Well-written and full of details, however I found it quite chaotic in the organization of topics and I found it really difficult to connect events and actors.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews