The motive of this post is some comments about the growing population in the Arab world and the fact that is non-relevant.
I will to support my point use some statements made by Samuel P. Huntington in a book named â€œThe clash of civilizations and the remaking of world orderâ€.
History teaches a great deal about human relations and its complexity. Nevertheless, it never fully applies to any new situation, a man cannot swim twice in the same river, as it is not the same man and it is not the same water. What is new in world order today? We are not more civilized, nor are we any smarter than our ancestors were. But we have something new: technology. It might sound like irrelevant but it changes international relationships a great deal. The US plan to make a missile shield is a joke, if Russia was to blow is entire nuclear arsenal on Moscow, the dust cloud and nuclear downfall will erase all life from continents in a matter of years. It is inevitable that more countries will have access to such technology in the future years. We can always slow it down, but will never stop the trend.
What solution do we have then? Either we learn to live together, with all the complexity of such a task, or we go back to stone age. The maneuverability in between these two solutions is shrinking as time passes. If we go back to stone age, no need for a debate, anyway it is unlikely that any of us will be there to still talk about it. Therefore we can only talk about the other alternative.
In his book Samuel P. Huntington Says: â€œLarger populations needs more resources, and hence people from societies dense and/or rapidly growing populations tend to push outward, occupy territory, and exert pressure on other less demographically dynamic peoples. Islamic population growth is thus a major contributing factor to the conflicts along the borders of the Islamic world between Muslim and other peoples. â€œ
â€œMeanwhile Muslim population growth will be a destabilizing force for both Muslim societies and their neighbors. The large numbers of young people with secondary education will continue to power the Islamic resurgence and promote Muslim militancy, militarism, and migration. â€œ
The instability of the Middle East is a not a new issue, nevertheless, we emphasize the problem by the way we treat it. In the following countries, the amount of people age 15 â€“24 will represent 20 % or more of the total population somewhere between 2000 â€“ 2020: Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Sudan, Kyrgyztan, Malaysia, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Jordan, Iraq, Oman, Libya, Afghanistan. (Source UN). Most of these countries are in the middle east, as was mentioned on other posts, these countries will be quite liberal, and with the way USA is getting involved in the region, the resentment against them will grow stronger.
The cost of the war is said to be 70 Billion dollars. It is an idealistic approach, I agree, but this money could have been better used to cool down the region rather than heat it up.
A last quote from Samuel P. Huntington: â€œ In the coming era, in short, the avoidance of major intercivilizational wars requires core states to refrain from intervening in conflicts in other civilizations. This is a truth which some states, particularly the United States, will undoubtedly find difficult to accept.â€