As with other regions, the wars between neighbouring(ish) countries subside with cultural & economic development - if the countries (ever) get to that point (cross several big thresholds). And we don’t even have enough data to verify if this is even actually true.
But like Europe, constant warring for millennia up until 19th century, then sure, two really big wars, but you could already see how culture & economy of the masses shifted & favoured peace over war (“even with the stinking neighbours who we are racist towards”), it became harder to entice wars and/or to convince people we need a war with a neighbour.
I feel like this sort of rule of majority (in practice) & low scarcity is the natural equilibrium where huge efforts for maintaining peace aren’t required.
(Even both WW were because of this equilibrium shifted massively into huge inequalities.)
African countries (so lower industrial development & big inequalities even on small scales bcs scarcity for basics, like food & life opportunities, exaggerates those) see constant proper wars (1 on 1 skirmishes between two countries or even regions), but since mass starvation became a thing of the past, so did the fighting become less intense.
(Africa is huge tho, generalisations like this aren’t representative of actual issues.)
With that I think Middle East would definitely be a much more peaceful place without massive colonialist fuckery over the centuries, or at least without Russia & USA (which covers establishing Israel). Longer lasting stable culture & increasing trade dependency & prosperity + no foreigners financing radical terrorist groups (which comparatively quickly become the dominant power by sheer asset value), yes, I think it would be a much better place & wars a lot shorter.
Now, imagine that Middle East but if the world was already off of fossil fuels for the last century (so less inequality between countries).
Maybe a great (and accessible) active cultural hub between Europe & India?
I feel like without oil the middle East would be like northern Africa. No real natural resources to kickstart an economy leading to seemingly perpetual poverty.
Africa already had significant ancient civilisations before, the last century or so (when even advanced countries finally mostly ditch what we would see as poverty, like England) it was perpetually fubared by European nations, like literal atrocities we still don’t talk about.
Also Africa is very rich in resources. After all, that’s why every advanced nation with two extra cents invaded & pillaged it.
Northern African countries are among the most developed on the continent, what are you talking about?
Also Algeria had to fight a century and the last two decades of it in a genocidal war waged against it by the french colonial empire that did the same settler colonial shit Israel is doing now.
As with other regions, the wars between neighbouring(ish) countries subside with cultural & economic development - if the countries (ever) get to that point (cross several big thresholds). And we don’t even have enough data to verify if this is even actually true.
But like Europe, constant warring for millennia up until 19th century, then sure, two really big wars, but you could already see how culture & economy of the masses shifted & favoured peace over war (“even with the stinking neighbours who we are racist towards”), it became harder to entice wars and/or to convince people we need a war with a neighbour.
I feel like this sort of rule of majority (in practice) & low scarcity is the natural equilibrium where huge efforts for maintaining peace aren’t required.
(Even both WW were because of this equilibrium shifted massively into huge inequalities.)
African countries (so lower industrial development & big inequalities even on small scales bcs scarcity for basics, like food & life opportunities, exaggerates those) see constant proper wars (1 on 1 skirmishes between two countries or even regions), but since mass starvation became a thing of the past, so did the fighting become less intense.
(Africa is huge tho, generalisations like this aren’t representative of actual issues.)
With that I think Middle East would definitely be a much more peaceful place without massive colonialist fuckery over the centuries, or at least without Russia & USA (which covers establishing Israel). Longer lasting stable culture & increasing trade dependency & prosperity + no foreigners financing radical terrorist groups (which comparatively quickly become the dominant power by sheer asset value), yes, I think it would be a much better place & wars a lot shorter.
Now, imagine that Middle East but if the world was already off of fossil fuels for the last century (so less inequality between countries).
Maybe a great (and accessible) active cultural hub between Europe & India?
I feel like without oil the middle East would be like northern Africa. No real natural resources to kickstart an economy leading to seemingly perpetual poverty.
Africa already had significant ancient civilisations before, the last century or so (when even advanced countries finally mostly ditch what we would see as poverty, like England) it was perpetually fubared by European nations, like literal atrocities we still don’t talk about.
Also Africa is very rich in resources. After all, that’s why every advanced nation with two extra cents invaded & pillaged it.
Northern African countries are among the most developed on the continent, what are you talking about?
Also Algeria had to fight a century and the last two decades of it in a genocidal war waged against it by the french colonial empire that did the same settler colonial shit Israel is doing now.