By Barry Rubin
Good news from the Middle East is that rarest of all things. Solutions (however imperfect or even temporary) to conflicts there are equally rare. That’s why the creation of a new country, South Sudan, is so significant coming after years of strife between the northern and southern parts of that country due largely to their religious and racial differences. This development also leads to an interesting question: will south Sudan be a purely African-oriented state or will it play some part in the Middle East?
Note that most of the population of south Sudan is Christian. The Muslim north decided to get rid of the region so that it could pursue its Islamist ambitions more easily and focus on repressing tribes (also Muslim) in the west.
None of the news reports on south Sudan, however, pointed out the earthshaking aspect of its creation. After all, this is a state that has come into existence because it is Christian, a sort of parallel to Israel. It is too poor, remote, and non-Arab for Islamists and Arab nationalists elsewhere to care about and they are preoccupied with other things right now.
Yet to the north, in Egypt, Christians are facing growing persecution. Will the rest of the Middle East ignore south Sudan or will it become a target in future for jihad and hatred, as an illegitimate entity allegedly created by Western imperialism that must be destroyed?
Another interesting question is whether Christians elsewhere will show any interest in the new country and try to help it survive and prosper. In political terms, it seems that Western Christians spend much of their time either supporting or bashing Israel. The beleaguered Christians of Egypt, the Gaza Strip, Iraq, Lebanon, Sudan, and Pakistan are ignored. Now that there’s what is in effect a state created as a safe haven for Christians will that change any attitudes?
Finally, the Obama Administration probably deserves a large measure of credit for the Sudan solution. It cozied up to the dictatorship but in this case, in contrast to other situations, Obama actually achieved some positive result.
By the way, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is totally against the two-state solution in Sudan, greeting the occasion with a particularly antisemitic, anti-American cartoon. Back in 2009, when the Sudanese regime was committing mass murder–in real life, not like the false accusations made against Israel–PA leader Mahmoud Abbas urged all Arabs and Muslims to give complete support to the Khartoum government.
But the PA isn’t at all being inconsistent since basically it is also against a two-state solution of the Israel-Palestinian issue as well.
Of course the PA is against a two state solution – in every case they are for a one state “solution”, one state that is Arab and Muslim.
As for a Christian state being like a Jewish state, should I mention again that Jewish, or rather Hebrew, was a nationality before it became also a religion, the religion of the Hebrew nation? In this sense a Christian state isn’t like a Jewish state, a Christian state isn’t a nation state because the concept of Christian has no national or ethnic components. Christians don’t have a national language like Hebrew. A Christian state also isn’t unique since there are dozens of majority Christian states. Of course, each Christian state is unique for other reasons. South Sudan is unique for its ethnic and cultural makeup, and is now free to pursue its own cultural character without the threat of a dominant Arab culture that tends to impose itself and replace the original identities wherever Arabs invaded and conquered. It also isn’t all Christian. Followers of the indigenous animist religions might even be a majority.
However, the point is that it’s quite difficult being a non-Muslim where Muslims are dominant. Pagans are even worse off than the “people of the book” (Christians and Jews). Therefore other religions having their own states is the best solution. They might face hostilities since according to Islamic law every land Muslims conquered by force belongs to all Muslim generations until Judgement Day, but it’s better to face hostilities being free and armed in your own state than being a defenseless minority with limited political rights under Islamic rule.
As for support from other Christians, my guess is that they’ll get it mostly from the “usual suspects”, i.e. those who also support Israel, and other supporters will be few. Most of the rest won’t care enough just as they don’t care about other suffering Christians. They want to prove their “impartiality” by caring for Muslims, but not for any of their victims, be they Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, animist, or Jews.
Congratulations and good luck, Republic of South Sudan! Hope you and us Israelis can be friends. God knows how much friends are needed in this neighborhood.
>>>>>As for a Christian state being like a Jewish state, should I mention again that Jewish, or rather Hebrew, was a nationality before it became also a religion, the religion of the Hebrew nation?
You are correct, of course, but in this particular case “Christian” is apt since they declare themselves as Christians as part of their identity, to distinguish themselves from Muslims around them.
The Wall Street Journal recently published a fascinating piece about the mess called the India-Pakistan two-state solution:
“Why My Father Hated India”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304911104576445862242908294.html?mod=WSJ_hp_us_mostpop_read#articleTabs%3Darticle
How long before they discover a valuable resource such as oil, and a neighbor wants to swallow them up?