The Loom of Time

In his latest publication, Robert Kaplan focuses on the Greater Middle East. Despite previously implying that this region was overly scrutinised, Kaplan now urges readers to take its potential and challenges seriously. He broadly defines the Greater Middle East, encompassing territories from North Africa and the Sahel states to the Indian subcontinent. Interestingly, he criticises the American withdrawal from the area, arguing that it has encouraged other global actors like China, Turkey, Russia, and Iran. This seeming contradiction from his earlier works underscores Kaplan's tendency to overlook inconsistencies in his arguments.

The book, spanning nearly 350 pages, opens with a map and a prologue examining China's post-imperial trajectory. Kaplan then explores the significance of time and geography in history before adopting a regional perspective on the Greater Middle East's past. He covers various topics, including Greece and Turkey, the Nile River region, the Arabian desert, the fertile crescent, Safavid Iran, and Afghanistan. The concluding epilogue warns against underestimating the potential for further deterioration in the region. His core argument is that some parts of the world are anarchical by nature, and failed attempts at democracy incline these regions towards anarchy. In some measure, moderate tyranny may be better than anarchic chaos.

He argues that Turkey is a case of a missed opportunity as it was shunned by Europe and led into the arms of Islamists. Kaplan laments Egypt's stifling governance, arguing that historically, Egypt has always been an authoritarian state. On Ethiopia, he laments the need for a unifier. Kaplan discusses the political origins of the 'Fertile Crescent' and argues that statehood and boundaries are artificial constructs that have not furthered the cohesion of these states. He spends time cataloguing Safavid Iran's achievements and Afghanistan's struggles. Kaplan closes the book with a philosophical warning of the failure of imagination.

As an author, it's apparent that Kaplan provides impressionistic portrayals of the world rather than presenting a structured worldview. These portrayals are tailored to mirror the prevailing needs and concerns of the era, perhaps driven by a strong desire for acknowledgement as an authority on the region. While some may perceive this inclination as pathological, it doesn't necessarily diminish the value of his book. He also appears driven by a desire for recognition among peers and readers, often seeking validation from mainstream media. Despite these inclinations, the book offers value as a journalistic narrative of Kaplan's experiences in the Middle East. While his biases, particularly against Iraq in the time of Saddam, shape his perspective, there remains a thread of consistency with his previous works, emphasising the importance of historical geography and his tendency to support imperial structures for maintaining order.

While one can criticise Kaplan's lack of internal coherence, the book presents insights into the region and challenges prevailing narratives by advocating for the positive aspects of empires. Kaplan also seems to have become his nemesis as the travelogue dimension of his authorship schema is heavily weighed down by the excessive quoting of scholars. Many of the chapters are disproportionately peppered with ideas and the thoughts of Edward Gibbon, Arnold Toynbee, Edward Said, Bernard Lewis, Clifford Geertz, Freda Stark, and T.E. Lawrence.

Kaplan states, "The greater the disorder, the more extreme the order that follows it". While this appears to be an excellent geopolitical bumper sticker, if this were true, there isn't much evidence around. The book retains its merit if approached as a relaxed, journalistic narrative of Kaplan's experiences in the Middle East. Approaching the book with a light-hearted perspective and seeing it as a personal journey through the Greater Middle East can enhance its appeal. Overall, a worthy read for its distinctive style and wide-ranging substance.

My Rating 4/5