REGIONS: DISTINCT OR FOREVER INTERTWINED?

Nations around the world are very much interconnected with one another as without collaboration, these would be isolated regions of the world. With the world market, territorial disputes, and even political corruption, it is safe to say that the regions of the world may be different, but are not altogether distinct from one another.

South Asia and the Middle Easts’ histories are mirrored in much of the conflict between the two, but this doesn't mean that these two regions don't have differences. In South Asia, Pakistan and India have been in conflict since the Partition in 1947. One territorial dispute that has been plaguing both the countries since 1971 is the territorial disputes of Kashmir. In the Middle East, we see this reflected in the Israeli-Palestenian conflict. In 1948, Israel was established and the Middle East became its home. They did not take into account that building Israel on top of a group of people would leave the Middle East in disarray. Not only for the constant conflict between the two peoples, but also the resentment that many of the people in the Middle East have for the US and the UK for imposing their Western ideals on them. “As is the case with the Middle East and the Israel-Arab and Israel Palestinian disputes, it is possible to speak of the region’s modern history…Kashmir was at the center of many of these.” (The World 104). When talking about American intervention we see a divide between these two regions. In the Middle East, while many of its people do not like the US, Saudi Arabia and many of the Middle Eastern countries are given aid or intervened on behalf of the US. From aid towards the monarchy of Saudi Arabia to the war in Iraq, the Middle East has always had influences from the US. Now that's not to say the US hasn’t touched South Asia (the Afghanistan-Soviet War in 1997), but countries like India and Pakistan have tried to maintain this “strategic neutrality”. They have to toe the line between not having aid from the US and maintaining relationships with countries in their region - such as Afghanistan.

East Asia and the Americas may have both been influenced by the singular hegemon, but the way the countries are categorized are ultimately distinct. In East Asia, the country that helped the region accelerate into wealth and economic prosperity is the US. “The contribution of the United States to this economic boom is worth pointing out...US aid to its allies following World War II was significant and helped set the conditions for future economic success.” (The World 89) While China may be trying to establish its presence in East Asia, the US gave these countries access to the world market and this utilization gained them the traction for this economic boost. Turning towards the West, the US has used its influence to establish its power over the Americas. “The United States with a GDP just over $20 trillion…has the world’s largest economy and is the dominant country in the Americas…[they] possess power and influence on a different scale from the other countries in the region.” (The World 143) While the US may not intervene in many of the countries in this region, it is to their advantage to keep countries like Venezuela or Colombia in internal conflict so they can be the “hegemon” of the Americas without a competing force. In the Americas, almost every country but the US faces internal conflict and is overall much poorer than the US. To contrast this in East Asia, as these countries' economies accelerated, the term Asian Tigers was coined as Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan have grown tremendously in wealth and focus more on border disputes than internal conflict.

Africa’s history has been connected with Europe ever since the colonization in the 1880s and probably centuries before through the practice of slave labor. The conflict that has evolved in Africa stemmed from their relationship with Europe and the internal conflicts they face. As Europe drew the lines of African countries without considering the history of African culture and religious groups, it created many border disputes between different countries. Africa has tried to create unity amongst the countries but has more or less failed to do so. “The Organization of African Unity, was created in 1963 in the immediate aftermath of decolonization but accomplished little…on paper the AU appears to be an improvement…lacks necessary resources” (The World 141). While Africa may be trying to foster unity in the region as a whole, it is nearly impossible to balance that while being wary of external countries (such as the US and China), facing corrupt governments, and having millions in poverty. On the other hand, Europe seems to be taking a turn for the better, economically speaking. “European governments have been grappling with what degree of integration is desirable…EU market…ensured the free movement of goods, services, and people across national lines.” (The World 74). Although there have been some border wars, such as the war in Ukraine and Russia, it is not nearly as frequent as Africa. Coming off of the two wars that were caused by internal conflict, Europe seems to be wary of escalating to full fledged conflicts and prefer settled things through pacts and treaties; Africa continues to be pillages by neocolonizers for its resources through one-sided agreements (Belt and Road Initiative).

The history of these 6 regions have always been threaded together. From the economic dependence between the US and China to the colonization of the Middle East, Africa, and Asia by European countries, these regions would not have established their prosperity without this interdependence. They may be different in cultures, races, and their history of coming into power, but it would be ignorant to say that the regions did it in isolation “ when it comes to anything and everything”.