WWI, the Middle East Map, and Orientalism
This paper examines two interconnected dimensions of Western engagement with the Middle East: the geopolitical restructuring that followed World War I and the ideological framework of Orientalism. It traces how the collapse of the Ottoman Empire enabled Britain and France to redraw regional boundaries through agreements such as the Sykes-Picot accord and the Balfour Declaration, creating the modern states of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and the contested territory of Palestine. The paper then draws on Edward Said's concept of Orientalism to analyze how Western ethnocentrism informed these interventions, using Charlotte Brontë's Jane Eyre as a literary illustration of how the East was depicted as exotic, irrational, and in need of Western salvation.
- The Ottoman Empire and the Aftermath of World War I: Ottoman collapse and British wartime alliances
- Redrawing the Map: Sykes-Picot, the Balfour Declaration, and New States: New borders carve up former Ottoman territories
- Palestine, Israel, and Ongoing Territorial Disputes: Turkey's losses and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
- Edward Said and the Concept of Orientalism: Said defines Orientalism as Western ethnocentrism
- Orientalism in Literature: Jane Eyre as a Case Study: Jane Eyre illustrates exotic, irrational portrayals of the East
- Western Imperial Attitudes and Middle Eastern Self-Governance: Imperial attitudes justified British management of Arab states
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It connects geopolitical history with cultural theory, showing how military and diplomatic events are undergirded by ideological assumptions about the East.
- The use of Jane Eyre as a literary example grounds the abstract concept of Orientalism in a concrete, well-known text, making the argument accessible and persuasive.
- The paper moves logically from historical facts to theoretical framework to applied example, demonstrating a clear argumentative arc across a short word count.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper effectively applies Edward Said's theoretical framework to both historical events and literary analysis, a technique known as interdisciplinary synthesis. By reading Jane Eyre through the lens of Orientalism and then connecting that lens back to British imperial policy in the Middle East, the author shows how a single analytical concept can unify disparate bodies of evidence — a hallmark of strong undergraduate argumentation.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with historical context (the fall of the Ottoman Empire and postwar boundary-drawing), moves through the consequences for specific territories (Palestine, Turkey, Iraq), then pivots to Said's definition of Orientalism, applies it through a close reading of Jane Eyre, and concludes by linking the cultural attitude back to British imperial decision-making in the Middle East. This creates a tight thematic loop between history and ideology.
The Ottoman Empire and the Aftermath of World War I
The map of the Middle East was completely redrawn as a result of World War I, as reflected especially in the cases of Turkey, Iraq, and Palestine. The Ottoman Turks had ruled the region prior to WWI and maintained an alliance with Germany. England, always wary of a strong continental power making inroads in the Middle East, sought to undermine both German and Ottoman influence, and thus allied with the House of Saud, supporting it against the Ottoman Empire. When war broke out, the destruction of the Ottoman Empire became a primary objective for England — and it achieved that goal. At the same time, the English were indebted to Zionist Jews who sought a restoration of Palestine as a state of their own. The Balfour Declaration, issued during WWI, promised Palestine to the Jews, and as England now controlled the territory following the fall of the Ottomans, that promise was expected to be paid in full.
Redrawing the Map: Sykes-Picot, the Balfour Declaration, and New States
The House of Saud was rewarded for its support with its own region, which became Saudi Arabia. Large portions of the Ottoman Empire were carved off at the end of WWI, and the Sykes-Picot Agreement between Britain and France saw Lebanon and Syria going to France, while the areas of Jordan and Iraq went to England. Jews were given a portion of land in Palestine according to the Balfour Declaration, although the state of Israel would not be officially recognized until after World War II in 1948.
Palestine, Israel, and Ongoing Territorial Disputes
Palestinians would ultimately be pushed to the margins of Palestine as Israelis extended beyond the territory recognized as theirs by the United Nations. The Gaza Strip and the West Bank represent the main remnants of Palestinian territory. Israel barely recognizes Palestine as a state and continues to occupy the West Bank.
Turkey was able to retain some of its territories, such as Anatolia, even as Western powers sought to partition the Middle East. However, because the Ottoman Empire had been multiethnic, what remained was a collection of ethnic groups clumped together without the unifying framework of Ottoman rule or broader Arab consent. The Ottoman Empire had stretched down to the Arabian Sea prior to WWI; in its aftermath, Turkey's southern portions were entirely stripped away. Iraq was born as a new state stretching down the rivers to the Persian Gulf. Syria was situated between Iraq and Turkey, with Palestine to its south.
Turkey was left with no access to the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, or the Arabian Sea — only the Black Sea and the Mediterranean remained as its coastlines. This severely restricted Turkey's importance in terms of Middle Eastern trade routes and limited its geopolitical influence within a newly partitioned Middle East.
Edward Said and the Concept of Orientalism
Orientalism, as described by Edward Said, was in his view a biased tradition through which Westerners viewed the Eastern world as exotic and foreign. Said argued that Orientalism was an expression of Western ethnocentrism — the act of viewing a foreign land not through the lens of its own culture, but exclusively through Western eyes, and judging that land and its people from the standpoint of Western imperialism. This attitude was prevalent in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and contributed to a condescending and often mistaken notion of what life was like for people in the Middle East.
References
Anderson, L. (2018). The state and its competitors. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 50(2), 317–322.
Clark, J. (n.d.). Actors, public opinion, and participation.
Gaiser, A. R. (2017). A narrative identity approach to Islamic sectarianism.
Johnson, N., & Koyama, M. (2019). The state, toleration, and religious freedom. In Advances in the Economics of Religion (pp. 377–403). Palgrave Macmillan.
Lust, E. (2018). Layered authority and social institutions: Reconsidering state-centric theory and development policy. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 50(2), 333.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.