Why Did Western European Tribes Coalesce Faster Than Those in the Middle East and Africa?

Western Europe’s geographical configuration played a significant role in the rapid coalescence of its tribes into states. In contrast, tribes in Africa and the Middle East still struggle with fragmented political structures and ongoing conflicts. This article explores the reasons behind these differences.

Geographical Factors

Western Europe is smaller and more geographically constricted than Africa. It lacks extensive deserts and is more integrated, less isolated compared to some regions in the Middle East and Africa. This geographical configuration facilitated the assimilation of tribes rather than their voluntary integration.

The term 'assimilation' is used here to describe a more violent process where tribes were often conquered, their men massacred, and their women seized. The ultimate goal was to create states capable of protecting the interests of their ruling elites. This process was inherently violent and led to the formation of European states.

Myth of African 'Tribes'

The idea of Africa being a conglomeration of tribes is often exaggerated. Tribes, defined as groups collectively descended from a common ancestor, are not the primary social grouping in most of Africa today. Instead, many groups are identified by shared languages and are studied by anthropologists due to their ethnic diversity.

My tribe, for instance, is around 30 million strong, while a neighboring ethnic group is 80 million. The famous Zulu of South Africa number close to 11 million. These are nation-state numbers rather than traditional tribal groups.

The Middle East and Centralization

The Middle East witnessed the coalescence of tribes into centralized states, particularly through the rise of empires like the Achaemenids. However, these states were eventually subsumed under the identity of the various empires, and more deeply so under the influence of Islam. Geographically remote areas like Afghanistan remained less centralized.

Historically, the 'problems' in the Middle East stemmed from resource control issues and more recently from religious disputes and foreign interventions. Today, these 'tribal' issues are more pronounced due to the political nature of these interests.

Political Interest Groups

The concept of tribes in the modern context is better understood as 'political interest groups.' These groups exist around the world and are characterized by cultural distinctiveness and interests that may conflict with national progress.

Examples of such political interest groups include the working class, suburban soccer moms, the Hispanic vote, and the Kikuyu. These groups or interests can lead to violence when a state is unable to repress them.

State Weakness and Violent Political Groups

The difference in violence among these interest groups is influenced by the strength of the state. In Africa and the Middle East, weak states are more prone to violent political actors.

Violent political groups are not unique to Africa and the Middle East. The American revolutionaries, Marxist-Leninists, the Taliban, and the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo-Zaire all represent the same broad patterns. However, they often occur in weak states where the state fails to repress other violent actors.

European Influence and State Formation

During the colonial era, Europeans adopted a divide-and-rule strategy in the Middle East and Africa. They often found local allies from particular 'tribes' and placed them in power, enforcing tribal identity as the primary source of political power.

This approach created inherently weak and unstable states. When European powers eventually pulled out, the ruling groups found themselves hated and had to continue repressing other groups to survive. This marginalized the 'in-group' and created open hostility with the 'out-group.'

The cycle of violence continues as the 'in-group' fights to the bitter end to maintain power, leading to even greater blood feuds with the 'out-group.'

Modern Context

The equivalent of this in Western society would be elites invoking tanks every time the working class demanded a settlement. The presence of easily extractable resources like oil and gold further exacerbates these conflicts, creating a cycle of governance and conflict that is difficult to break.

This analysis shows that the issues in Africa and the Middle East are part of a broader human conflict narrative, where the unity and power of a state are often maintained through the subjugation and repression of other groups.

Conclusion

The rapid coalescence of tribes into states in Western Europe contrasts with the ongoing struggles in Africa and the Middle East. This difference is rooted in geographical, historical, and political factors, highlighting the complex nature of state formation and its impact on social and political structures.