Romanians And Romanian Culture History Essay

Romanians And Romanian Culture History Essay In the name of the Romanians is reflected the reminiscence of their ethnic origins which are connected with the period when their country was part of the Roman Empire. Although the Romanians speak a language whose basis is spoken Latin, Romanian culture is permeated with traits that stem from periods predating the presence of Romans. Romanian culture owes much to the legacy of the earliest European civilization, the Danube civilization of the sixth and fifth millennia B.C.E. Scientists have often wondered how the Romanians could have maintained their Romance language through long periods of foreign domination and external influence. Similarly, one can wonder how certain cultural patterns of much older periods persisted to form an organic whole with more recent innovations, of what is known as Romanian culture. Most of the 26 million Romanians live in two states with a predominantly Romanian-speaking population. The great majority (Romà ¢nii) inhabit Romania (20.5 million) where they account for 90 per cent of the population. Among the minorities in Romania are (>) Roma (Gypsies), (>) Hungarians, (>) Germans, (>) Tatars and other ethnic groups. Neighboring Moldova is the home country of some 2.8 million speakers of Romanian who call themselves Moldovenii (Moldavians) and these make up 76 per cent of the population. Other ethnic groups living in Moldova are (>) Ukrainians, (>) Russians, (>) Gagauz and others. Romanian minorities are scattered outside the two states with concentrated Romanian population, in Ukraine (0.35 million), Serbia (0.25 million), Greece (0.25 million), Russia (0.18 million), Hungary (0.1 million), Bulgaria. There is a populous Romanian minority in Israel (0.25 million). Since the tenth century the development of the various groups of ethnic Romanians follows different trajectories. Four regional groups with distinct cultural patterns and local varieties of Romanian language can be discerned: 1)Daco-Romanians (the Romanian population north of the Danube, in Romania, Moldova, Ukraine); 2) Aromunians or Macedo-Romanians (in Macedonia, Bulgaria, Greece, Serbia and in the historical region of Dobruja, south of the Danube); 3) Megleno-Romanians (Romanian minorities in the South of Bulgaria and in the Northeast of Greece; these groups originated, in a secondary ethnic process, from Aromunian populations); and 4) Istro-Romanians (Vlachs of Istria; Romanian minority on the Istria peninsula in Croatia). Romania is among the areas in Europe where the Neolithic inhabitants adopted agriculture at an early date. The beginnings of plant cultivation and animal husbandry go back to the sixth millennium B.C.E. The western region of Romania, Transylvania, is the cradle of metal-working. There, copper artifacts were worked hundreds of years earlier than in western Asia or Mesopotamia. Early evidence for the tradition of metallurgy in Transylvania dates to around 5500 B.C.E. The art of the ancient Danubians was prolific and varified in style and ornamentation. What strikes the eye in the archaeological record is the multitude of figurines, most of them female, that were found in sanctuaries, together with altars, and in areas of the households reserved for domestic rituals. The aesthetic impression of those figurines has not lost any of its attraction throughout the ages and their timeless aesthetic appeal inspired artists in later periods. In the early twentieth century, the Neolithic spirit was revitalized in the works of modern art. The Romanian-born Constantin Brancusi is among the best-known representatives of this trend. The civilization of Old Europe was overformed by the culture of the Indo-European nomads who migrated westward out of the Russian steppe and established themselves in the areas of the agriculturalists. Old European traditions, though, continued albeit in a fragmentary way. The legacy of the ancient Danubians was not limited to the technology of metal-working or to forms of the visual arts. Old European traditions also persist in certain architectural forms and in the narrative themes of Romanian folklore. And just as certain features of prehistoric shrines eventually evolved into basic parts of Christian churches (), much of what we know as mythology derived, more or less directly, from the ritual-cultural life of prehistoric peasants (Poruciuc 2010: xiv). Those who transmitted the Old European traditions into later periods were the Dacians, themselves descendants of the Indo-European tribes that came to populate Southeast Europe in the fourth and third millennia B.C.E. At the time when the Romans conquered the Balkans and were organizing administration in the provinces of Southeast Europe the Dacians were the strongest military power north of the Danube. At intervals the Dacians and Romans were in alliance but the interests of the indigenous population and the Roman colonizers differed fundamentally so that, eventually, military confrontation was unavoidable. In a long and hard war the Romans subdued the Dacians under their king Decebalus and established their power in Dacian lands, in 106 C.E. The Roman province was named after the people that inhabited the region, Dacia. New villages and towns were founded by the Romans, among them the administrative and economic center of Dacia. That was Sarmizegetuza in Transylvania, named after the former capital of the Dacian kingdom, located at some distance from the Roman town. Living-conditions in Dacia favored acculturation and assimilation, and within a few generations the majority of Dacians had experie nced a shift to Roman lifeways, including a shift from Dacian to spoken Latin. During the period of Roman rule groups of Dacians had been forcefully relocated by Roman authorities to areas south of the Danube, following rebellions of local Dacian tribes against Roman rule. Those Dacians who continued to live south of the Danube assimilated completely to Roman lifeways. During the tenth and eleventh centuries their descendants moved back into the region from where their ancestors had come. The kind of Latin spoken by the Dacians was different from the Latin in Italy or in the western provinces of the Roman Empire, and it absorbed words of the Dacian language before that was no longer spoken and vanished altogether. The development of the Latin speech as used by the new Romans deviated further when Dacia was abandoned by the Roman administration and the military in 271 C.E. and contacts with the Roman world were cut off. The Latin of Roman times gradually changed to become a local Romance language. Those who continued to speak it were ordinary people. This means that Romanian ethnicity finds its roots in the medieval communities of illiterate peasants and shepherds. Written Latin, the language of civilization and of the church in western Europe, played no role in early Romanian society. The medieval Romanian language lacked the medium that roofed local Romance dialects in the West and provided a source for literacy. The Romanian language and the Christian religion have been the major markers of Romanian identity since the Middle Ages. The development of the Romanian speech community, though, was quite uneven in the regions with Romanian populations. Transylvania has been a contact zone since antiquity. After the Romans had abandoned Dacia this region was settled by Germanic peoples, by Gepids (allies of the Huns) and Visigoths, later by Slavic tribes and Hungarian populations. German settlers arrived in the area in the twelfth century, leaving their imprint on culture and political history. Slavic, Hungarian and German influence shaped the interaction with local Romanians whose communities grew in size to eventually become the most populous of the ethnic groups in Transylvania. Political sovereignty was achieved, in the course of the fourteenth century, in other regions with Romanian population, in Moldavia and in Wallachia. The ruler of Wallachia, Mircea the Great (d. 1418), was aware of the po litical trend of his period which saw the rise to power of the Ottoman Turks and he advised his successor to come to terms with the Turks. Stephan the Great (d. 1504) of Moldavia tried to negotiate political relations with the powerful newcomers but, in the end, all of Wallachia and Moldavia were forcefully integrated into the Ottoman colonial territories of Southeast Europe. The region with German settlements in Transylvania (called in German Siebenbà ¼rgen the region with the seven fortified towns) retained some kind of autonomy, albeit under Ottoman supremacy. From 1709 until the 1820s, Romania was ruled by Greek governors (Phanariots) in Turkish services. This period is remembered by Romanians as one of oppression and exploitation. Gradually, Ottoman hegemony in Southeast Europe weakened in the wars with Russia that extended its territory at the cost of the Turks. In 1812, Russia occupied the eastern part of Moldavia, Bessarabia. The development of the Romanian communities in that part was different from the rest of Romania. Russia encouraged anti-Ottoman movements among the Romanians in Wallachia and western Moldavia and, in 1858, these two regions were united under a Russian-supported hospodar, Cuza. The year 1861 saw the proclamation of a Romanian state. The first king to rule the country was Carol I (reigned 1866 1914), a German-born prince of the House of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen. Romanias infrastructure (i.e. railway system, army, school system, exploration of oil fields) was mostly developed according to the model of contemporary Prussia and later the German Empire. For several decades after World War I that ended in 1918, the countrys territory included Transylvania and eastern Moldavia and was reminiscent of a Greater Romania. As a result of World War II that ended for the Romanians in 1944 eastern Moldavia had to be ceded to the Soviet Union but Transylvania remained within the borders of Romania. Under the communist regime of Ceausescu (d. 1989), the Hungarian and German minorities of Transylvania became victims of a forceful Romanization campaign and many left Romania as emigrants. The demise of communism in Romania and the shift to a parliamentary democracy in 1989 did not change the high-handed attitude of Romanian governments toward minorities. Neither Hungarian nor German are acknowledged as official languages and Romanian, as state language, is the only official medium in administration and education throughout the country. Romanian is a Romance language and forms, with Italian, the eastern group. Its character as a Romance language is apparent in the grammar although less than half of the vocabulary has been preserved from spoken Latin. Nevertheless, these words of Latin origin are among the lexical elements of high frequency and they dominate everyday Romanian. Some 60 per cent of the Romanian lexicon are of Slavic, Germanic, Hungarian and other origin, reflecting the manifold contacts of Romanian with other languages in Southeast Europe throughout one and a half thousand years. Romanian remained unwritten until the sixteenth century. The earliest documents of written Romanian are a letter dating to 1521 (containing some 200 words) and a Lutheran catechism that was printed in Sibiu (the town in Transylvania that was founded by Germans under the name of Hermannstadt), in 1544. During its history, Romania has been written in two scripts. For about three hundred years the Cyrillic script predominated when writing Romanian. Although the Latin alphabet was already used in Transylvania in the late sixteenth century, it competed with Cyrillic well into the nineteenth century. With the rise of Romanian national awakening, the Roman heritage and the Latin script became celebrated. An orthographic system with Latin letters was adopted in Wallachia, in 1860, and in Moldavia, in 1863. The competition between the Latin and the Cyrillic tradition of writing Romanian was renewed in the twentieth century and, this time, it was politically motivated. Some groups of the Romanian-speaking population that lived east of the river Dniestr had remained on Soviet-Russian territory while eastern Moldavia had been united with Romania in 1918. Soviet language planners created a written standard, with Cyrillic orthography, for the Soviet Moldavians, as an ideological counterweight to language use in neighboring bourgeois Romania. When Moldavia was annexed to the Soviet Union in 1940 (and factually in 1944), the Moldavian standard language was used in all of Soviet Moldavia. The revised Cyrillic orthography for Romanian in Moldavia was in use until 1989 when the parliament in Chisinau, the capital of Moldavia, decided to shift to the Latin script and write according to the norms of Romanian in Romania. This regulation means that Romanians and Moldavians use the same standard langu age and write with Latin letters. The 1990s saw the division of the Romanian-speaking population in two independent states (i.e. Romania and Moldova) where they form the majority. Recent development in the two countries has followed very different trajectories. Romania joined the democratic integration movement of Europe and has been a member state of the European Union since 2007. Moldova has remained outside this process because of its weak economy, and it is in this country that ideas about communism still play a vital role in election campaigns. Harald Haarmann Further Reading Fernà ¡ndez-Armesto, Felipe (ed.). The Times Guide to the Peoples of Europe. London: Times Books, 1994 (Romanians: pp. 261-267). Goebl, Hans et al. (eds.). Contact Linguistics, vol. 2. New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1997 (Romania: pp. 1458-1486, Moldavia: pp. 1933-1941). Haarmann, Harald. Balkanic Linguistics, vol. 1: Areal Linguistics and Lexicostatistics of the Balkanic Latin Vocabulary (in German). Tà ¼bingen: Gunter Narr, 1978. Pernicka, Ernst and David W. Anthony. The Invention of Copper Metallurgy and the Copper Age of Old Europe. In The Lost World of Old Europe. The Danube Valley, 5000-3500 BC, ed. David W. Anthony, 162-177. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009. Poruciuc, Adrian. Prehistoric Roots of Romanian and Southeast European Traditions. Sebastopol, CA: Institute of Archaeomythology, 2010. Treptow, K.W. A History of Romania. Iasi, 1999.

Highschool Dropouts

Vanessa Siegning Professor Dutterer EGL 1010 March 19, 2013 High School Dropouts Going to school has always been seen as one of the most important occupations in our life. All categories of ages can go to school; kids, young people and even adults. School is defined as a place where people get an education. By going to school, people can acquire knowledge and skill that are not only important for the society but also for them. However, getting out of the educative system has become a big phenonem nowadays. It mostly affects students from high school. They usually get out of school without earning at least a High School Diploma.Isn’t too early for those young students to drop out of school? The answer is that sometimes, they have problems that make them get out of school. While dropping out of high school is due to problems such as the financial situation, the family circumstance faced by students, and their difficulty to get adapted to the school system, it also produces effec ts such as the limited access to jobs, the exposition to juvenile delinquency and the lack of education. The major cause that motivates students to get out of high school is the financial situation of their parents.Not all students come from a rich family. Because of a lack of money, some parents cannot afford their children’s need such as school supplies, transportation or nutrition. Regularly, they just have a low rate job or maybe they are on the status of unemployment. It becomes impossible to take care of their family and even themselves. Poverty is a better word to describe their financial situation. It’s automatically clear that a student who lives in such conditions will drop out of school and will try to find a job in order to get some money.Additionally, some students from high school have a lot of difficulties to get adapted to the school system. To provide a better education, schools are always established on a strict system that imposes students to follow some rules in order to get satisfactory results. For example, the school system requires students to be present every day of class and on time, to do their homework and to study or to make research. However, some students find that difficult and unattractive. They do not feel motivated or interested for school. As a result, they fail in class.As long as they get bad grades in class, they always keep in mind that they are wasting their time by going to school. Therefore, the only possibility available for them now is to drop out of school. Another point that causes young students to get out of school is their family circumstance. The majority of high school students are adolescents. We all know that adolescents are sensible, so they are most of the time affected by their family condition. In a family where parents are always fighting or arguing, it gets obvious that students won’t concentrate in their education.Generally, parents who are in trouble in their couple cannot focus anymore on their children’s education. This could lead students to fail in class, and then drop out of school. The same thing applies on a family where parents are separated or divorced. It cannot be easy for single parents to take care of their children; furthermore, to pay attention to their school work. This means children are neglected as well as their education. It‘s certain that when students get out of high school, they have significant causes, but this situation of course generate many effects.First of all, non-graduated high school students have limited access to jobs opportunities. Even when they get one, it’s a low pay job. Knowledge, skill and ability are the first qualities that attract all employers. To stabilize or to develop their society, employers need help from qualified people. The better way to get knowledge is to go to school. The more someone goes to school, the more he earns knowledge. Secondly, when adolescents drop out of high school, t hey are likely exposed to juvenile delinquency. They don’t go to school anymore, so they have enough free time.Habitually, they have nothing to do, and they spend their time by staying in the street with friends. During this period, they might get involved into bad things such as crime, violence and vandalism. Actually, they become a danger for the society. Some of them run away from their family and turn to become homeless. Finally, students who drop out of high school are not educated enough. When people stop going to school early, they don’t have a possibility to be educated enough. They don’t behave correctly and they are not instructed.They cannot debate correctly like people who go to school. Sometimes, those people cannot even speak and write well. For example, it’s impossible for an illiterate person to give some pertinent ideas on a subject concerning the development of a country. They don’t have an ability to think enough. In conclusion, high school dropouts are due to many causes such as the financial situation, the family circumstance and the difficulty of students to get adapted to the school system; however, that situation produces long term effects.While some students stop going to school because of a lack of money and because of their family condition, some of them are just lazy. They don’t want to provide any efforts. As consequences, they have a limited access to jobs, they are exposed to the juvenile delinquency and they are not educated enough. To avoid students of dropping out of school, the government can help parents by providing school supplies to their children.

History of the Middle East

CW43: The Middle East and Arab-Israeli Conflict, c1900–2001 Jewish settlement in Palestine, 1900–45 Conflict |Causes of conflict |Presence and influence of other actors and |Changing Arab-Israeli relationships |Proposed solutions | | | |international events | | | |World War One |Misperceptions |Actors: Ottoman Empire |Jewish settlements |Paris Peace Conference | |Britain and Arabs ally against the Ottoman|Unaware of the details of the Sykes-Picot |Until 1917, retention of Arab customs in |Lovers of Zion; Rishon-le-Zion; more than 40 |Arabs should have the right to national | |Empire; expectation from the Arabs that |Agreement and the Balfour Declaration; Britain’s|Palestine |Zionist settlements in Palestine by 1914; Jewish|self-determination; need for a major power| |they would get Palestine in return; |support for both them and Zionism | |population doubled between |to help them run their new country; | |Hussein-McMahon letters | |Actors: Britain |1922–29 |Britain received the mandate to look after| | |Arab disagreement with various proposals: |Balfour Declaration; given a mandate over | |Palestine, also confirmed that the terms | |Political conflict |verdict of Paris Peace Conference |Palestine by the Paris Peace Conference; helped |Reasons for migration |of the Balfour Declaration should apply to| |Emir Feisal becomes king of an Arab state |Decision to include the Balfour Declaration in |the Jews build up their military forces such as |Influence of Rothschild; Herzl and the Zionist |the new country | |consisting of Palestine, Lebanon, |the way n which Palestine was to be governed; |the Hagannah and the Irgun Zvai Leumi |Congress in 1897; Jewish National Fund | | |Transjordan and Syria; publicly opposes |Peel Report – proposed a Jewish state and an | | |Peel Report | |Zionist migration; Arab parties unite to |Arab state |Actors: King-Crane Commission |Wartime immigration |Palestine should be divided into a Jewish | |form th e Arab Higher Committee; Ben | |Concluded that the case for a Zionist presence |Jews smuggled in by ship: the Struma |state and an Arab state; Britain to keep | |Gurion’s conference at the Biltmore Hotel |Rate of settlement |should be dropped; findings ignored by Paris | |control of the area around Jerusalem | |calls for the immediate creation of a |Herbert Samuel’s influence; Jewish population |Peace Conference | | | |Jewish state in Palestine |doubled between 1922–29 | | |1939 White Paper | | | |Actors: France | |Jewish immigration to be limited to 75,000| |Civil disobedience |Extreme Zionism |King Feisal started attacking the French; French| |over the next five years; no more | |1936 general strike |Vladimir Jabotinsky, demonstration near the |removed him from Syria and Lebanon | |immigration without Arab consent | | |Mosque of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem | | | | |Arab-Israeli violence | |Actors:Herbert Samuel | |1942 Biltmore Programme | |Protest again st Samuel’s decision; 1929 |Jewish dissatisfaction |British Jew, High Commissioner of Palestine; | |Calls for the immediate creation of a | |massacre; Irgun planted bombs and shot |Anger at the 1939 White Paper in light of the |16,500 Jews to be allowed to settle in Palestine| |Jewish state in Palestine | |Arabs in response to the White Paper |Nazi threat |in 1920 | | | | | | | | | |Arab-British violence | |Events: First World War; Paris Peace Conference | | | |1937–39 rebellion | | | | | | | | | | | |Jewish-British violence | | | | | |Lehi, Abraham Stern, Lord Moyne, Irgun | | | | | |violence | | | | | | | | | | |World War Two | | | | | |30,000 Jews in Palestine joined the | | | | | |British army | | | | | The creation of the state of Israel and its impact Conflict |Causes of conflict |Presence and influence of other actors and |Changing Arab-Israeli relationships |Proposed solutions | | | |international events | | | |Irgun and Lehi |British immigration limits |Presi dent Truman |Propaganda – Ben Gurion and the Jewish Agency |UN voted in November 1947 to partition | |From 1946, the Irgun and the Lehi began a |Despite President Truman’s declaration that |Demanded that 100,000 Jews be allowed into |continued to try to smuggle Jews into Palestine |Palestine six months from that date; | |large-scale campaign of violence against |100,000 Jews should be allowed into Palestine, |Palestine at once | |Jerusalem should be an international zone | |the British, including the blowing up of |the British fixed the limit at 1500 a month. | |Political change |under UN control; Jewish and Arab states | |the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, |This was the last straw for the Lehi and the |United Nations |On 15 May 1948, the British mandate ended and |should be linked in an economic union to | |headquarters of the British government in |Irgun; Exodus Asked to take back the mandate from Britain and |the Arab and Jewish states came into being; the |help eac h other’s trade | |Palestine, which killed 91 people | |decide the future of the country; UN Special |Jews named their state Israel and formed a | | | |UNSCOP Plan |Committee on Palestine; truce arranged on |government led by David Ben Gurion | | |Death toll |Jewish state would be larger than the Arab |11 June 1948 which allowed the Israelis to | | | |212 killings in Palestine |state; vote for partition was followed by |reorganise their army and transport the Czech |Effects of the violence | | | |violent Arab protests which soon turned into |weapons they had bought earlier in the year from|Nearly a million Palestinians left or were | | |Civil War |killings and counter-killings between Jews and |Europe; second truce lasted until October 15 |forced to leave their homes; most went to Jordan| | |Operation Dalet, Deir Yassin capture of |Arabs | |and the Gaza Strip, many went to Syria and | | |Tiberias, Haifa and Jaffa; Hagganah | |Arab League |Lebanon; Arab state of Palestine ceas ed to | | |occupied most of the Arab areas of West |Purchasing of arms |Palestine turned to it for help; however, it had|exist; Palestinians became a minority people in | | |Jerusalem |Hagannah leaders went to Skoda arms firm in |only been created recently and its members were |the new state of Israel | | | |Czechoslovakia and bought a huge quantity of |divided on many issues | | |War of Liberation |armaments | |Reasons for Palestinian migration | | |The civil war of 1948 was about to turn | | |Massacre at Deir Yassin, Israeli military | | |into an international war, the first of a |Arab League assistance | |victory; Arab leaders encouraged them to leave | | |series of Arab-Israeli conflicts that has |Arab League in December 1947 declared partition | |during the conflict | | |rocked the Middle East since 1948.On 15 |illegal and gave the Palestinians 10,000 rifles;| | | | |May 1948, armies from Egypt, Lebanon, |early in 1948 it formed an Arab Liberation Army | | | | |Transjordan, Ira q and Syria entered |of 3000 volunteers to fight in partition | | | | |Palestine with the aim of helping the | | | | | |Palestinian Arabs fight the Jewish state |Formation of Ben Gurion government | | | | |of Israel which had been created that day;|Five neighbouring Arab countries sent armies to | | | | |Arab Legion of Transjordan had taken back |make war on Israel | | | |control of the Old City of Jerusalem; | | | | | |Israelis seized western Galilee; drove the| | | | | |Lebanese back north; Israel was left in | | | | | |control of 80% of the land | | | | | Reasons for, and outcomes of, Arab-Israeli conflicts to 1973 War of 1948 |War of 1956 |War of 1967 |War of 1973 | |Description: |Description: |Description: |Description: | |On 15 May 1948, armies from Egypt, Lebanon, Transjordan, |Lasted for 10 days; invasion began on |5 June 1967; Israeli initial air strike (bombed Egyptian |6 October; the Day of Atonement; Arab initial success: | |Iraq and Syria entered Palestine with the aim of helping |29 October; advanced deep into Sinai; involvement of |airfields and launched similar attacks against the other |smashed Israel’s Suez Canal defences; 80,000 Egyptians | |the Palestinian Arabs fight the Jewish state of Israel |Britain and France; Egypt refused to evacuate Suez Canal |Arab air forces); land war (drove Egyptians out of the |crossed the canal; destroyed Israeli tanks; Syria | |which had been created that day |zone and were bombed by the British and French; UN voted |Gaza strip and Sinai; defeated Jordan within two days, |advanced into the Golan Heights and drove the Israelis | | for a ceasefire; Arab countries stopped supplying Britain|capturing the Old City of Jerusalem and the ‘West Bank’; |back into Galilee; Israel fought back: US weapons sent to| |Causes: |with oil; USA refused to support the invasion; Eden |attacked the Syrian army in the Golan Heights and this |Israel; 254,000 reservists mobilised; 14 October tank | |Establishme nt of Ben Gurion government; unhappiness with |forced to agree to a ceasefire just 24 hours after the |was over by June 10); United Nations ordered a ceasefire |battle against the Egyptians; Israel crossed into the | |the UN Partition Plan; British mandate expiring; both |first British troops had landed in Egypt; UN Emergency |which the Arab nations had to accept |Suez Canal; international pressure – USSR wanted it ended| |sides rearmed |Force moved in to police the border between Egypt and | |(feared that the Egyptians would lose); USA wanted it | | |Israel |Causes: |ended (did not want to provoke the Soviets into giving | |Effects: | |- Syria became violently anti-Israel (General Jedid’s |even more weapons to Egypt and Syria); joint ceasefire | |- Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria signed armistices |Causes: |takeover, attacks by Fatah guerrillas from Syria |proposed came into force on 22 October | |with Israel but no peace treaty; many Arabs have refused|- Nasser wan ted to avenge Egypt’s defeat in the 1948 war|increased) | | |to recognise Israel and have talked about destroying it;|against Israel and to return Palestine to the Arabs; |- Land dispute – Israeli tractor ploughed up some |Causes: | |many Jews arrived in Israel from existing refugee camps |increased wealth and armed strength; his reputation in |Arab-owned land close to the border and met Syrian fire. |- Sadat replaced Nasser in 1970 and he wanted to reverse| |and communities from Eastern Europe |the Arab world increased; he aimed to unite the Arabs |Israel responded by bombing Syrian guns.Israel warned |the Arab defeat of 1967 | |- Israel’s first law in 1950 was the Law of Return; |under Egyptian leadership |that it would strike back if Syria did not stop |- Egypt was more ready – asked the USSR for assistance; | |anti-Jewish riots; in Iraq, Zionism was punishable by |- 1955 arms agreement with Czechoslovakia gave Egypt |- USSR intervention (incorrectly a rgued that Israel was |plans were made for an invasion of Sinai across the Suez| |death; Arab protest at Israeli diversion of the waters |many Soviet weapons |ready to invade Syria at short notice); King Feisal of |Canal; Syria would also attack from the Golan Heights | |of River Jordan |- Support for Algerian rebels angered France – supported|Saudi Arabia and King Hussein of Jordan promised to help| | |- Need for $65 million of international aid to cope with|Arab rebels who were fighting the French in their colony|Syria |Effects: | |new humanitarian needs; change of leadership in Arab |of Algeria |- Nasser ordered UN Emergency Force to leave Egyptian |- Israeli victory: 12,000 Arabs had been killed compared| |governments: assassination of Egyptian prime minister in|- Nationalisation of Aswan Dam angered Britain – it had |territory; UN was ordered to withdraw; barred the Gulf |to 2000 Israelis | |1948; a series of military takeovers in 1949; in 1950: |been owned lar gely by British and French shareholders; |of Aqaba to Israeli ships; military pacts (Jordan and |- Oil as a weapon: OAPEC increased the price of Arab oil| |assassination of Lebanese prime minister; murder of |Nasser did this after Britain and the USA cancelled the|Egypt formed a defence pact; eight Arab states were |until Israel withdrew from Egypt and Syria | |King Abdullah of Jordan; coup in Egypt which gave |loans they had promised |poised to attack); Moshe Dayan (appointed Minister of |- USA tried to appease the Arabs | |Colonel Nasser power; Arab leaders blamed their defeat |- Increase of Fedayeen ttacks angered Israel – |Defence) decided to use attack as a form of defence |- Britain stopped supplying Israel with weapons | |on Britain and the USA and concentrated on improving |continuance of cross-border attacks; closing of the | |- EEC expressed sympathy for the Palestinians | |their economies |entrance of the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli ships | |- Kissinger’s propo sal: disengagement of | | | | |Israeli and Egyptian forces should happen in 1974; they | | | | |should withdraw to pre-ceasefire positions; UN army | | | | |should control the gap between them; Israel should | | | | |withdraw from Sinai and in return get American aid | Reasons for, and outcomes of, Arab-Israeli conflicts to 1973 (cont) |War of 1948 |War of 1956 |War of 1967 |War of 1973 | | – Some of the new leaders hoped for a union of the Arab|Effects: |Effects: | | |countries; very little action taken on Palestinian |- Egypt’s military power reduced – 1000 casualties; |- Israel improved its strength and security – kept | | |refugees among all Arab countries, except Jordan; |Israel accepted as a permanent member of the |Sinai, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights, and doubled| | |Fedayeen established – secret guerrilla attacks on |international community |the size of the country | | |Israeli targets; each year from 1949 to 1955, some 250 |- B ritain and France humiliated – their influence in the|- Disaster for the Arabs – 15,000 men killed; 800 tanks | | |Israelis were killed or wounded in such attacks.This |Middle East declined; had to leave Egypt empty-handed; |captured or destroyed; suffering for the Palestinians – | | |prompted Israeli attacks in retaliation, including an |failed to overthrow Nasser; failed to keep the Suez |those who had been living in the West Bank and the Gaza | | |attack on the village of Qibya in Jordan in 1953 and in |Canal open; had to introduce petrol rationing |Strip were now in occupied territories and faced heavy | | |1955 the Israelis mounted a raid on the Gaza strip after|- Israel gained security against Fedayeen attacks – |restrictions on their lives | | |a series of Fedayeen attacks on their territory; Arab |destroyed their bases; UN took over Sharm el-Sheikh and |- Strength of Fatah – Turned to Fatah rather than other | | |boycott of Israeli trade â €“ Israeli ships could not use |Gaza; emergence of Palestine Liberation Organisation |Arab states – Fatah increased their weapons; Battle of | | |the Suez Canal; confiscation of cargo from Israeli |- Nasser’s reputation in the Arab world increased – |Karameh; Arafat became leader; continual fighting | | |ships which called at Arab ports; Israel was in a |pro-western governments in Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq |between Egypt and Israel; support from USSR; 1970 | | |permanent state of tension |turned against France and Britain; hopes for United Arab|ceasefire; Guerrilla warfare (PFLP, Dawson’s Field | | | |League were soon dashed hijackings), Black September Organisation assassinated | | | | |the Prime Minister of Jordan, kidnapped and later | | | | |murdered eleven Israeli athletes taking part in the | | | | |Munich Olympic Games; failed diplomatic effort – UN | | | | |Resolution 242 | |Arab nationalism in the 1980s and 1990s, and divisions in the A rab world |Divisions in the Arab world |Conflict | |President Sadat |Direct conflict between Israel and Lebanon | |Sadat’s initiative: recognised Israel’s existence; Camp David Agreement of 1978; Washington Treaty 1979; caused |26,000 Israeli troops invaded Lebanon in response to a bus hijack; PLO continued their attacks undeterred by the UN| |fury in the Arab world; President Sadat was murdered by angry Egyptian soldiers |or the Christian militia leader, Major Haddad; June 1982 – 172,000 Israeli soldiers invaded Lebanon; UN let them | | |pass; forced the PLO out of Beirut; PLO went to Algeria and Iraq. Defeat for Israel – assassination of pro-Israeli | |Lebanon |Maronite President Gemayel of Lebanon; Sabra-Chatila massacre turned public opinion in Israel against the war; | |Sunnis, Shi’ites, Druzes; Christians-Maronites, Greek Orthodox, Greek Catholics; conflict between Maronites and |Defence Minister Ariel Sharon resigned; Israel had to withdra w from Beirut; met with suicide bombs from fanatical | |SunniMuslims; refugee problem |Shi’ites | | | | |PLO in Lebanon |PLO attacks | |Muslims in Lebanese government supported the PLO whilst the Maronites condemned them; full-scale civil war between |By 1986, PLO guerrillas were back in south Lebanon and making cross-border attacks on Israel; splinter groups came | |Phalangist Militia and Tiger Militia and Shi’ite and Druze Muslims; Syria invaded Lebanon on the side of the |into being; Palestine Liberal Front hijacked a cruise ship and the Abu Nidal group hijacked an Egyptian airliner | |Christians and then killed Christians | | | |Internationalisation of conflict | |Civil war between terrorist groups in Lebanon |Terror campaign was spread in places like Britain and France; in 1986 an American soldier was killed by a terrorist| |Islamic Jihad Organisation; Hezbollah; Arab Red Knights; Black Brigades; civil war involved taking of hostages |bomb in West Berlin; US bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi | | | | |Rise of Hamas from Fatah |Political dissension within Israel | |Following on from this, Hamas and other militant organisations rose to power and shook the foundations of the |Peres – talks in Morocco and Egypt; Taba; Yitzchak Shamir – no negotiation with the Arabs over the West Bank; | |authority which Fatah under Arafat had established. However, Arafat remained in his position until a month before |Jewish settlers continued to build new settlements there; Likud talked of extreme solutions such as the nnexation | |his death in 2004 |of the occupied territories | | | | | |Intifada | | |On 9 December 1987 an Israeli army patrol shot two attackers; uprising soon followed; strikes and economic | | |boycotts; refused to work for Israeli employers; Israel’s response – ‘iron fist’ | | | | | |Arafat’s change of tactics | | |Renounced terrorism; proclamation of independent state of Palestine; soug ht to negotiate a settlement with Israel; | | |USA entered into talks with the PLO; the Oslo Accords of 1993, agreed by Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and | | |PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, granted the Palestinians the right to self-government in the Gaza Strip and the city of| | |Jericho in the West Bank, through the creation of the Palestinian Authority. The PLO had used negotiating tools to | | |get as close to their stated aims as was realistically possible, but this by no means marked the end of the | | |conflict, as the Second Intifada, with repeated suicide bombings, took place in 2000–04 | Sources |Lowe, N. Mastering Modern World History (3rd edition, Macmillan Masters, 997) | |BBC series, Cold War, written by Jeremy Isaac and Taylor Downing, published by Transworld in 1998 | |Hunter, R. E. The Six Day War (Purnell’s History of the 20th century, Vol. 6, Chapter 94, BBC, 1969) | |Kyle, K. Suez: Britain’s End of Empire in the Middle East (I. B. Taur is, 2003) | |Mandle, B. Conflict in the Promised Land (Heinemann, 1976) | |Mansfield, P. A History of the Middle East (Penguin, 2003) | |Perkins, S. J.The Arab-Israeli Conflict (Nelson Thornes, 1991) | |Regan, G. Israel and the Arabs (Cambridge University Press, 1993) | |Scott-Baumann, M. Conflict in the Middle East: Israel and the Arabs (Hodder Murray, 2007) | Processes (Part A) |Assess the impact of British intervention 1914–21 on the growth of Arab nationalism in the ensuing decade. | |Assess the impact of Britain, Egypt and Suez 1945–56 on the growth of Arab nationalism in the ensuing decade. | |Assess the impact of the Cold War 1956–73 on the growth of Arab nationalism in the ensuing decade. |Assess the impact of the United Nations and the Gulf War 1990–91 on the growth of Arab nationalism in the ensuing decade. | The role of individuals (Part A) |What was the short-term significance of David Ben Gurion? | |What was the short-term significance of C olonel Abdel Nasser? | |What was the short-term significance of Yasser Arafat? | |What was the short-term significance of Saddam Hussein? | Key events (Part A) |What was the short-term significance of the creation of the state of Israel, 1948? | |What was the short-term significance of the war of Yom Kippur, 1973? | |What was the short-term significance of the Iranian Revolution, 1979? | |What was the short-term significance of the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, 1995? | Processes (Part B) How significant was the presence of foreign powers as an influence on the nature and growth of Arab nationalism in the years 1900–2001? | |How significant was the existence of Israeli-Arab wars as an influence on the nature and growth of Arab nationalism in the years 1900–2001? | |How significant was the promotion of proposed solutions as an influence on the nature and growth of Arab nationalism in the years 1900–2001? | |How significant was Israeli migration as an influence o n the nature and growth of Arab nationalism in the years 1900–2001? | The role of individuals (Part B) |Assess the significance of the role of individuals in affecting Israeli-Arab relations in the years 1900–2001. | Key events (Part B) To what extent do you consider the Balfour Declaration to be a key turning point in the political development of the Middle East during the 20th century? | |To what extent do you consider the 1948 Civil War in Palestine to be a key turning point in the political development of the Middle East during the 20th century? | |To what extent do you consider the founding of the Palestine Liberation Organisation to be a key turning point in the political development of the Middle East during the 20th century? | |To what extent do you consider the death of President Nasser to be a key turning point in the political development of the Middle East during the 20th century? |

Havana Two Faces of the Antillean Metropolis - 1209 Words

For those who have not studied Cuba, it is simply ‘that socialist island in the Caribbean’, reducing a fascinating history to one label. The book ‘Havana: Two faces of the Antillean Metropolis’ by Scarpaci, Segre and Coyula helps to debunk this myth through the story of its capital city and its citizens proving that Havana, and by extension Cuba, is a complex, contradictory country where â€Å"history has left its handprint on every street corner† (back cover). The general theme in Cuban studies is that Cuba is a country of many contradictions and dichotomies; the book perpetuates this idea through its exploration of Havana emphasizing dichotomies such as those between the Spanish and American Influence, pre and post-revolution, capitalist and socialist Cuba, and the Havana experienced by tourists and locals. Havana: Two faces of the Antillean Metropolis explores the fascinating city of Havana throughout the turbulent history of Cuba, from Spanish colonization, through the American era and the revolution of 1959 to the early 2000’s. It is one of a limited number of novels on Havana written in English and part of a series exploring cities around the world (foreword). One of the most striking features of the book is the varied backgrounds of the three authors; Scarpaci, a professor of urban affairs from the United States, Segre a professor of architecture and urbanism from Brazil and Coyula, the only Cuban of the group, an architect and planner from Havana (foreword). ContraryShow MoreRelated Geography of Cuba Essay605 Words   |  3 Pagesaccessible to many harbors. Cuba has a unique advantage over the other Carribean islands because of its accessibility to harbors, which allows for the transport of agricultural goods easily and efficiently to foreign markets. Two hundred rivers can be found in Cuba, however only two are navigable. The Sagua la Grande in central Cuba is a big source of hydroelectric power for the island, as well as many waterfalls found throughout Cuba. The Cauto River, found in the southeast, is slightly navigable for