Writing on Monday, May 25, Shanaka Anslem Perera traced recent developments around the Iran War, noting “Both sides are performing peace while preparing war.”
The President of the United States publicly named eight Muslim heads of state and ordered them to sign a treaty with Israel.
He warned that failure would show “bad intention.”
He invited the Islamic Republic of Iran to join.
He claimed the document would bring peace to the Middle East for the first time in five thousand years.
(https://substack.com/@shanakaanslemperera/note/c-264914965)
Perera continued:
Leaders went silent on the call.
On Sunday President Trump wrote that time was on our side. On Monday he posted on Truth Social: “Negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran are proceeding nicely! It will only be a Great Deal for all or, no Deal at all. Back to the Battlefront and shooting, but bigger and stronger than ever before. And nobody wants that.”
As of Monday, the US was once again conducting strikes on Iran.
As we consider prospects for peace in the Middle East; read the day-by-day back and forth; and ride, in tweets and headlines, the roller coaster of rising and falling expectations for peace, the price of oil, and markets, it behooves us to consider 5000 years of historical context.
Today, I reflect on those 5000 years, starting with Abraham and my visit to his grave site. This is the first of a series about the Middle East, and it will conclude with the fall of the Ottoman Empire.
My first of 25 trips to the Middle East occurred over a half century ago, in 1974. The aftermath of the Yom Kippur War and the Arab oil embargo led by Saudi Arabia dominated discussions. The oil price quadrupled from $3 to $12 a barrel in 1973–1974. By the end of the 1970s, it hit $30. The US stock market declined over 40% in those two years. The US economy was in a full recession. Oil shock-induced inflation was rising. My founding partner, Shep Goldberg, and I had a new independent investment advisory firm, Cumberland Advisors. Cumberland was in its infancy, only a year old.
During that first trip, I visited Hebron and the Cave of Machpelah. (I would not reprise this trip today because of security risk.) That cave is the burial place of Abraham and Sarah. The guide assembled our small group in the square in Hebron, and he read the biblical description of the real estate transaction at the end of Genesis Chapter 33. He walked us around the real estate and showed us the terrain — a field and a cave that Ephron sold to Abraham for 400 shekels in silver. Abraham buried Sarah at Machpelah and was interred with her after his death. And there it was in front of us.
Imagine visiting this burial site if you haven’t done so. Here lies the single personality who is recognized as the patriarch of believers in the unity of the deity. The three major Western religions agree on this but differ on much else. And since Abraham, religious strife has been a constant in the Middle East.
Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all recognize Ishmael and Isaac as sons of Abraham. They differ significantly in how they interpret these figures’ roles within God’s plan.
In Judaism, Isaac holds a central place. He is the primary heir through whom God’s covenant is carried forward. Ishmael, while acknowledged and blessed, is not considered part of this covenant. Christianity largely follows this framework, emphasizing Isaac as the child of divine promise, while Ishmael plays a more secondary or symbolic role in theological interpretation.
In Islam, both Ishmael and Isaac are honored equally as prophets and faithful servants of God. In Islam, each contributes to a unified story of monotheism. Isaac is associated with the line of Israelite prophets that includes Jacob and Moses. Ishmael is linked to the Arab peoples and ultimately to the Prophet Muhammad. Islamic tradition places special importance on Ishmael’s role in Mecca, where he and Abraham are believed to have built the Kaaba. That gives Ishmael the central place in Islamic religious history.
Another divergence among the three traditions focuses on Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his son. In Judaism and Christianity, this son is explicitly identified as Isaac. That is consistent with the belief summarized above. In Islam, the Qur’an does not name the son, but longstanding tradition holds that it was Ishmael. This distinction reflects broader theological differences: Judaism and Christianity emphasize Isaac as the primary bearer of God’s promise; Islam presents both sons as integral to a larger, continuous unfolding of divine guidance.
Following the death of the Prophet Muhammad in 632 CE, Islam experienced a major internal division about who would lead the Muslim community. This is the dispute that gave rise to the Sunni–Shia split. We are watching a version of it at work in Hormuz today. Sunnis wanted the community to choose its leader and named Abu Bakr the first Caliph. Shia Muslims believed leadership should be familial within the prophet’s family. They wanted Ali, Muhammad’s cousin, and son-in-law. It started as a political disagreement. It has become an enduring theological and religious difference. It has divided Islam, even though both groups share the core beliefs and practices of Islam. It has provoked much bloodshed throughout history.
Within Christianity, a turning point occurred when the Roman Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity in the early 4th century. Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire under Emperor Theodosius. Over the centuries, differences emerged concerning theology, authority, and religious practices. These tensions culminated in the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century. Martin Luther challenged the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. A lasting division resulted between Catholics, who remained aligned with papal authority, and Protestants, whose various denominations emphasize scripture, individual faith, and reform. The differences have provoked much bloodshed throughout history.
The Middle East’s long history of wars is a complex interplay of religion, politics, and power. Many conflicts, ranging from early Islamic expansion to the Crusades, and to modern regional disputes, are framed in religious terms. Political leaders frequently use religion as a strategic tool. In the name of God, they unify populations, legitimize their authority and, sadly, justify conflict. This pattern has repeated and repeated during periods of imperial decline. It was the basis for formation of modern states. Appeals to religious identity have been employed to mobilize support and intensify rivalries. In Middle East wars and regional disputes, religion is invoked by leaders to reinforce loyalty, shape narratives, and sustain divisions. Although the root causes of these conflicts are deeply political and historical, religion has repeatedly served as a powerful instrument for influencing and directing human conflict. The differences have provoked much bloodshed throughout history.
Let’s look briefly at the biblical and post-biblical period. Was there ever peace? No. Though there have been interludes between wars and strife, not since Abraham’s two sons went separate ways has there been lasting peace. As an example, see the story of Passover or the Old Testament story of Exodus. Only in the last few decades has there been a peace agreement between modern Egypt and modern Israel.
Remember the Romans. Read Josephus and the Jewish Wars. Then there is the most significant historical inflection point, when Pontius Pilate ordered a history-changing crucifixion, which has been followed by 2000 years of war.
During these two millennia, the Crusades unfolded. Saladin comes to mind. Years ago, I visited the Plain between the Horns of Hattin and walked the battlefield of a famous conflict.
Here’s the story of that war:
“Battle of Hattin” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hattin
Islam had already splintered into Shia and Sunni factions. Then the Ottoman Empire formed and prevailed with war. It ruled the Middle East for 600 years. But decline started in the 17thcentury after the 16th century rule by Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent. War, war, and more war. Territory eroded; 19th century independence movements saw countries such as Greece, Romania, and Serbia break away from the empire; European sea trade with East Asia circumvented the old overland trade routes through Ottoman territory. The empire’s finances worsened, and debt soared.
The final collapse was coincident with WW1, when the sultanate had been abolished and the last Ottoman sultan fled Turkey in 1922. Turkey became a republic in 1923. For the long history of the Ottoman Empire, see
“Ottoman Empire | Facts, History, & Map” | Britannica,
https://www.britannica.com/place/Ottoman-Empire
This read explains in detail what preceded the modern period and includes information about the administration and organization of the society under a “millet” [community] system that separated Christians and Muslims and Jews by community in hopes of preserving order. Despite this effort to manage a heterogeneous state, Britannica tells us, “Christian hatred of Muslims (Islamophobia) and Jews (antisemitism) … led to constant tension and competition among the different millets, with the Jews being subjected to ‘blood libel’ attacks against their persons, shops, and homes by the sultan’s Greek and Armenian subjects.” Still, Jews fared better in the Ottoman Empire than they did in other areas, including Arab states and Western Europe.
Note that the Ottoman Empire’s demise and the agreements that surrounded it is the start of the modern era of war and strife that continues in the Middle East today.
As the Brittanica article details, during World War I, the Allied powers developed a series of overlapping plans to dismantle and divide the Ottoman Empire. Early drafts of wartime agreements promised major territorial rewards to the victors: Russia was to receive Istanbul, the straits, and parts of eastern Anatolia; France was assigned influence in Syria, Cilicia, and later Mosul; and Britain secured Egypt, Cyprus, southern Mesopotamia, and strategic ports such as Haifa and Acre. Palestine was designated for international administration. Italy was also promised territory in the Dodecanese and southwestern Anatolia, including the area around İzmir. At the same time, Britain made conflicting commitments by encouraging Arab hopes for independence and later endorsing a Jewish national home in Palestine.
These partition plans shifted after Russia withdrew from the war, but the postwar settlement still imposed severe terms on the Ottomans. The 1920 Treaty of Sèvres stripped the empire of its Arab lands, reduced its authority in Anatolia and Thrace, internationalized the straits, expanded Greek claims, and placed Ottoman finances under outside supervision. It also reflected separate British, French, and Italian arrangements for spheres of influence. But Turkish nationalists under Mustafa Kemal rejected it and fought a successful war of independence. Their victory forced a renegotiation, and the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne replaced the Treaty of Sèvres, recognizing the borders of modern Turkey and ending many of the harsher Allied demands. The result was not a stable peace for the broader region, but a new political order whose contradictions would shape the modern Middle East.
At the beginning of this post we asked whether Middle East peace aspirations are possible or whether they may prove just a fantasy instead. History reminds us of the complexities and challenges inherent in resolving 5000 years of distrust and recurring conflict. This first post in our series summarized the centuries from Abraham to the demise of the Ottoman Empire. In post two of our series, we will examine the post-Ottoman period to the creation of the State of Israel in 1948, and we will narrow our focus to the region originally proposed as Palestine.
For today’s religious summary, I tried to use sources that were neutral in their perspectives. Religion is personal and fraught with risk as a topic of discussion. My personal experience is reading the Old Testament (Soncino) and The English Standard Version of The Holy Bible (Crossway), the Q’uran in English translation by Arthur Jeffery (Heritage Press), and the six-book series Great Religions of Modern Man (George Braziller).
Sources and Further Reading
Abrahamic religions / Ishmael & Isaac
“Abrahamic religions” | Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions“Ishmael” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael“Isaac” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac“Ishmael in Islam” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael_in_Islam
Sacrifice story
“Binding of Isaac” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_of_Isaac
Sunni–Shia split
“Islam’s Sunni‑Shia divide, explained” | History.com,
https://www.history.com/articles/sunni-shia-divide-islam-muslim“Sunni versus Shia: Origin story of the divide” | World History Edu,
https://worldhistoryedu.com/sunni-versus-shia-origin-story-of-the-divide/
Constantine & Christianity / Protestant Reformation
“The alliance between church and empire” | Encyclopaedia Britannica,
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Christianity/The-alliance-between-church-and-empire“Edict of Thessalonica” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Thessalonica“Martin Luther” | Encyclopaedia Britannica,
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Martin-Luther“Reformation” | Wikipedia,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformation
Religion and conflict in the Middle East
Lee, R. D. (2018). Religion and politics in the Middle East: Identity, ideology, institutions, and attitudes (2nd ed.) | Routledge,
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780429494765/religion-politics-middle-east-robert-leeBolling, L. R. (1991). “Religion and politics in the Middle East conflict” | Middle East Journal,
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4328242 [jstor.org]Yan, H.‑D., Bajo‑Rubio, O., Kwan, D. S., & Yu, F.‑L. T. (Eds.). (2024). Conflicts and challenges in the Middle East: Religious, political and economic perspectives | Springer,
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-62739-2
Disclosure:
The information posted on this website (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of David R. Kotok. David R. Kotok is an independent contractor. He may independently receive payments from various entities for consulting, advisory and board functions, speaking fees, book royalties, advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs, and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship, or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by David R. Kotok.
Nothing on this website constitutes investment advice. It should not be construed as an offer soliciting the purchase or sale of any security mentioned. Nor should it be construed as an offer to provide investment advisory services by David R. Kotok. The information provided on this website (including any information that may be accessed through this website) is not directed at any investor or category of investors and is provided solely as general information.
This content, which may contain security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only. Do not rely upon it in any manner as investment advice. It is not an endorsement of any practices, products or services. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment. Any charts provided here are for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. As always please remember investing involves risk and possible loss. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others. Information in charts has been obtained from third-party sources believed to be reliable; however
