richard nicholson. al jazeera. >> if you would like to find out about the latest from the world cup, or the latest news around the world, you can click onto our website. that's at aljazeera.com. >> are the roots of today's never-ending conflict in the middle east really growing out of a 1916 agreement between britain and france? iraq and syria, sykes, piko, the the "inside story." >> hello, i'm ray suarez. in recent days the fighting men

of the islamic state of iraq for the lavant claimed there was no long arrest syria, no longer an iraq but a state controlled by isis in both countries. now simply the islamic state. what they aim to do is erase the lines drawn across the middle east by the sykes-piko agreement, an agreement between britain and france that basically created the modern mideast from the ottoman empire. once those powers lost, the winners, britain and france, prepared to divide influence, divide the spoils from the forms otto man empire lands formed new kingdoms, iraq, libya, syria, and eventually israel.

that last territory, from the iraqi turkish frontier down to the border with yemen is hardly known a day of peace. did the middle east created by britain and france already contagion russ amounts sources of conflict. or did those countries simply doom these states permanently welcome that's our focus this time on the program. joining us for a look on the new islamic state and the middest are eshan and former iraqi ambassador to the united nations, and derek harvey, director of the global initiative on civil society and conflict at the university of south florida. ambassador, let me start with you. these latest developments, the proclamation of the islamic

state that sort of a parastate. what do you think it means in the wider context of this conflict? >> well, obviously it's a threat to further attempts to stabilize the region, which you have pointed out suffers from a. of instability. but as far as the people are concerned whatever you may say about sykes-pico, they certainly created the map as we know it now. the people of iraq think of themselves as iraqis. the people of syria think of themselves as syrian. and the people of lebanon think of themselves lebanese. this borders that these borders

simply do not exist will not agree with the people of the middle east. do you. >> do you think it will be a failure. >> yes, will "t" will notaries --it will not resonate with the arabs of the region. >> but doesn't it up the ante, we might say, to create this multi national territory, try to hold onto it, and say that you are ambition, your long-term ambition is to remove that border between syria and iraq. >> well, i think it does create

some significant problems and risk for the caliphate, the islamic state or isis, depending on what you want to call it. it risks push back from contemporary arabs, challenges sovereign states of the region and in particular the monarchy of saudi arabia is going to create problems for isis' agenda in the region. >> this comes at a time when the central state in iraq is weak. baghdad can't necessarily push back isis over the border. can't necessarily retake all that territory. it's lost. isn't that significant in the context of what is happening now? >> if we want to see the fraying of the iraqi state, and the correct context, we should see it in the context of the broader fragmenttation and radical indication that is taking place. we're seeing it in syria, in iraq and other places. now it's

true that the modern states in the middle east are the construct of six picot. i--sykes picot. yet there are new forces tearing these countries asunder, and you cannot ignore them. for the first time in islam, the last 1400 years, we have never seen the type of sectarian bloodletting that is taking place in a large swath of arab a land on the gulf to tripoli or beirut. if you add bahrain or yemen, this is relatively new, corrosive and incredibly dangerous. we've never seen this like this. this is one that we have to take in consideration.

the other one is for the first time in history of modern arabs, baghdad and cairo is in terrible shape. i don't even want to mention libya, yemen or others. we have a new ugly reality in the region. on top of that we have a collapse governments. we have a dearth of serious leadership and all the isms, socialism, liberal forces and whatnot, and what was left to be secularists are marginalized completely, they are in a state of retreat. what you have is a struggle among the family of islamists. some are moderate, and others are totally crazy and live in a different universe like isis a

and el nusra and others. these are the new realities that social scientists and scholars have never dealt with. i've been reading everything that has within written since the arab up rising or the american invasion of iraq, and very few people have any idea about the road map out of this purgatory. let me go on to quickly say. you can say at the beginning of the frame or the composition of the state of iraq began in september 1980 when saddam hussein made his fateful crazy decision to invade iran, and everything grew out of this. iraq became a pauper state outer after eight years of war. he then invaded kuwait, which led to a system of sanctions that lasted ten years and large groups like the sunnies and

kurds were totally inalienated. and then u.s. invasion and we end up here. >> what do you make of that thumbnail history that was just delivered, fair comment? >> yes, i would push it back a little farther. i think that the we are now arguing about dates, and i suppose that's not a fruitful discussion for your viewers, but saddam hussein in 1979. and before that the baath party, but certainly by 1979 the state had been taken apart, and had become largely kind of an alter ego of saddam hussein certainly by 1979 before the 1980 war. what we're saying here is that it's not some exercise of imperial huberis on the part of

the angelo frencha allies in creating these areas, and one of the biggest bugga boos of scholars is to say this is an artificial state. there is nothing artificial about iraq. it is not 1960s. it's not 1970 that is cause of the fray that we're seeing now. truthfully what we're seeing now is now-government s, which could take societies that were quite promising and then govern them so poor li poorly. >> there is nothing artificial about the iraqi state. we'll look at that a little later in the program. but this idea right now we're

looking at something far more significant than previous attempts to weaken the iraqi state. it sometimes happens in the human body when you catch something, when you're already ill it's more dangerous to you than when you're strong. and no one would have tried to dismember iraq in the 1970s or 1980s, but they're trying to do it now. >> that's true. look at the major threat today. isis is a capable organization, well led with significant resources. in point of fact the integration of former iraqi senior military officers intelligence officials particularly from m 14 intelligence bureau to the military commission of isis provides leadership planning and capability that al-qaeda and other organizations have not had. they've had sanctuary in eastern syria in which to build up the

capability and begin to undermine iraq. we must also remember when we look at the context today and the trends that were talked about in the previous segment that the globalization impact of media, social media, demographic trends and the like, provide a larger context through which we should be examining the events ongoing in iraq today. that's contributing in large to the region today. the leadership of moment nouri al-maliki. there was a stable situation left to him 2010-2011, and the security situation was relatively good, and there was an opportunity to move towards political inclusion. the job was not finished at that point in time, and prime minister maliki's sectarian authoritarian

agenda undermined the opportunity to bring that country forward. >> we're going to take a short break. when we come back, you know, colonialism has created lines around the world. in some places it has led to successful states. in many others it hasn't. we'll talk about the middle east that came out of the first world war at about the time the world is marking the 100th anniversary of the beginning of that war. this is inside story. stay with us. >> we're following the stories of people who have died in the desert >> the borderland marathon >> no ones prepared for this journey >> experience al jazeera america's critically acclaimed original series from the beginning >> experiencing it has changed me completely >> follow the journey as six americans face the immigration debate up close and personal. >> it's heartbreaking... >> i'm the enemy... >> i'm really pissed off... >> all of these people shouldn't be dead... >> it's insane... >> the borderland marathon

only at al jazeera america

>> on tech know, an amazing new species is discovered... >> kind of like we're watching little architects in action >> one of natures mysteries solved... >> i don't think it's a spider or mite >> in the amazon rainforest >> we're gonna try to get one in the act of actually making the structure >> tech know, every saturday go where science meets humanity. >> this is some of the best driving i've every done, even though i can't see. >> tech know. >> we're here in the vortex. only on al jazeera america. >> welcome back to inside story. i'm ray suarez. the newly elected iraqi apartment met with a goal to form a more inclusive government.

after an hour of debate sunni and kurdish representatives walked out and lack ing a quorum the session was ended after just a week. we're looking at the iraqi crisis looking back in time nearly 100 years to the end of world war i and the agreement that from the old ottoman empire. you said that jordanians felt jordanians, syrians felt syrian, and iraqis felt iraqis. but could there have been more natural provinces that would have formed different states. leave kurds with kurds and not

split them up the way they were . >> let me deal with the country that i know the best, that is iraq. the kurds were dealt a bad hand after the first world war, no doubt about it. when you look at iraq, it's only very late in the ottoman empire that it was divided into three ottoman provinces something around 1880. before that it was not divided, and it was governed by a governor in baghdad. even after it was divided into the three provinces, the governor of baghdad was the first among equals amongst the other governors. and the governor of baghdad extended north and south almost to the outskirts so that the shia cities were, in fact, part of the baghdad government.

it was made worse by successive iraqi government which tried to fit into an arab quality which they do not fit. by the time we got to the 1970s we had in fact a fascist arab ruling the party. which if you are a curd therefore not an arab it's very difficult to consider yourself a part being a citizen of an arab fascist state. of course, it's the same fascist party that ruled iraq and ruled the arab of syria. in the 1970s no one would have thought to divide up iraq. well, in fact, starting in the 1960s and even before that in the 1930s the kurds had been in rebellion, and were put down quite brutally in the 1970s by saddam hussein. the problem is we have failed to

create in iraq and i dare say in syria and other country in the middle east regardless of ethnicity and back ground, do they feel they're invested as full citizens. failure to do that, and i agree that nouri al-maliki has exacerbated those problems in iraq over the four or five years. the failures are something that makes everyone feel disinfranchised. i think you could have imagined a different history for the region than the one we were dealt by-- >> let me give derek a chance to respond. let's go to florida and derek harvey. do you agree with the ambassador that had these countries been more successful we wouldn't be

talking about how they were formed into states. it wouldn't matter quite so much that there never was a transjordan, later jordan. if jordan had been a more successful country. >> i agree completely with the ambassador in this case. i think that issues of governance, institutions that are well run, development and economic prosperity, and security, being age to live in a society where you don't fear for your life or your property are keys to successful in the region. and unfortunately we've had a series of authoritarian regimed over many decades since sykes picot that unde undermine those very things. we could have had a very different situation. we could have had a very different outcome in iraq with more enlightened leadership

instead of focusing on perceived threats or exaggerating the threats to shia government in baghdad. if we would have been more maintained and provide better coaching and mentoring, we would have been able to forestall the collapse. >> you're looking to the west. big chunks of the territory villa the islamic state, let's go back to the 1918. part of the french sphere of influence, and one created art fishery hauled th artificially. >> when the final borders

emerged in 1916 and 1918, and let me say, i grew up, and we grew up in a different generation where we were told that sykes picot was a colonial construct. it was evil, it was bad. and it was true. it was a colonial construct. but these are modern states. the interesting thing is the sunni, shia, kurds, christians, armenians, they would all live together. but the they're reneging on the promise that we could all live in an unified iraqi state or

city and state if we had good governments that would appear on the cultural rights of every group. where they could access isis, their birth right, and to be represented fully. >> going back to the 40's, 50's, and 60's, these states were largely secular. run by strong men, maybe techno contracts. we'll look at whether it was the x factor of religion that under mind the dream of creating states in this part of the world. this is inside story.

people of our time. >> talk to al jazeera only on al jazeera america >> welcome bac back to inside story. i'm ray suarez. sunni insurgents in the islamic state in iraq and the levant changed their name to simply the islamic state. they proclaim the news was called the end of sykes picot, the reference of secret

agreement between france and britain who cut up the ottoman empire after world war i. derek harvey, when the dust settles, whether it's in a few months or a few years, do you think the lines that currently divide the nation-states of the middle east will be in the same place? >> well, i think we're at risk that that not being the case but i think we'll be able to move forward to keep. sovereign state of iraq and other states in the region. i think it will work. when i look at other people in the region, i've spent a lot of time in iraq and the middle east, i've seen shia and sunni, mixed tribes, people enter marry and people not spending too much

time on sunni and shia. if we can stabilize the security situation and move forward there is a very good chance we could get an outcome here that will stabilize the situation and allow us to repair the danger dondamage the last six years. >> it's not just shia and sunni, the kurds have done quite well for themselves while other iraqis duke it out. when the dust settles will there be an unitary state the way we saw before the first word world war. >> thno, there will have to be a different political bar that cannot be the central state with baghdad appointing every schoolteacher across the

country. there will be have to be equal transcrip treatment throughout the middle east. and the mali government and supporters are refusing to broke arrest compromise with the sunni and kurds of iraq. the kurds have said long ago i in 2003 that they would not be the cause of the break up of iraq, and, indeed, they have not been. >> let me go to syria and lebanon are also in kay cross, conflict. there were millions when the dust settles. >> i doubt that syria will be able to do anything soon.

it will have to be a defacter situation. the minority is in control of the greater damascus area all the way to the alawite region on the coast line. and then in this enclave yo it will go on. afghanistan, sudan before the break up this, could last. it's difficult to put sire i can't back together now especially after this bloodletting. it's incredible what happened. >> is that good for the independence of lebanese? >> lebanon not will always be . but i think they may have crossed the rubicon. >> that brings us to the end of this edition of inside story. . thanks for being with us. learn more about this. look up the sykes picot agreement.

learn more about the first world war. i'm ray suarez . [♪ music ] >> two hours in, we came up on a body... >> this country is crazy man..you have problems with somebody...they him them. >> knowing this is the kind of violence that is so prevalent in the culture...are you telling me that's ok to just open up the borders and let em' all run into the united states? >> the good news is , is that you'll be coming home soon...