I once wrote and performed a play in which my alter ego travelled from London to Iraq before the 2003 US-led invasion to find out if the reality of his birthplace matched the portrait he was being shown every day on the news.
Life imitated art several months later, when I went to Baghdad as a journalist to report on the post-war rebuilding and recovery. Unsurprisingly, both versions – real and fictional – found themselves in a country that was far removed and infinitely more complex than the place they had seen on television.
For me at the time, there were (at least) two versions of Iraq. The one for western consumption; saved by the actions of the US and its allies, put on the path to redemption, only for its future to be hijacked by the very extremists the war had been waged to destroy.
There was also my personal version. A land filled with people not much different from anywhere else, doing their very best to get on with things under the worst possible circumstances. They wanted the same “normal” life as anyone else might. Men and women who were everyday heroes and who deserved our respect and support (and still do).
Over the more than two decades since, a lot has changed and yet so much is still the same. Stereotypes do not easily shift. Western audiences are fed a steady stream of them. It’s not just about Iraq. Name a culture, country or region of the world and you will find that stereotypes about them are alive and well in the news reports published and broadcast in the English language.
That this region has had more than its fair share of this treatment leaves me bitter and angry.
Most countries in this region are being lumped together in a fictional construct called “The Middle East”. A place to be feared. A place rife with sectarianism. A place desperate for a strong dose of western values. A place not quite as civilised as Europe or America. “The Middle East” viewed in the West as an accursed monolith.
Except of course it isn’t like that at all. “The Middle East” as the news describes it does not exist and never has. Anyone who visits the region will tell you that. Each country has its own narratives. Within them there are competing storylines. Some positive and some negative. Much like anywhere you might have been.
After 9/11, in the absence of social media, we might be forgiven for swallowing the self-serving and simplistic narratives in the West about “The Middle East”. Perhaps, too, we should acknowledge that progress has been made since, and a general lack of knowledge has given way to a greater, albeit imperfect, understanding.
Audiences in the West had to be enticed away from their prejudgment with stories about seven-star hotels and luxury first-class air travel. Now they have access to daily reports about the Gulf becoming a hotbed for innovation and the massive amounts of investment being made in AI, education and health care.
But the horrifying and deadly destruction in Gaza and the current, heartbreaking escalation in Lebanon have once again provided ample opportunity for western media outlets to dispense with any pretence at nuance. Take, for example, Matthew Syed, writing in The Times on Saturday, putting it as crudely as “in the conflagration that is coming, I back Israel 100 per cent, the West 100 per cent, civilisation 100 per cent, progress 100 per cent”.
How is it still so easy for audiences to accept such sentiments? Does it make it easier to throw your hands up in the air and say “well, what can we do, it’s a lost cause, they did it to themselves” and absolve themselves of any responsibility for thinking deeper or demanding policies from governments in the West that are not so damaging?
Not really. Not when a glance through the posts on the apps on your phone might disabuse you of any wilful ignorance. No one who cares about the future of this region – including the people who actually live here – can support the wave of death and terror unleashed by Israel. This is despite the arguments about common enemies and realpolitik that, once again, are an oversimplification.
It is also an arrogant way to treat people who live in the countries of the region. In parts of “The Middle East”, especially the UAE, quality of life is higher than in Europe or America. Access to quality health care and education is more equitable.
Meanwhile, we could just as easily point to systemic failure and corruption in “The West”, without distinction between countries and governments in Europe and North America. In “The West”, societies have been going backwards in terms of values of tolerance and acceptance in the 21st century while “The Middle East” has been making progress the other way.
The philosopher and author Yuval Noah Harari has argued that in modern times, wars are not driven by territorial or resource reasons, but are about fighting for the stories we believe to be true.
There is a fight playing out daily across media platforms and outlets, pitting values of “The West” against those of the “The Middle East”. We have the power to change the story to end the conflict any time we choose to.
The End of Loneliness
Benedict Wells
Translated from the German by Charlotte Collins
Sceptre
French business
France has organised a delegation of leading businesses to travel to Syria. The group was led by French shipping giant CMA CGM, which struck a 30-year contract in May with the Syrian government to develop and run Latakia port. Also present were water and waste management company Suez, defence multinational Thales, and Ellipse Group, which is currently looking into rehabilitating Syrian hospitals.
Company%C2%A0profile
%3Cp%3E%3Cstrong%3ECompany%20name%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3Eamana%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3EStarted%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3E2010%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3EFounders%3A%3C%2Fstrong%3E%20Karim%20Farra%20and%20Ziad%20Aboujeb%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3EBased%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3EUAE%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3ERegulator%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3EDFSA%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3ESector%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3EFinancial%20services%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3ECurrent%20number%20of%20staff%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3E85%3Cbr%3E%3Cstrong%3EInvestment%20stage%3A%20%3C%2Fstrong%3ESelf-funded%3Cbr%3E%3C%2Fp%3E%0A
Mercer, the investment consulting arm of US services company Marsh & McLennan, expects its wealth division to at least double its assets under management (AUM) in the Middle East as wealth in the region continues to grow despite economic headwinds, a company official said.
Mercer Wealth, which globally has $160 billion in AUM, plans to boost its AUM in the region to $2-$3bn in the next 2-3 years from the present $1bn, said Yasir AbuShaban, a Dubai-based principal with Mercer Wealth.
“Within the next two to three years, we are looking at reaching $2 to $3 billion as a conservative estimate and we do see an opportunity to do so,” said Mr AbuShaban.
Mercer does not directly make investments, but allocates clients’ money they have discretion to, to professional asset managers. They also provide advice to clients.
“We have buying power. We can negotiate on their (client’s) behalf with asset managers to provide them lower fees than they otherwise would have to get on their own,” he added.
Mercer Wealth’s clients include sovereign wealth funds, family offices, and insurance companies among others.
From its office in Dubai, Mercer also looks after Africa, India and Turkey, where they also see opportunity for growth.
Wealth creation in Middle East and Africa (MEA) grew 8.5 per cent to $8.1 trillion last year from $7.5tn in 2015, higher than last year’s global average of 6 per cent and the second-highest growth in a region after Asia-Pacific which grew 9.9 per cent, according to consultancy Boston Consulting Group (BCG). In the region, where wealth grew just 1.9 per cent in 2015 compared with 2014, a pickup in oil prices has helped in wealth generation.
BCG is forecasting MEA wealth will rise to $12tn by 2021, growing at an annual average of 8 per cent.
Drivers of wealth generation in the region will be split evenly between new wealth creation and growth of performance of existing assets, according to BCG.
Another general trend in the region is clients’ looking for a comprehensive approach to investing, according to Mr AbuShaban.
“Institutional investors or some of the families are seeing a slowdown in the available capital they have to invest and in that sense they are looking at optimizing the way they manage their portfolios and making sure they are not investing haphazardly and different parts of their investment are working together,” said Mr AbuShaban.
Some clients also have a higher appetite for risk, given the low interest-rate environment that does not provide enough yield for some institutional investors. These clients are keen to invest in illiquid assets, such as private equity and infrastructure.
“What we have seen is a desire for higher returns in what has been a low-return environment specifically in various fixed income or bonds,” he said.
“In this environment, we have seen a de facto increase in the risk that clients are taking in things like illiquid investments, private equity investments, infrastructure and private debt, those kind of investments were higher illiquidity results in incrementally higher returns.”
The Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, one of the largest sovereign wealth funds, said in its 2016 report that has gradually increased its exposure in direct private equity and private credit transactions, mainly in Asian markets and especially in China and India. The authority’s private equity department focused on structured equities owing to “their defensive characteristics.”
Sukuk explained
Sukuk are Sharia-compliant financial certificates issued by governments, corporates and other entities. While as an asset class they resemble conventional bonds, there are some significant differences. As interest is prohibited under Sharia, sukuk must contain an underlying transaction, for example a leaseback agreement, and the income that is paid to investors is generated by the underlying asset. Investors must also be prepared to share in both the profits and losses of an enterprise. Nevertheless, sukuk are similar to conventional bonds in that they provide regular payments, and are considered less risky than equities. Most investors would not buy sukuk directly due to high minimum subscriptions, but invest via funds.
