The mess in the Middle East is a Western creation. At some point in the early 20th Century, two guys, one British and one French, took a map and a pencil, drew a crooked line through the Middle East and started sipping Ceylon tea with freshly baked croissants. It’s the favorite sermon of all Westerners with a guilty conscience, something that this book refers to directly with its pseudo-moralistic (or gently cynical) title. But people with an attention span larger than that of a regular Facebook philosopher know world politics is a little bit more complicated than an afternoon singalong. Fortunately, this book does a very good job in portraying this complexity, even though, in its attempt to embrace modern self-criticism, it often flirts with the trivial accusations of incompetence and ignorance. The afterword, written 20 years after the first publication, offers an attempt at broader objectivity, rightfully pointing out that ”the authors of the Settlement of 1922 were animated by imperialism, the only world they knew was the world of empires, and it would be unfair to criticize them for that: almost everyone was animated by imperialism. The winners were empires; but so were the losers.” Then it continues: “Only in our modern interdependent world are broader concerns required or even encouraged. Only today do we claim to speak for mankind.” It's self-criticism turning upon itself :)