Contemporary state violence redraws Muslim-majority borders much as colonial agreements once did

Evidence

I was in the other Washington, DC, the city where the War on Terror was conceived, the seat of the “civilized” world, with a young woman who had just turned twenty-four and had left behind a country that bore no resemblance to the place of our youth. Eastern Aleppo was no more. And Syria seemed poised to follow Iraq’s fate of being dismembered into a wholly unrecognizable form. We often think of the colonial laws that fractured Muslim-majority nations, like the Sykes-Picot Agreement, as relics of a bygone era. Yet modern crusades are quick to smack us in the head and open our eyes to the plodding disfiguration and division of nations unfolding today. — Khaled A. Beydoun, The New Crusades_ Islamophobia and the…, 333

Categorization

• XREF: Extends the reader’s chapter-level thesis in this very book that state-sponsored Islamophobia operates globally; connects to Iftikhar’s global-synthesis view of imperial policies toward Muslim lands. — connects to: Foreign wars redraw internal racial borders that target domestic civilians of enemy descent — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of…, 548
• QUESTION: Does Beydoun later detail specific modern partitions of Syria and Iraq parallel to Sykes-Picot? Worth tracking which carve-ups he names.