We wanted to take a moment to explore the complexity and historical background of the term "Middle East," and to encourage further discussion about it — including the decolonial alternatives that exist. Language isn't neutral, and the names we use for places often carry the fingerprints of history, of power, and of the people who live there.
Many of us use the term "Middle East" every day. It's common shorthand for a region that generates constant news coverage and draws a huge range of perspectives — a region that has been strategically significant for millennia. But it's worth pausing on where the term came from, who coined it, and what it has done in shaping how the region and its people are understood.
So, where did the term come from?
The Oxford English Dictionary records English-language uses of "Middle East" going back to the late 1800s, with meanings that shifted over time — sometimes referring broadly to "India and adjacent countries," or even more broadly to a zone "between the Near East and the Far East." ¹
In strategy and diplomacy, the term solidified in the early 20th century. A widely cited moment is Alfred Thayer Mahan writing in 1902 (in National Review), describing "the Middle East" as a strategic region — notably through a Europe-centred worldview. Historical research also points to an earlier usage in 1900 by a British officer, reinforcing that this label was born from imperial mapping needs rather than local self-identification. ²
Why does this matter?
Terms like "Near East," "Middle East," and "Far East" reflect a world arranged relative to European power — a reminder that naming can function as a tool of empire. Encyclopaedia Britannica is direct on this point: these labels are Eurocentric, even if they've become normalised in English today. ³
It also goes beyond semantics. Names influence what gets framed as "unstable," "exotic," "strategic," or "a problem to manage."
How the term has been used in modern conflict narratives
In the post-9/11 era, "Middle East" became a dominant frame in Western policy and media — often collapsing dozens of countries, languages, ethnicities, and histories into a single "security" story. That flattening can feed stereotyping and dehumanisation, particularly toward Arab and other regional populations.
What do people in the region call it?
One complexity worth noting: the Eurocentric term has been widely adopted within the region itself. For example, the Arabic الشرق الأوسط ("Al-Sharq Al Awsat" — "Middle East") is in common use. But alternatives do exist and are used in some contexts, including the Arabic غرب آسيا ("Gharb Aasiyah" — "West Asia"), as well as broader cultural and political terms like "the Arab World" — which is not the same as the full region, and excludes many non-Arab communities and countries. ⁴
What's a more geographically accurate term?
For language that is more geographically descriptive and less rooted in colonial framing, "West Asia" is often used in UN-linked statistical groupings — though it's worth noting that UN groupings are designed for statistical convenience rather than as definitive labels. ⁵
Other terms you'll come across in decolonial spaces include:
- SWANA / WANA: Southwest Asia and North Africa / West Asia and North Africa ⁴
- Specific subregions: the Levant, the Gulf, North Africa, and so on — often more precise than a single umbrella label
- Or simply: name the countries you mean
Why think about this at all?
This is part of a broader effort to use people-centred language, acknowledge history, and be accurate about places — so we don't imply an entire country or region is affected when it isn't. The words we choose matter, and being thoughtful about them is a small but meaningful step toward more honest and respectful communication.
0 comments