“Global Order” is currently facing serious difficulties in terms of the “international system” as a whole and is being affected by the rising power of China，including the evolving relationship between China and the United States.Even though，it should be possible to renew the international system and the benefits it provides with adjustments that reflect new global realities，especially shifting power relationships in the world.The U.S.and China are not “destined for war”.The great question of our age may well be whether the United States and China can co-exist peacefully as great powers，neither seeking to dominate the other.The answer will depend on the tenacious will and sustained wisdom of human beings—not just our political leaders，but including scholars and thinkers such as those contributing to this journal.It is the responsibility of all of us to confront the present difficulties and find a path forward that creates as much shared peace，prosperity and human flourishing as possible. The borderlands dividing the Iranian Plateau from Mesopotamia and Kurdistan have long been the scene of struggle between regional and global powers，going back to the times of the Persian and Greek Empires. After serving as a passageway for the conquering armies of Mongols，Arabs，and Turks，in the sixteenth century this region became the stage for Ottoman and Safavid encounters.As the Safaviya Sufi order gave rise to the Safavid state，which strove to spread Twelver Shi^˓ism across the Iranian plateau and beyond，these encounters became increasingly defined in terms of sectarian animosity.Focused on the Caucasus，Azerbaijan，Kurdistan，Baghdad，and Basra regions，they resulted in Safavid supremacy in Azerbaijan，eastern Kurdistan，and parts of the Caucasus，and the Ottoman control in the rest.No doubt geo-political and economic concerns were at the heart of these conflicts，but the rivalry，more often than not，was couched in religious-ideological terms.Similar terms are dominating the various rivalries in the present day Middle East，making a reconsideration of confessional politics a necessity.As it is impossible to provide a history of confessional politics in the Middle East within the confines of a chapter，the present paper concentrates on the first fifty years of the Ottoman-Iranian history.This it does for two reasons.

Firstly，because this period is the foundational period of sectarianism at the service of geo-political interests.Secondly，this relatively short period is also the foundational period in the formation of the Ottoman-Iranian boundaries，at present shared by Iran on the one hand and Turkey and Iraq on the other.It is the authors firm contention that sectarian and territorial boundary making went hand in hand and these processes should be studied together.Even though the Shia-Sunni contention long pre-dates the Ottoman-Safavid rivalry，one could argue that the present-day language of sectarian differences operates and builds on a framework or a repertoire established in the first half century of that rivalry.As Charles Tilly argued in “Contentious Performances” there is a repetitive character of the present-day claim making in struggles over Syria and Iraq.2273352 For example，the fatwas of famous Sheikh Yusef al-Qaradawi labeling Hezbollah and Iran，the supporters of the Syrian government，enemies of Islam，and in fact “more infidel than Jews and Christians，” and the Sunni clerics of Lebanon urging their co-sectarians to support the Syrian Sunni rebels lest the Safawi project spread；are based on a well-established repertoire of geo-politicized sectarianism that was perfected in the first fifty years Ottoman-Safavid rivalry.2273353 By concentrating on the first fifty years of the Ottoman-Safavid contention from an Ottoman perspective，and based mostly on Ottoman historical sources，the following pages want to show that the language of present day Shia-Sunni rivalry，be it in Yemen or in Syria，is heavily borrowing from earlier centuries.As such they are part of a repertoire of contention that has been staged various times previously.