 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 4 - 10 November 1999 Issue No. 454 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 4 - 10 November 1999 Issue No. 454
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Features Profile Travel Living Sports People Time Out Chronicles Cartoons Letters Mauritania falls
By Salama Ahmed Salama
Some states play pivotal roles in the affairs of their regions or in the wider sphere of international affairs, imposing their influence and leaving their mark. Then there are states that are marginal in their regions and in the world, which have no impact on the course of events and remain always vulnerable to international pressure, retreating before powerful adversaries, avoiding conflict at any cost. Too weak to resist the predators of the international arena, they are easy prey and can vanish from existence in the blink of an eye.
Mauritania is a vivid example of this latter case. Situated at the farthest corner of the Arab world, the largely arid country was left by the Arab world to waste away in poverty and backwardness. While other Arab countries were always being discussed by the League of Arab States and the wealthy Arab countries, constantly visited by dignitaries and designated as beneficiaries of financial and technical assistance, Mauritania remained out of focus. It caught world attention only when some political coup overturned its regime, or when members of its opposition were thrown into prison. Its human rights record is one of the worst in the Arab world, so much so that it is accused of perpetuating slavery as a social institution.
When Washington and Tel Aviv announced the ceremony scheduled to take place for the signing of an agreement establishing full diplomatic relations between Nouakchott and Tel Aviv, it came as no surprise. An imminent exchange of ambassadors between the two capitals elated United States officials, who praised this step as an endeavour to capitalise on the peace process. This bold step, said an exhilarated US official, would encourage other Arab states, which are not on the confrontation line with Israel, and have no way of impacting Arab policies, to follow suit.
It is clear from the US-Israeli approach, not to mention Barak's policies, that any attempt to link diplomatic and economic relations with Israel to progress achieved in the peace process is being dismissed. This explains the increasing pressure exerted by the US on countries like Yemen, Bahrain and Kuwait, all countries incapable of manoeuvering within current policy constraints, and which simply seek economic, political or military help from the US. The designs on Mauritania have certainly been in the works for some time. The earliest allusion was the news of an agreement concluded between Mauritania and Israel to bury Israeli waste. But the news failed to move anyone in the Arab world, even in the Maghreb; not even Libya, which is constantly expressing its dismay at the degradation that has beset the Arab countries, as compared to Africa.
While it may be argued that several Arab states are at various stages on the way to normalising relations with Israel, Mauritania's rush toward full normalisation says far more about the crisis of the peace process, or rather what the peace process has failed to achieve, than about what it has achieved so far. If other Arab countries follow suit and submit to US advances, the Arabs will end up empty handed, having lost even the least of their advocates.
