 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 27 Jan. - 2 Feb. 2000 Issue No. 466 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 27 Jan. - 2 Feb. 2000 Issue No. 466
|
||
| 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 New region, new challenges
By Dina EzzatThe Arab-Israeli peace process has been revived, reopening the question of Middle East business cooperation -- and that question is: what kind of business, and on whose terms?
The countries of the region are again talking about, and soon may embark upon, closer cooperation allowing Israel more numerous business dealings with its Arab neighbours. At some time in the future, cooperation could also include other non-Arab Middle Eastern countries -- notably Turkey and Iran.
The resumption of the multilateral talks, launched at the Madrid peace conference in 1991 and suspended due to the anti-peace policies of former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, may well be around the corner. The steering committee is expected to convene in Moscow on 1 February. Foreign Minister Amr Moussa is expected to head Egypt's delegation to the meeting. It is likely that a few weeks later, the effective resumption of the working groups set up by the multilateral talks will take place, provided that the peace process does not lose its current momentum.
"Since the peace process is resumed on all tracks, we can resume cooperation," saidMoussa, who cautioned that this cooperation is dependent on continued progress in the peace process -- "all tracks included". In other words, if serious problems beset the peace process once more, "and you have a potential crisis over the issue of Israeli settlement policies in the Occupied Territories, for instance, then all boats will dock", commented one diplomat.
The multilateral talks function through five working groups. Three of these are devoted to joint work on water, the environment, and economic cooperation -- including the convocation of the famous Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Conference, at either summit or ministerial level. The relevant committees, whose work has been put on hold since 1996, will now have to look at the new facts of the region, particularly in the four core partners (Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinians, and Israel), to decide how best to pick up the pieces.
The multilateral talks are also about making this part of the world more secure and, consequently, more amenable to regional business and foreign investments, by settling two serious disputes between Israel and the Arabs: refugees and disarmament. This may prove tricky, since the two relevant working groups ceased functioning shortly after they had begun, due to Israel's refusal to cooperate. "The Israelis were particularly uncooperative on the matter of disarmament, since they refused to talk about their enigmatic nuclear capabilities," recalled one diplomat. As far as Egypt is concerned, this file cannot be dealt with unless Israel's nuclear capabilities are dealt with. It remains to be seen what Tel Aviv will have to say.
It is, then, a period of change for the Middle East. The region seems poised for peace. But for this change to be complete and effective, more has to be done than the signing of peace deals between Israel and the Syrians, the Lebanese and Palestinians. "The entire region has to be stable and secure. This cannot be achieved if the current situation in Iraq is left unattended to, and if attempts to divide Sudan continue to be encouraged by extra-regional parties," said one Egyptian diplomat. "Eventually, there will be a settlement between Israel and its Arab neighbours -- but you will not have a peaceful region," he added.
So the road leading to lucrative economic cooperation and major foreign investment throughout the Middle East is bound to include a few more stops beyond an Arab-Israeli settlement.
Meanwhile, the resumption of multilateral talks has not been given carte blanche -- at least not from Cairo. "We are not going to be talking about and engaging in everything at one go. Our interests are now being considered and our decisions will be made accordingly," commented an official.
For example, Israel is particularly keen on promoting issues like cooperation in the development of water resources, desalination and even exports. Egypt does not see matters the same way, and has insisted on the exclusion of any form of regional cooperation, or even research, in relation to the Nile. "For us, this is an issue that is beyond the scope of regional cooperation in the Middle East," said one official. Egypt is not taking part in proposed water desalination projects that have been subject to discussion among Israel, Jordan, and some Gulf states. In fact, Egypt was never a member of the Muscat-based centre for water research and desalination projects launched under the umbrella of the multilateral committee on water.
Nor has Egypt, which will be exporting natural gas since its production is on the rise, been particularly interested in the project of exporting natural gas to Turkey via pipelines that pass through Israel. "It is legitimate for Egypt to be apprehensive about having its gas going through Israel, given the fragile nature of peace between Israel and all its neighbours," said a petroleum official. He added: "This is a major investment. We are not in a state of confrontation with Israel, but we have to consider our interests." Today, given the potential for sustainable progress in the peace process, Cairo seems to be in a situation to reconsider its stance.
Attracting foreign direct investment is Egypt's highest priority, as it is for other countries in the region. In other words, competition for investments from extra-regional players will be tough among the core peace partners.
In any event, it seems likely that the Regional Economic Development Working Group (REDWG), which has traditionally been the most active tool of the multilateral talks, will remain so. This committee's future work may include the convocation of the MENA Conference at ministerial or summit level in Egypt before the end of 2000. It will also include the rejuvenation of the Middle East and Mediterranean Travel and Tourism Agency (MEMTTA).
Much depends, however, on what the different countries will be telling each other when they do sit down to talk. The open question of whether or not the Syrians, and of course the Lebanese, will be joining the multilateral talks will also have an impact on the way the talks develop. Obviously, the interests of non-regional but strongly influential players -- such as the US and the EU -- must also be taken into account.
The resumption of institutionalised multilateral Arab-Israeli cooperation could prove to be a new challenge for Cairo, which seeks to gain from regional endeavours, however limited they may be. Countries like Israel have little to offer Egypt in trade and economic cooperation, for example. Egypt will also have to ensure that renewed joint activity will not help Israel realise its dream: the "new" Middle East, where Tel Aviv is the economic and even political centrepiece.
"This is simply out of the question. We are all for cooperation, under the strict condition that it does not harm our interests. But there is no way that Egypt will accept to have Israel leading the Middle East," commented a senior Egyptian diplomat.
Moreover, given the traditional ties among the Arab countries, intra-Arab cooperation, at least on some fronts, could always be more intensive than that between Israel and the Arabs. As one economic cooperation official explained: "This is not about anti-Israel sentiment; it is a matter of the scope of ties, just as cooperation between two EU member states is much higher than cooperation between an EU member and a non-European state."
In fact, the resumption of the multilateral talks will be an interesting test for the strength of Arab cooperation, particularly on the economic front. Arab economic unity has been contemplated since the heyday of pan-Arabism in the 1960s, but only gained momentum in the past few years, when the Netanyahu government brought Arab-Israeli cooperation to a halt. Now, it remains to be seen whether the Arab countries will continue to work together or prefer to battle over doing business and cooperating with Israel, seen in certain parts of the Arab world as the royal gate to the White House.
Egyptian officials say they do not believe cooperation between the Arab and non-Arab Middle East states will preclude Arab cooperation. "There is no confrontation there, but the Arab countries constitute the major part of the Middle East and it is only natural that they should continue to work together. After all, when we talk about regional cooperation, we are not only talking about cooperation between the Arabs and Israel," commented an Egyptian diplomat.
Such statements, however, may not be backed up by reality. Arab and western diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity have many stories to tell about "under-the-table" cooperation between some Arab countries and Israel, despite the resolutions passed by the 1996 Arab summit to halt cooperation in the absence of sufficient Arab coordination, and as long as Israel continued to block the peace process.
Egypt has often come under great political pressure to be more flexible with Israel during the difficult moments of the peace process. It could well be that the pressure will continue in a post-peace scenario. As summed up by one senior insider: "The pressure will only be different, and maybe more economic than political".
