 |
Al-Ahram Weekly 16 - 22 March 2000 Issue No. 473 
|
||
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
|
Al-Ahram Weekly 16 - 22 March 2000 Issue No. 473
|
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 |
| ||
Egypt Region International Economy Opinion Culture Special Focus Travel Living Sports Profile People Time Out Chronicles 'A show of solidarity'
By Dina Ezzat
For the Arab foreign ministers, the Beirut meeting may have represented a step towards restoring Arab coordination. Yet for all that, nobody was able to explain how this goal could be achieved while the Arab world is still confused and divided over Iraq.
Mohamed Said El-Sahhaf
In an exclusive interview, Iraqi Foreign Minister Mohamed Said El-Sahhaf expressed his country's willingness to work together with the rest of the Arab world to try and find a formula that might be satisfactory to all parties.
The following are excerpts
The Iraqi problem is the most difficult, the most controversial even, of all inter-Arab problems. Yet your country did not ask for the issue to be included on the agenda of this meeting. Is this your way of expressing lack of faith in the Arab world?
The meeting for which we came to Beirut had one clear goal: to show our solidarity with Lebanon in the face of Israeli aggression and occupation. Iraq was not a topic for discussion.
True, Iraq is an Arab country that is also being subjected to great injustice on an almost daily basis. If the council chose to discuss this injustice, we would have had no objection. But we would not have allowed Iraq to be discussed as a problem in itself. Iraq is not a problem. The problem here is the way others act towards Iraq.
If there is a will to general Arab reconciliation, then we are available to discuss it, and we are interested. If there is a problem because of the fighting that took place in 1990, we believe that this matter should be discussed in an Arab family atmosphere. This discussion, however, should not be biased to any one side of the issue, not should it be limited by prior assumptions.
So would you say that it was a little presumptuous to talk about reestablishing Arab solidarity in Beirut, without talking about Arab reconciliation over Iraq?
What I am saying is that the issue of Arab coordination came up at this meeting as one part of a discussion about the possibilities of holding an Arab summit on a regular annual basis under the umbrella of the Arab League.
But do you think they are prepared to approach the matter in this way?
We find ourselves today in a situation that is not of our making. Therefore, we are not only disappointed, but are actually critical of the other Arab countries. We accuse them of having played an important role in keeping Iraq under this most unjust embargo. We hold them responsible for the current situation in Iraq, and for its negative impact, not only on the Iraqis, but on the entire Arab world.
They have to bear collective responsibility for what is happening today. And all the concerned Arab parties will have to play a part in rescuing the Arab nation.
This Beirut meeting has been described as representing a significant step forward for inter-Arab reconciliation. Do you think that what was achieved here could pave the way for a reasonable discussion of Iraq's predicament in the near future?
Let me say this: things are never difficult if you avoid discussing the serious issues. Here, the serious issues were avoided, and that could give a misleading impression as to what was achieved. Personally, I cannot say that I feel we progressed towards Arab reconciliation on the basis of what I saw here.
All that was needed in Beirut was a show of solidarity, not action. So it would have been a serious disgrace for anyone not to vote in support of Lebanon at this point. What we saw here was verbal support; and even that, to be honest, was not strong enough.
So you think that nothing was really achieved at this meeting?
I don't think I want to say that. When all is said and done, you can sense that the Arab governments have begun to feel embarrassed by the huge gap between what they are doing in the name of inter-Arab cooperation, and the real desire of their peoples to see this cooperation achieved.
Do you really think that Arab governments could do much to realise their people's dream of closer Arab ties, even if they wanted to? Are you not ignoring the US' influence?
I know that there are extra-regional factors that can affect what is going on in this region. Through them, much harm has been done to the Arab nation. But the situation of the different governments in their own countries, and how their attitudes are perceived by their own people, also plays a role.
Speaking of the US, do you not think that the time has come for an Iraq-US dialogue?
To start a dialogue, there have to be two parties. That is not the case now where the US is concerned. We have called for dialogue, but the Americans just want to impose their will.
Do you think that the next US administration may have reason to reconsider its position?
It does not matter to us who governs the US. We know that the US has bad intentions towards this region.
