21 - 27 February 2002
Issue No.574
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 21 - 27 February 2002 Issue No.574 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
In the hot seat
Arab leaders will meet regularly, or will not meet at all. But what will they talk about? Gamil Mattar* foresees difficulties
The obstacles to the approaching Arab summit are increasing in number and complexity. Observers are divided: some blame bad luck, others ill will. An inauspicious sign was seen early on, when participants in last year's Amman meeting decided to change the venue for this year from Abu Dhabi to Beirut. However convincing the reasons for this decision, the commitment to the principle -- established, indeed, only last year -- that Arab leaders would meet at the same time every year at a fixed venue, should have outweighed them. At any rate, Beirut has spared no effort in preparing for the summit, and Amman has done its best to fulfill all the duties it undertook according to last year's summit resolution, to ensure the principle of periodicity.
Perhaps part of the problem is that Arab governments are not yet used to an outside official speaking on their behalf, even if that official is the chairman of the Arab summit. During the past year, the chairman's statements elicited a certain discomfort, because his positions did not suit all tastes, much less reflect a unanimity of opinion. Such discomfort did not reach the level of open protest, though, which suggests a dawning acceptance that majority opinion should prevail, if only in exceptional circumstances, such as those the world has witnessed in the last 12 months. Whether such acceptance will last, however, is uncertain; already there are rumours that, at the coming convention, some Arab leaders will question the freedom the chairman should enjoy in speaking on their behalf during the intervals between meetings.
Attendance, it seems, will be higher than usual. This is an encouraging sign in light of the well-known custom of last- minute cancellations due to health reasons. True, Arab leaders will send a second in command, should such a person exist, to attend in their stead, but that official, who only serves in a temporary capacity, may not be authorised to speak on all issues, and is certainly not permitted to chair a meeting. After all, many Arab leaders sport important titles and hail from backgrounds that, according to local or regional lore, grant them precedence over others. As long as this is the case, these leaders cannot be perceived as the equals of a delegation head far inferior in status -- let alone the subordinates of a deputy who happens to be chairing a meeting. This matter, raised during the preparatory phases of several meetings, actually caused them to be cancelled or postponed. Fortunately, the Beirut summit will not face this obstacle, since its chairman will enjoy full authority. I fear, however, that problems related to the level of representation will arise nevertheless.
It was Libya that drew attention, this year, to the problems arising from the traditional absenteeism. Colonel Gaddafi announced that he would not be going to Beirut, although a Libyan delegation will be present. Not that this was unexpected. Gaddafi was known for his tendency to cancel long before he shifted his sights from the pan-Arab to the pan-African sphere. Nor can the Iraqi president be expected to attend this summit, or any other in the near future, especially following Amr Moussa's visit to Iraq and Kuwait. I doubt the secretary- general of the Arab League was seeking to ensure Saddam's attendance when he mentioned a highly sensitive issue, said to concern not the Arabs but imperial headquarters in Washington. Much more was said about the ramifications of the (calculated?) risk Moussa took, and its continuing reverberations. It is clear from reactions to his visit that Washington felt he was overstepping his authority, and does not want the summit to deal with the Iraqi-Kuwait issue.
Experienced summit-watchers point to another difficulty, voted most likely to determine whether the meeting is convened or postponed; if it does take place, this is the issue most crucial to its success or failure. Since the US began its most recent war, no one can avoid discussing, officially or unofficially, the aftermath of 11 September, the disaster Arab terrorists caused in the US, American responses, and especially the resulting changes in US foreign policy.
Participants at the EU conference in Munich on European security, for instance, saw the meeting as opportunity to warn Washington about the consequences of its actions, and the Europeans' reluctance to follow its agenda blindly. At the World Economic Forum in New York, the anxiety was no less palpable: some of the world's most eminent authorities in economics and politics expressed their fear over Washington's fanatic handling of international issues and the increasingly predatory nature of the new global capitalism.
No Arab official, at the summit or elsewhere, is about to accuse Washington of madness and stupidity. No one will suggest that the US president's State of the Union address was the brainchild of a moral midget. One doubts very much that the participants will object to Bush's notion of an "axis of evil" and Washington's repeated threat to intervene militarily if the countries of this region do not toe its anti- terrorist line. Nor will Arab leaders cast their vote along with Microsoft's Bill Gates, who admitted that America's prescriptions for world trade favour the rich nations, and warned that those who feel they have got a raw deal will target the rich in retaliation. The summit will not even condemn the participation of some Arab countries in an alliance with the US, an alliance Brzezinsky warned would probably become a pact of repression.
None of these statements will be made because the summit has special mechanisms for preventing such eventualities. Of course, an Arab leader might declare his solidarity with EU leaders or the economic leaders who met in New York, or ask the summit to produce a definition of terrorism that does not comply with Washington's. One of the participants could also call for a resolution deploring the fact that every problem, including poverty, corruption and disease, and every bilateral issue, even trade, aid and foreign exchange, have been reduced to fit the terrorism/counter-terrorism dichotomy. On the other hand, some leader could also appeal for a statement in support of US foreign policy and military strategy. Many Arab officials anticipate appeals of this nature, which alone increase the chances of absenteeism. After all, it is difficult to imagine, amid global outrage at US policy, that an Arab summit can avoid issuing a statement of some sort on the issue. But then, the Arabs do not always adopt the sensible course of action, or reject the obviously irrational route.
Substantive difficulties aside, those committed to bringing Arab leaders together regularly are doing all they can to ensure that the summit goes ahead as scheduled, even if that means discussing the most urgent and sensitive issues facing us. The draft agenda, in fact, includes topics that are less important than they are made out to be -- such as improving the image of the Arabs in the US and the dialogue of civilisations.
These are hard times. Many Arab capitals have changed their spots and issued statements that would have been inconceivable from any quarter in the past. Nor will the days leading up to the summit be any easier; and so one hopes that organisers will redouble their efforts to bring the event off successfully. One would hate to see the principle of regular meetings fall victim to difficult circumstances. Of course, it would also be unpleasant for Arab leaders to convene while one of their number remains under house arrest in Ramallah. In any case, it would be most disheartening to see the secretary-general of the Arab League leaving the summit -- if it does take place -- despondent and fettered with restrictions.
* The writer is director of the Arab Centre for Development and Futuristic Research.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page