Sounds familiar

The Arab press readies -- again -- for the summit. Dina Ezzat sees what's new and old

---

Click to view caption

From Israel to the US, the UN and supposedly lesser states, Amgad Rasmi of Asharq Al-Awsat portrays the survival of the biggest; "This is a chance for every official responsible for the vote to be brought to book. This means that the minister of youth must speak up and tell the whole truth." Hassan El-Mistikawi, Al-Ahram

This week, the Arab summit was not making front page headlines in the Arab press. The new scheduled date of the highest Arab congregation was on the Arab affairs pages, not quite making it on page one.

Most Arab papers were careful in their official statements about the summit, now expected to be held in the same place, Tunis, on 22 and 23 May. They attributed the date almost exclusively to Arab official sources, while the details of the delay of the event, which was to have taken place in March, were constantly brought forth to remind the reader -- without having to say it out loud -- that the summit may or may not be held.

"A summit on a hot tin roof" was the headline of an opinion piece published Monday by the prestigious London-based Al-Hayat. In his article, commentator Erfan Nizameddin argued that the Arab summit has become an unlucky event. "This summit is faced with so much bad luck that it makes it an ill-fated event no matter what," Nizameddin said. He added that the road to the summit "was full of landmines".

One big landmine, the regular Al-Hayat commentator argued, is that the summit lacks the basic ingredients for success of any high-level meeting: political will, good faith and determination of action on the part of Arab states.

"At a time when the Arab world is faced with endless storms ... [Arab] solidarity is missing, joint decision- making is lacking and sensitivities [among member states of the Arab League] are increasing by the day," Nizameddin wrote.

But, Nizameddin argued, if the summit fails to convene, there will be "cries of anger and disapproval".

So according to the writer, the summit is damned if it convenes and damned if it does not. If it convenes, Nizameddin argued, it will be criticised for shallow and ineffective resolutions on crucial issues such as developments in Palestine and Iraq and reform in the Arab world and of the Arab League. And if it does not convene, it will be criticised for failing to take place at a time of unprecedented challenges before the Arab world.

Until the morning of 22 May, Nizameddin warned, the debate will continue: "Will the summit convene or not ... And what if it does convene? Will it manage to be successful if held on a hot tin roof?"

Nizameddin was not the only commentator to express concern over the fate of the Arab summit. On Sunday, also in Al-Hayat, Egyptian political analyst Wahid Abdel-Meguid asked some serious questions about the summit and, for that matter, the Arab regime itself. For Abdel-Meguid, the question was not whether the summit will be held or where but whether it could handle the serious challenges it is facing, particularly the need to reform the Arab regime in its entirety.

"It seems that Arab initiatives for reform tend to stem from [a Saudi document] that is more of a declaration of intentions than anything else. Moreover, all these initiatives are not to be adopted in this summit but postponed to next year's gathering," Abdel-Meguid said.

According to Abdel-Meguid the biggest problem confronting the Arab regime was the regime itself. "The collective Arab regime could not be more remote from the state of action. It is trapped in a state of reaction."

This, Abdel-Meguid said, applies not only to issues related to reform but also to other highly crucial issues including the Palestinian cause. "Arabs have left [Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon to take the [political] initiatives just as much as Palestinian mistakes [on the ground] have allowed Sharon to take the military initiative."

Abdel-Meguid criticised Arabs not only for failing to take the initiative but also for failing to show prompt reaction. These failures, he said, "allow Sharon to put Arabs in a corner time and time again."

On Tuesday, in an interview with the London-based, Saudi-managed Asharq Al-Awsat , Jordanian King Abdullah echoed a similar view, saying the time had come for Arabs to stop speaking in slogans and stop taking small steps. "This is the time for a realistic discourse and approach," Abdullah said.

Whether or not the Arab summit will yield such a new attitude, Abdullah was not sure. "I am optimistic about the summit provided we are not faced with new surprises," he said.

Abdullah was not clear what he meant: the assassination of another Palestinian leader or Tunis calling off the summit as it did in March just hours before it was scheduled to start?

Despite the many concerns that loom over the summit, some Arab papers argued that it was no longer an option for Arab leaders to fail to meet or for their summit to fail to yield conclusive stances on key issues, especially Palestine and Iraq.

The Syrian daily Teshreen subscribes to this mood. In an article on Monday, Teshreen argued that the summit must convene and speak out against the developments in Palestine, the increasing bias demonstrated by the US administration towards Israel, the terrifying developments in Iraq and the increasing threats against Syria.

The challenges facing the Arab world, Teshreen admitted, are not minor but neither are they insurmountable provided that Arabs opt for frank discussions in good faith. The Syrian daily argued that, summit or no summit, the time had come for Arabs to stop saying one thing while thinking of something else. "This is the time for the truth to be said no matter how bitter it might be, for civilised dialogue to prevail and for reason to have the upper hand ... This is the only road that [Arabs should take] for the summit to succeed."