Summit blues

By Salama A Salama

---

The recent Arab summit in Tunis shows how divided and indecisive the Arabs are. It shows how little faith they have left in the one Arab organisation that they managed to set up over half a century ago. The difficulties were neither spontaneous nor sudden. Some looked intentional, even premeditated -- such as the ridiculous scene of Colonel Gaddafi walking out of the opening session, or the collective decision by Gulf states to send foreign or prime ministers to represent them. Ironically, some of these countries were more interested in attending the wedding of Spain's crown prince than going to the summit.

Egypt and a few Arab countries tried their best to retain a modicum of steadfastness in common Arab work. Their mission was not easy, for the collapse of the Arab League would make many happy inside and outside the region. A core of dedicated Arab countries tabled proposals, accepted compromises and tried to accommodate the pressures placed on the summit. But this was a rearguard action.

The summit produced a thick stack of statements and documents. But what hope do the recommendations, prepared after months of tireless work by Arab foreign ministers, have of ever materialising? Can Arab nations finally regain confidence in their leaders? Have the Arabs moved on from reaction to action? These are the questions that matter, not the resolutions.

The resolutions were all known beforehand. Once again, the Arab peace initiative was emphasised. Once again, the leaders called for international protection for the Palestinians and reiterated commitment to Palestinian rights. They didn't forget to urge an end to Iraq's occupation. And they promised us homegrown reforms.

Arab countries live in a swirl of latent fears and repressed wishes. And leaders are finding it harder to reconcile their worst fears with the common interests of the Arab people. To put it bluntly, compliance with foreign pressures cannot tally with the desire for independence. Any credible Arab stand involves a certain will to resist pressure. But not all Arab countries are willing to risk it. And a few at least have their hearts set elsewhere. Some accept a NATO role in the region. Others want to enhance their military cooperation with the United States. None of the above is in tune with implementing the Arab Joint Defence Treaty. None of the above is interested in joint mechanisms to settle disputes, or in the formation of a common Arab market. None of the above wants to see the Arab League Charter amended to ensure decisions amount to more than rhetoric.

Arab newspapers affiliated with the countries in question have published articles questioning the usefulness of the annually-held Arab summit. The periodic gathering only heightens differences and sows seeds of disagreement, we're told. The Arabs have no military or political power to back up their rights, the defeatists argue.

The summit came up with a "Pledge Document", in which Arab leaders vow to implement the summit's recommendations, introduce reforms and face up to foreign and domestic challenges. And we're supposed to believe that. Many Arab leaders have been around for decades and yet little has been accomplished. Had the promises been serious, Arab leaders would have set timetables for establishing true parliamentarian systems, for the rotation of power, for the protection of freedoms and human rights and for the introduction of political, economic, educational and social reform. Membership of the Arab League should be made conditional on such things. Perhaps the day will come when Arab nations will have to take matters into their own hands. They have waited too long for the leaders to put things right.