Mixed messages

In Tunis, Dina Ezzat reports on attempts by Arab leaders to address regional and international problems, and talks to Amr Moussa about the outcome

---

Click to view caption

Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa speaking with Tunisian President Zein Al-Abidine Bin Ali during the closing session of the annual Arab summit which was held in Tunis on 22-23 May

There is no agreement among diplomats or intellectuals over whether the Arab summit that convened in Tunis earlier this week was successful. Many admit, however, that the mere convocation of the summit, with respectable levels of participation by Arab heads of state, amounts to a success for collective Arab diplomacy. This is particularly true in light of the shock and dismay expressed by many diplomats when Tunisian President Zein Al-Abidine Bin Ali -- the current chair of the summit -- called off the top Arab meeting on the eve of its originally scheduled opening in March.

Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly on Sunday afternoon just after the summit concluded in the Tunisian capital, several Arab diplomats stressed that they have cause for celebration, even if the Arab summit failed to adopt the kind of resolutions that would have satisfied Arab public opinion. For them, the inter-Arab disputes that followed the unilateral Tunisian decision to call off the summit -- due to alleged differences in preparatory meetings on the resolutions relating to reform -- could have aborted the chances of holding the summit altogether.

"This would have been a serious blow to the decision adopted by Arab countries in 2000 to hold an annual summit in March, and it would have had a very negative impact on potential collective Arab cooperation," commented one Arab League source. According to this and other sources, the resolutions adopted on pressing political issues, especially those relating to Palestine and Iraq, "were more or less predictable because this is what Arab countries can offer at the moment".

On Palestine, the Arab summit underlined that any peaceful settlement of the Arab- Israeli conflict has to be in accordance with international law and relevant UN resolutions. The summit also underlined the parameters set by the peace initiative adopted at the 2002 Beirut summit, which decrees that a full, normalised Arab-Israeli peace can be reached upon the return of all Arab territories occupied by Israel in 1967, the establishment of a viable Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and a fair settlement of the issue of Palestinian refugees.

In its resolutions, the Arab summit specifically "rejected the two letters exchanged between the Israeli prime minister and the United States' president" as part of its total rejection of any foreign attempt to tamper with the terms for Middle East peace or to prejudge final status issues, including the borders of the Palestinian state, the fate of Palestinian refugees and the political identity and character of Jerusalem.

The Arab summit also stressed the need for closer cooperation with the Quartet on ways to rescue the potential achievements of Middle East peace and on securing that any movements conducted on the ground -- including a possible unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza -- should be conducted within the framework stipulated by the roadmap plan.

On Iraq, the summit also followed a predictable policy line. Arab leaders stressed the importance of maintaining Iraq's territorial and ethnic integrity, and underlined the "central role of the UN in paving the way towards a handover of sovereignty to the Iraqi people". They also called on the UN Security Council to take necessary measures to end the occupation and provide assistance to the Iraqi people.

"In short there was nothing in these resolutions that could be seen as particularly dramatic from the perspective of the Arab people," commented one Arab diplomat who asked not to be named.

While these resolutions might have been received with dismay in many quarters of Arab public opinion, diplomats are confident that they were deemed satisfactory in Washington. "There is nothing in the language either of the resolutions, the communiqué or any of the other documents adopted by the summit that could be perceived as confrontational by the US. This is one thing that all delegations in the summit were certain they wanted to avoid, including the Syrian delegation," remarked one Tunisian source on condition of anonymity. Indeed, according to this source, Arab delegations seemed "keen to send positive signals to the US".

For the most part, these "positive signals" were sent when Arab leaders refrained from harshly criticising Washington's move to impose sanctions on Syria, calling for dialogue in order to address differences. In what was also clearly a "positive signal" to Washington, the Arab summit condemned "all operations that target civilians indiscriminately". Additionally, the summit -- upon the request of the Iraqi delegation -- adopted subtle and sensitive language in condemning the images of torture and abuse in the US-controlled Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The summit also condemned the bombings that are being carried out in Iraq, mainly against US targets.

On the latter, one delegate commented, "this is a very important message to the US, because while some view the bombings conducted by Iraqis mainly against US facilities in Iraq as acts of resistance, the US consider them acts of terrorism." Indeed the Arab summit went as far as qualifying these bombings as "terrorist".

While the summit did not grant the US a resolution providing for the participation of Arab military forces in Iraq under occupation, it refrained from addressing the thorny issue of heavy US military presence in all Arab Gulf countries. The summit also supported the US-backed process for the transfer of power that is currently being drafted by UN Special Envoy to Iraq Lakhdar Brahimi.

Meanwhile, summit delegates adopted a series of resolutions relating to the introduction of political and socio-economic reforms in their countries. Among them was the approval of a new Arab charter on human rights. As for the reform of the Arab League -- with which Washington is growing increasingly impatient -- the summit did not adopt many operative resolutions, confining itself to acknowledging the need to amend the League's charter.

In a joint press conference held at the end of the summit, Tunisian Foreign Minister Al-Habib Bin Yehiya and Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa said that the Tunis summit had offered all that it could: a commitment to basic Arab rights and an appeal for the US to adopt more even-handed and Arab-sensitive policies in the Middle East.

The Arab League was set up in 1945.