Unreconciled agendas

A conference of Mediterranean officials and intellectuals concludes that the quest for collective Mediterranean security is fraught if not lost, Dina Ezzat reports from Antalya

---

It is almost 11 years since the 1995 Barcelona Declaration set into train a process expected to promote concepts and mechanisms of collective Mediterranean security as part of a wider cooperation drive, including an extensive political and cultural agenda. Today, according to the deliberations and conclusions of a conference held recently in Antalya, Turkey, to discuss the process, the definition of collective Mediterranean security is as elusive as ever.

Convened 15-16 September by the German Konrad-Adenauwer Stiftung, the International Conference on Perspectives of European Foreign and Security Policy in the Mediterranean offered an opportunity for strategists, officials, intellectuals and journalists from Mediterranean countries to debate the issues at stake. Moving from broader items, like South Mediterranean perceptions of European security and defence policy and the European- Transatlantic Cooperation in the Mediterranean dialogue, to more country specific cases, the conference reflected the difficulty for Mediterranean countries to seriously talk of collective security arrangements given divergent views among them -- including those unrepresented in the conference, like Syria -- over definitions, threats and security priorities.

"This has been a partnership based on suspicion by the northern side towards the southern side and limited understanding on the southern side of the perceptions and concerns of the northern partner," said Mohamed Driss, professor of political science at the University of Tunis. Driss added that post-11 September American apprehension towards many Southern Mediterranean countries was partially transmitted to European countries, some of which have grown suspicious of the south, especially when it comes to crucial security issues like the situation in Iraq.

This line was not well received by many of the European participants to the conference, including those representing NATO. "Southern Mediterranean states have the right to ask for an end to the confusion between Islam and Islamism, but they also need not to confuse every American with the neo-cons," said Gustavo de Aristegui, Foreign Policy Spokesman of the Partido Popular in the Spanish Congress.

The Antalya meetings did not engage in extensive debate over definitions of "terrorist" versus "freedom fighter" or of the "dialogue of civilisations" versus the "clash of civilisations". Instead, the conference offered a panoramic reflection of the divide around the Mediterranean on whether or not Iran's nuclear programme -- declared by Tehran to be strictly peaceful -- posed a threat to the Mediterranean security. Equally subject to disagreement was the impact of the Arab-Israeli conflict. While some argued that the conflict did not necessarily eliminate the possibility of establishing collective security arrangements around the basin of the Mediterranean -- even prior to the establishment of a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace -- others argued the opposite. And while Israel's policy of nuclear ambiguity was not forcefully brought up in the discussion, there were enough references made by Arab and Israeli participants to indicate that this is an issue for serious debate when approaching the concept of collective Mediterranean security.

"The strategic imbalance in the region that is the result of the possession of weapons of mass destruction by some parties and their relentless pursuit of military superiority, continues to pose a fundamental obstacle to real and meaningful security in the region," said Egyptian retired military officer Ahmed Abdel-Halim. He added that transparency and candid consultations on planned or implemented security arrangements at the regional level were needed.

Additionally, there remains much disagreement on other issues, like migration. Northern Mediterranean participants in the conference seemed most concerned with the impact of south to north migration on their societies while South Mediterranean countries voiced concern over increasingly draconian limitations imposed on migration that they perceive as economically vital. The social and economic underpinnings of security, participants from Southern Mediterranean countries contested, are never given adequate attention by Northern Mediterranean partners.

The link between increasing migration and the rise of Islam -- and as some European participants argued "Islamic fundamentalism" -- was subject to heated debate. Several participants from the south suggested that many of the initiatives of cooperation proposed by Northern Mediterranean countries are driven by a single objective: to contain the rise and growing power of political Islam.

Meanwhile, the link between this growing northern concern and the 1994 launch of the NATO-Mediterranean dialogue prompted yet another debate with several participants from the south suggesting that the real motive behind the launch of the dialogue was to secure NATO presence in countries perceived by the West as "exporters of terrorism".

The one thing that everybody seemed to be in agreement on during the conference was that it will be a long time before Mediterranean states come up with a joint agenda on security concerns. Speakers acknowledged that in the absence of a joint European security agenda, a joint Arab security agenda, and the lack of Arab-Israeli peace, it is unrealistic to propose a unified Mediterranean security agenda.