Remember Saddam?

Inter-Palestinian dialogue in Cairo produced cautious welcome but less optimism prevailed in the wake of the ICC indictment of Omar Al-Bashir, as Doaa El-Bey found out

---

The London-based independent political daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi wrote that the mission of the participants in the Palestinian dialogue was very difficult given the high hope pinned on the talks by Palestinians who are disillusioned by the state of division within and shameful conflict between Palestinian parties.

The main recipe for success according to the newspaper's editorial lies in the readiness by Fatah and Hamas to make concessions that can resolve most of their differences and help them to draw a clear strategy for joint work.

Although both parties expressed a wish to make concessions, the editorial questioned whether that wish can come true when they discuss their major differences, including forming a national unity government, rebuilding security institutions and fixing a date for the next presidential and legislative elections.

The edit expected the formation of a unity government to be controversial because of the huge gap between the two parties. Fatah wants a technocrat government headed by an independent official close to the party. Hamas agrees but wants such a head of government to be close to it because its members represent the majority of the legislative council.

The edit pointed to the future strategy of the unity government and whether it would espouse negotiations or choose resistance. "It is impossible to predict the results of inter-Palestinian dialogue. But it will definitely take more than the 10-day period designated for it, which means that [Prime Minister] Salam Fayyad could remain in his post for months," the edit concluded.

The Omani daily Al-Watan hailed the arrival of the latest humanitarian convoy to Gaza and the international efforts to help ease the suffering of Gazans after the ruthless Israeli aggression against the Strip. The newspaper's editorial regarded the world's present interest in Gaza as a historic opportunity for Palestinian factions to end their differences especially after the resignation of Fayyad, and the dire need to produce a national unity government.

"Palestinian reconciliation is not a luxury or an option, but a must imposed by the sensitivity of the present phase. History will not have mercy on those who impeded the ambitions and aspirations of the Palestinians," the edit concluded.

Mohamed Kaoush wrote that reconciliation is better for all Arabs ahead of the annual Arab summit in Doha. He underlined Arab efforts to hold a mini reconciliation summit ahead of the Doha gathering scheduled at the end of the month. He called on the summit to put the basis for Palestinian reconciliation first and then support the Sudanese president and protect the unity of the land and people of Sudan. "The Doha summit could be a chance to adopt a brave stand in supporting the Sudanese president against injustice," Kaoush wrote in the Jordanian political daily Al-Arab Al-Yom.

He wondered why some parties advise Khartoum to bow to the political ruling of the International Criminal Court and reminded the Sudanese president of what happened to Saddam Hussein.

Selim Nassar wrote that Al-Bashir described the ICC indictment as biased and hostile. He added that the court reached the ruling because of his personal stand against Israel.

Commentators see the current crisis in Sudan as posing a dangerous change in the country's modern history especially after China showed support for Al-Bashir's regime by paying his government huge amounts of money in return for investing in the excavation of oil in southern Sudan. Experts estimate that Sudan could raise its production of oil from half a million barrels to two million daily if the situation in the south is secure. However, the US does not want China to be in control of natural resources in Sudan and the US-Chinese rivalry in the African state could contribute to the deteriorating situation there, as Nassar wrote in the independent political daily Al-Hayat.

Abdel-Rahman Al-Rashed blamed Al-Bashir for the ICC indictment because he did not understand from the beginning the danger of genocide in Darfur. He denied the presence of the ICC until it issued an arrest warrant that gives it the right to try him for committing war crimes.

Al-Bashir's reaction to the ruling was predictable. He reacted by expelling the humanitarian organisations that were helping the ill-fated Darfur in the hope he would put pressure on the international community.

But the expulsions have given the international community more reason to arrest him.

Al-Rashed suggested that Al-Bashir should face the ICC indictment. "Al-Bashir should challenge the ICC by attending his trial rather than escaping from it. He should show that he respects the court. He could also be released if found innocent, if he focuses on preparing a sound legal defence instead of hosting terrorist organisations in order to frighten the world," Al-Rashed wrote in the London-based political daily Asharq Al-Awsat.

Tawfiq Al-Medeini wrote that the ICC arrest warrant had stirred up controversy among Arab politicians and men of letters on the jurisdiction of the ICC. The court issued an arrest warrant against a head of state at a time when the international community, which is controlled by the US, is passing through a phase of regression in applying international law. That is, according to the writer, strong reason to accuse the ICC of adopting double standards.

If the ICC ruling is unbiased, Al-Medeini asked whether the court could issue similar rulings against top officials responsible for the war in Iraq which has left millions dead, wounded and displaced; or should consider the war crimes committed in Palestinian lands for decades.

Al-Medeini explains in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan that the problem lies in the Third World states in general and Arab states in particular. He said the ICC cannot interfere in a state which, like Sudan, has not ratified the accord which led to the formation of the court and that it has no authority in a certain state unless that state has no power or ability to arrest indicted criminals. Given that the regimes in most of the Arab and Third World states are totalitarian and that justice and equality are absent, the national courts lack the jurisdiction to enforce law and justice. Thus, non-governmental organisations and human rights committees are forced to refer their cases to international bodies.