Rising to the occasion
The time is ripe for the Arabs to adopt a strong and unified position on the Iraq standoff, Ibrahim Nafie argues
Deep and angry divisions over the American war drive against Iraq have ricocheted rapidly through various international forums. Last Friday's UN Security Council session was charged by the clash between opposing camps led by the US and France. While the former holds that the Iraqi regime, through its evasion tactics towards the disarmament process, has forfeited its last chance to comply offered by UN Security Council Resolution 1441, France insisted that a peaceful solution to the weapons issue must still be explored.
Meanwhile, in NATO, France, Germany and Belgium rejected Washington's request to offer NATO defence capacities to Turkey to face a possible threat from Iraq. Such an action would entail invoking the NATO treaty's principle of "collective self-defence". The opponents to Washington's request argued that it would constitute an official declaration of war by NATO members against Iraq, which would be jumping the gun on the weapons issue.
Discord over how to resolve the Iraqi weapons crisis also beset the EU, in which France, Germany and Belgium insisted that international weapons inspectors must be allowed to continue their work and that diplomatic channels must be given the fullest scope to succeed. On the other side, Britain, Spain and Italy, among others, formed a broad base of support for the American position.
These fast-paced developments coincided with a wave of anti-war demonstrations, perhaps unprecedented in breadth and scale. The protests swept 600 cities around the world, including the capitals of those nations most ardently in favour of military action against Iraq, namely, the US, Britain and Australia.
It is hardly logical in this heated climate that the Arabs should refrain from voicing a firm and informed position on developments effecting this part of the world. For this reason, President Mubarak, last Friday, called for an emergency Arab summit to assess the Iraqi crisis and formulate a united position that would contribute to averting the spectre of war.
In his press conference that day, the president warned of the grave consequences a war between the US and Iraq would have on this region and the world. "The situation in the Middle East is very difficult, sensitive and complex, especially now that the military machine is moving into full gear and completing its preparations," he said, adding that the Arabs must act quickly to adopt a position that would promote a peaceful solution instead of a military one.
Mubarak's urgent appeal for a summit stems from his conviction that there is still time to dissuade Washington from its insistence on a military solution. When asked in the press conference what he felt the chances were for averting war, he responded, "They are considerable, if Iraq cooperates 100 per cent, and as long as many countries continue to oppose a military operation. We must capitalise on this to influence the US." He added, "Iraq may not have nuclear weapons, but it does have other weapons. It is a large country and the Americans and British do not believe [that those other weapons are not weapons of mass destruction]. We must prove to them that Iraq does not possess such weapons by inviting them into those areas where they suspect they exist, since we have nothing to hide."
Mubarak's appeal for an emergency summit could not have been better timed. Although the US and its supporters are pressing ahead with their military build- up, not all preparations are in place, which means that we have not yet reached the point of no return. Simultaneously, the furor in international forums over the US-led drive to war indicates that there is still plenty of scope for the Arabs to coordinate with those forces opposed to war and ensure that all diplomatic avenues have been exhausted. True, the critical problem remains Saddam Hussein's attempts to dodge the arms inspection process by only yielding on a point when pressures intensify. However, Hans Blix's and Mohamed El-Baradie's reports to the Security Council give an added measure of hope, having indicated that Iraq is complying after a fashion and that, if given more time, weapons inspectors will be able to ensure that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction.
Still, it remains up to Arab leaders to reach a consensus over a common position. This position must rest upon a set of principles over which there is general unanimity in the Arab world. First, priority must be given to a peaceful solution to the crisis. Second, the Iraqi leadership must cooperate fully and unconditionally with the UN weapons inspection teams until they complete their operations, after which the Arabs will press for lifting the sanctions imposed on the people of Iraq in accordance with paragraph 22 of UN Security Council Resolution 678. Third, the UN must be the sole authority responsible for handling the Iraqi crisis in accordance with clear resolutions. Fourth, the territorial integrity, institutions of government and infrastructure of Iraq must be preserved. In addition to these principles, the Arabs should also stress the appeal long advocated by President Mubarak which is to free the entire Middle East of weapons of mass destruction. This demand inevitably entails turning international attention to Israel, specifically, to its large nuclear arsenal.
The situation surrounding Iraq could not be more delicate and more fraught with dangers to the region and the world. The prospect of such dangers has stirred deep rifts in international opinion, indeed between Western allies, as each country scrambles to influence developments as best suits its national interests. Certainly, the Arab world, which will be most immediately effected by adverse developments in the explosive climate that hovers over this region, should make its presence powerfully and cogently felt.
It remains now to be seen whether the emergency summit will adopt the required resolutions, voicing the prevailing attitudes in the Arab world, or whether the Arabs will sit back and wait for others to resolve their disputes and then pay double the price for our absence or our division.
Will all Arab governments, without exception, rise to the level of responsibility towards their peoples and the history of the Arab nation? Or will each go its own way, absorbed in the pursuit of their separate concerns and transient interests, relegating their collective fate to be swept up by the tides of circumstance? If the latter proves the case, then I believe it is Egypt's right to take those decisions it deems will best serve its historic responsibilities and protect the welfare of its people and national security in the face of any remiss in Arab positions.
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 20 - 26 February 2003 (Issue No. 626)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/626/op1.htm