The debate continues
Arab governments are speaking of a new Arab order, but are they committed to doing what it will take to create it? Dina Ezzat examines the possibilities
It took Arab governments 14 weeks to form a ministerial committee to follow up on the resolutions adopted by the Arab summit on 1 March.
On Tuesday, in the Bahraini capital of Manama, the members of the Arab Summit Follow- up Committee (ASFC), namely the Arab League secretary-general, 13 Arab foreign ministers and their deputy foreign ministers, convened to discuss a fairly limited agenda that focussed on developments in Iraq, the Arab--Israeli conflict and the future of the Arab League.
Given that the first official session of the meeting began just as Hamas leader Abdul-Aziz Al- Rantisi survived a failed assassination attempt by Israel, a good part of that session was dedicated to assessing the possibilities of any future Palestinian--Israeli talks, the need for inter- Palestinian dialogue and the outcomes of the Aqaba and Sharm El-Sheikh talks at which five Arab governments committed to demilitarising the Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation.
Sources close to those at the meeting told Al- Ahram Weekly during a telephone interview from Manama that much of the gathering was given over to debate between the foreign ministers who had attended the Sharm El-Sheikh gathering and those who had not. In other words, while the heads of delegations of Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the Palestinian Authority defended the talks held at the Egyptian resort, arguing that the meetings were productive, having secured an American commitment to work for peace and stability in the Middle East, the heads of the Syrian, Lebanese and Libyan delegations criticised the outcomes of the talks. Foreign ministers of Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco and Sudan, though, largely remained on the sidelines of the debate.
Sources told the Weekly that critics of the Red Sea meetings tried to steer discussions to deal with "the real agenda and outcome" of those talks, and they contended the meeting was given over to responding to an American list of demands related to suppressing militant Islamist groups, particularly in the Palestinian territories. A topic of particularly heated discussion "and almost argument", according to one source, was the matter of the list of Sharm El-Sheikh invitees. Commitments made in Aqaba by Arab states were also discussed.
"However, it was not a harsh debate. At the end, the Syrians expressed scepticism over the seriousness of the US commitment to bring about peace and they were not too critical of the Arab parties to the Sharm El-Sheikh and Aqaba meetings," said one participant in the Manama meeting.
Typical of such meetings, there was no clear consensus about actions Arab countries should take to effectively manage the Arab-Israeli conflict.
"Nobody wants to offend the US. That's a fact. But it's also true that there is a clear discrepancy between those who believe that pursuing the roadmap is the way ahead -- Egypt and Jordan -- and Syria and Lebanon, who believe the plan is a trap," said a meeting participant.
Attendees were in agreement, however, in condemning the attempt on Al-Rantisi's life. The Arab League secretary-general and the foreign ministers of Egypt, Syria and Saudi Arabia vocally criticised the attack. "The attempt is condemned, condemned, condemned," said Syrian Foreign Minister Farouq Al-Sharaa.
Iraq, to no one's surprise, was another matter over which Arab foreign ministers were unable to agree. Some Arab states voiced concern about the support some Gulf states, Bahrain and Qatar in particular, are giving to US efforts to establish an interim administration in Iraq. Also debated in Manama was a proposal by Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa for the Arab organisation to host a meeting of representatives of the Iraqi political factions to foster the democratic selection of members of an interim government.
"It seems that Arab governments are not sure about how involved they want to be in reconfiguring Iraq's political map or who to endorse," one diplomat who took part in the ASFC meeting told the Weekly.
ASFC members reviewed several proposals on reforming the Arab League that had been submitted by member states. Participants dedicated most of their attention to a Saudi proposal focussing on greater coordination among member states' foreign policy. According to one participant, though, "nothing is conclusive yet". The ASFC intends to further review the Saudi and other proposals, including some that are still forthcoming.
Given this lack of agreement, the ASFC concluded its meeting without issuing a final communiqué. Persons in some Arab diplomatic quarters found the inability to issue such a document disturbing, saying it indicates a lack of collective political will to start tackling the serious problems facing Arab countries.
"There is always a debate, but there is no clear list of steps to be taken. They seem to always be in the brainstorming phase," commented one Arab diplomat.
Weighing in on this issue, Arab League Secretary-General Moussa said, "It's all a matter of political will." Speaking to reporters following the meeting of the ASFC, Moussa conceded the need for some radical changes. He said, "These should not be confined to the performance of the Arab League. They should include a commitment to the resolutions adopted by Arab states under the umbrella of this league. That's what we have to work on, because that's what could lead to the evolution of a better Arab order."
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 12 - 18 June 2003 (Issue No. 642)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/642/re7.htm