The fundamental problems facing the Arab states
Regional, Analysis, 1/31/1998

The US has consulted France, Britain, Canada on the issues facing the Gulf, and now, US secretary Albright is going to the Gulf not to consult the Arab States, but to tell them what the US has decided to do.

The timing is perfect as the US and Britain had just issued condemnation of these Arab States on human rights ( see our report today).

The US is spending endless energy to bring other countries in line with "US goals". The UK, the only strong supporter of US policy along with Israel on these issues, is an irrelevant entity in this regard as it seeks international status by attaching itself to the US position and will always follow US policy to magnify its importance and is thus quite marginal despite its best efforts to appear otherwise. Britain serves US interests in turn by giving cover to US actions to make US actions look multilateral instead of unilateral.

The United Kingdom's policies will become more relevant, but only due to its new role as the spokesman for the European Union. That will also force the UK to moderate its views on the Middle East and make it more supportive of Arab states' interests since the UK will be forced to adopt the other European countries' position, such as France, Germany, Italy and others, that are more supportive of political and economic development in the region and tend to be impartial, and have no negative desires against Arab states' interests.

The US president Bill Clinton recently began sending positive signals to Iran about reestablishing relations with this so called "terrorist" country. Why? Because the US, just like with Iraq previously, will do what ever it sees as necessary to keep a balance of power that is in its own interest, and that will keep everyone weak and fearfully of the other neighbors in order to remain dependent on the protection of the United Sates.

In the Gulf, Iraq does not serve a counterbalance to Iran so long as Iran is weak. The US has used Iraq in the past to counterbalance Iran by providing loans and arms in its bid to fight Iran. The US did not show resistance to the idea of invading Kuwait when its ambassador to Iraq, before the Iraqi invasion, told Iraq that the US in effect "will not interfere with Iraqi decisions!" Many have interpreted this as a green light by the US to entrap Iraq into its actions that followed, the invasion of Kuwait. That theory, right or wrong can be further given credence to by the fact that the CIA one year earlier in a major study developed and distributed a report that cited Iraq¹s growing army as a serious threat to US regional national interests.

This all leads to the problem that is plaguing the Gulf region and Arab states in general. The pursuit of US policy of balance of power, and keeping everyone off balance in the process.

Since Iran has been devastated economically and militarily after its war with Iraq, Iran has been making rapid progress in its use of resources to rebuild economically and militarily. Thus the increased US efforts to maintain sanctions against Iran, and the constant drumbeat against anyone that does business with Iran, such as the Europeans and others. The US sees that in a weak Iran there exists an opportunity of not worrying about a balance of power as typically done, that is by making each side stronger by matching the other's power, and the US sees a unique opportunity presented by the post Iraq-Iran war and the Gulf war, of keeping this balance by keeping each party weaker.

And thus, the US has no interest in a strong Iraq. To the contrary, a weak Iraq puts the US in an ideal position by not having a strong Arab country that "may" pose a "potential future threat" to oil supplies or Israel, the two stated strategic US interests, and at the same time, would push the Arab countries to depend even more on US protection against potential Iranian, Turkish and Israeli threats. Specifically in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries would have no where to go. Iraq is one of the few Arab States that have the natural wealth, large population, and human resource skills to be a very successful and powerful country on top and near the world's oil resources.

The US policy, most recently, is showing a very definite shift with regard to Iran, since Iran is acquiring all the weapons technology that allows it to project power in the gulf. This change in US policy is further driven by the realization that its "containment" policy against Iraq is heading for failure due to the unexpected support by Arab States to the importance of an undivided Iraq on their eastern boundaries, and as a buffer against potential regional threats.

One by one the Arab countries are always being weakened militarily, economically and externally by playing them against each other, by the creation of sanctions, by the creation of new enemies, by international isolation and labeling with terms such as "terrorist states", "drug states", "outlaw states", "fundamentalist states", all kind of ugly states. Also by using human rights against Arab states as a subtle threat to extract cooperation on many issues, and threaten their internal stability. That is what in practice is being done, despite all the smiles that come with the talks that try to convince the Arab "friends" otherwise.

The US pretends that even by not naming these "friends", that the US is doing them a favor by not mentioning their names, implying that they are so afraid of being publicly allied with the US that saying so may cause internal decent or instability, a very subtle threat the US gently waves above the leaders of the Gulf countries and others.

Well who are those mysterious friends? Saudi Arabia and Egypt are foremost, the two real pillars of Arab strength. Are they afraid that others would know that the U-2 planes fly from Saudi Arabia or that the US has bases in Saudi Arabia? Is this the secret the US is trying to protect the Saudis from? Not likely, since everyone knows these facts, and though some do not like this, the fact remains that Saudi Arabia has been a premier champion and an intelligent supporter and advocate of Arab states' rights, and has been among the most effective in promoting those rights. History points most clearly and evidently to this in their proven acts without which, the Arab states would have been as helpless as can be.

The Saudis' sophistication in their foreign policy is mature and there is increasing understanding by the populous of the need for the actions that the government takes and the policies it adopts. So any illusions that Saudi Arabia has weak support and fears of the few radicals, who have no respect for the rule of law and internal stability, are greatly misleading and their threat is intentionally magnified. This magnification of internal threats does not serve Saudi interests or policies, and any implications and interference by other countries be it the US, Britain or Iran in Saudi internal affairs along these lines should not be tolerated in any shape or form, as each country must develop at a rate that is reasonable for that country in line with its traditions, values and morays in order that stability is maintained through the necessary periods of change.

Or is this mysterious friend Egypt who the US found no difficulty in bugging (putting listening device) in the office of its president. Egypt has been the other force, and without it, all talk of Arab strength is meaningless. Egypt has not been afraid to say we are friends of the US and we seek to be even more friendly and to do business together and prosper in peace, but only when it serves Egyptian interests and is not against Egypt's strategic interests.

Egypt has been a pillar of stability and good judgment in relation to Arab interests and has been moving successfully in implementing its economic and political reforms and in formulating its foreign policy in a practical manner. The US would do well showing its friendship to Egypt by not trying to destabilize it internally, as it grows to become a regional economic and political power, by trying to create internal divisions along religious and other lines, or by creating external enemies along the lifeblood Nile river, to keep a lever on Egypt, as the US is doing with Syria with its Turkish policy.

Why is the US always promising and giving with one hand while doing the opposite with the other hand. The answer is simple as it should be. It is because the US ruthlessly pursues US interests as the US should, and what we witness in this "give with one hand and take with the other hand" policy are the tactics of implementing those policies that define US interests.

Now the questions is, will the Arab states realize, define and pursue what is in their individual and common interests or will they be guided by empty talk and rhetoric that has no relevance to their long term future national well being?

Will the Arab states have a sophisticated, unbelligerent answer that simply formulates and clearly articulates their interests unequivocally without any boasting or hostility towards anyone, especially without hostility towards the US? The Arab states desire excellent relations with the US, this point should be well understood. But the US must have respect for the Arab States' interest as well.

The future belongs to those who rise to the challenges needed to make a better, more peaceful and prosperous region, where children can grow up in well-fed, educated families and where their major preoccupation will be fulfilling their god given potential, instead of wasting energy on constant warfare and constant fear that prevents each of these states from their maximum potential.

North America, Europe, Asia, China, India, South America are rising economically to be the stars of tomorrow. Will the Arab States realize "real" stability so that resources can be put into the economic sphere, which is what in reality matters now and more so in the future, so that they too can be a star?

These events and the policy formulations they lead to are crucial to the kind of world the Arab States want to see around them. Will the Arab states look to the past, thinking that nothing changes, when the whole world is changing and passing by, or will they forge into the future?

Saudi Crown Prince Adbullah bin Abdul Aziz identified the problem with one short statement saying :"A sound healthy body is too strong to succumb to alien pests no matter how ferocious their attacks may be, whereas the body that is torn apart, or worn out from the inside, will be an easy prey to the attacks of foes and the intrigue of their vindictive." This one statement also has within it the solution.

The Arab States individually will have different interest then other Arab States at times, but collectively, they gain a political power that demands respect, and forces long term stability that allows for real peace, and economic development.

UAE's President Sheik Zayed said it just as well saying: "our weakness is our main problem" and "that the external challenges play a great role in determining the future of the Arab nation." He added that the US pressures on the Arab states are the result of the absence of the unified Arab stance.

Egyptian President Mubarak took on the challenge in the MENA conference.

Syria's President Hafez Assad exposed that even when the Arab States want peace, clearly and unequivocally, others do not. Others want to dominate, and determine the rules of the game.

One stick at a time, the Arab states are easy to break. Collectively, that is not very easy to do. These leaders see, understand the problem and the solution. What is needed, are practical steps to implement the solutions. These steps must be build on solid foundations and common interests, and not the emotions of the moment. They must have strategic components, and must allow for times when Arab states have their own separate interests, as they will do. But in unity, they all benefit and protect each other and allow the resources to be channeled where they are most productive to their citizens.

There are many challenges that face the Arab States. But with great leadership, all is possible. But they must rise to the challenge and propose, forge consensus and act on the solutions.

This issue is not whether some action or events will happen or not, the issue is "who will decide what will happen, and who's interest are being considered." No matter what the decision is, if the Arab States decide on it, then so be it, but they should be making the decisions about their future well being as they see it, and stating publicly those interests.

The Arabs want peace, stability and good relations with everyone including the US, Iran, Turkey and Israel. But these countries must reciprocate and act in concrete ways not threaten Arab state's interests.

The Arab states collectively hold all the cards! Whether they choose to hand these cards over and their future to someone else is purely their decision to make.

Previous Stories:
  Britain and US condemn Saudi Arabia and other Arab states on human rights   (1/31/1998)
  Dissecting US sanctions: The domestic politics   (1/28/1998)

Please add a link on your webiste pointing to ArabicNews.com and bookmark ArabicNews.com & subscribe to our daily email news bulletin.

Search