Edited by Hodna Nuernberg
History Made by Force
Anyone following the news was nearly made to believe that history was taking place with the meeting of the Arab League in Iraq, an unusual thing only possible thanks to the new regime put in place by the United States and its allies in Baghdad.
If history was being made, it was only by force. The meeting was held so that the world would believe that if the Arab League considers the Iraqi regime to be legitimate, so the rest of the planet must follow suit. The meeting also tried to pretend that the situation in the country is normal, although there are daily explosions and carnage in the whole territory.
There was no history made; there was a farce.
Is the Arab League an organization so spineless that it is willing to be complicit in a maneuver of this kind?
The response must be "yes," but the problem is more complex. In the sequence of events that took place in the Arab world, it is not easy to find common ground among the 22 members. It is much easier to establish accords around opportunistic positions that will ensure convenient relations with whoever rules the world.
The volatility of the positions within the Arab League gives the organization’s presidency a role it has never before possessed. The job is currently held by Qatar, not as a result of a system of rotation in effect in the League, but as a function of economic power -- hence political power. Qatar bought presidency by giving $400 million to the Palestinian Authority. Qatar represents everything that is dominant in the tumultuous Arab world today: petroleum, a lot of money, powerful alliances that represent military force, NATO and its regional sibling, the Gulf Cooperation Council.
On Qatar's side is Saudi Arabia, the most influential regional power in the process of transformation that the United States and Israel have had a hand in, whether in Iraq, Libya or Syria. It is important to remember that there is no cease-fire in Syria today in order to give Kofi Annan’s plan some leeway. This leeway is necessary since the groups that have been armed by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey -- a NATO member -- have been provoking conflicts that require the regime to respond.
Given the circumstances, it is easy to understand why Qatar scheduled the Arab League summit in Baghdad. The new Iraq, although in permanent turmoil, profoundly divided and governed by an executive who is remotely controlled by Washington, is the example of the kind of young and democratic regime that the Gulf states, which are all fundamentalist dictatorial monarchies, try to hold up as the beacon of a new era. The truth is that -- as far as we see -- they can afford such aberrations because they have the world leaders eating out of the palm of their hand… or should we say drinking from their hand (since petroleum is a liquid) so that they might continue on as they are.
If history was being made, it was only by force. The meeting was held so that the world would believe that if the Arab League considers the Iraqi regime to be legitimate, so the rest of the planet must follow suit. The meeting also tried to pretend that the situation in the country is normal, although there are daily explosions and carnage in the whole territory.
There was no history made; there was a farce.
Is the Arab League an organization so spineless that it is willing to be complicit in a maneuver of this kind?
The response must be "yes," but the problem is more complex. In the sequence of events that took place in the Arab world, it is not easy to find common ground among the 22 members. It is much easier to establish accords around opportunistic positions that will ensure convenient relations with whoever rules the world.
The volatility of the positions within the Arab League gives the organization’s presidency a role it has never before possessed. The job is currently held by Qatar, not as a result of a system of rotation in effect in the League, but as a function of economic power -- hence political power. Qatar bought presidency by giving $400 million to the Palestinian Authority. Qatar represents everything that is dominant in the tumultuous Arab world today: petroleum, a lot of money, powerful alliances that represent military force, NATO and its regional sibling, the Gulf Cooperation Council.
On Qatar's side is Saudi Arabia, the most influential regional power in the process of transformation that the United States and Israel have had a hand in, whether in Iraq, Libya or Syria. It is important to remember that there is no cease-fire in Syria today in order to give Kofi Annan’s plan some leeway. This leeway is necessary since the groups that have been armed by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey -- a NATO member -- have been provoking conflicts that require the regime to respond.
Given the circumstances, it is easy to understand why Qatar scheduled the Arab League summit in Baghdad. The new Iraq, although in permanent turmoil, profoundly divided and governed by an executive who is remotely controlled by Washington, is the example of the kind of young and democratic regime that the Gulf states, which are all fundamentalist dictatorial monarchies, try to hold up as the beacon of a new era. The truth is that -- as far as we see -- they can afford such aberrations because they have the world leaders eating out of the palm of their hand… or should we say drinking from their hand (since petroleum is a liquid) so that they might continue on as they are.