The Arab Summit and the US doctrine
THE Arab Summit, which was held on the 29th and 30th of March, 2008 in Damascus, Syria, faced serious regional challenges. This annual summit is usually held in a different Arab capital. The current Damascus Summit was defined by the failure to attend by Saudi Arabian, Egyptian, Jordanian and Lebanese leaders. These four countries made a tragic and strategic mistake by failing to attend the summit. They will become more vulnerable to Arab national voices, which will perceive them as collaborators with the United States. During his last visit to the region, Dick Cheney insisted that friendly Arab regimes, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, do not participate in the Damascus Summit. According to American analysts, this summit, lead by Syria, would consolidate the Iranian influence in the Middle East and totally ignore the Lebanese agenda on the table. The US policy, as one of the Iraqi War aims, was to destroy any broad based consensus in the Arab political system. In this war, the Americans have not been able to achieve any of their goals. Nevertheless, they have been able to achieve one target, that of destroying this Arab consensus and of preventing the Arabs from working as one political unit, such as the European Union and the Latin American states. The crucial question is why the so-called Arab moderate states are listening to the Americans. The answer is because these leaders perceive their national security interests as the same as American national security interests in the Middle East. This situation has been continuing due to the Iranian hegemony in the Middle East. At the same time, the Saudis are not doing anything significant to deal with that hegemony. They rely on the American veto regarding any political solution in Lebanon. The Saudis criticize the Harari government for not doing this or that, but at the same time they are not making any effort to be flexible or supporting the interests of their allies in Lebanon by encouraging dialogue with Hezbollah. They are following the American doctrine of rejecting and containing an old policy that has reached bankruptcy since the 1980's. Egypt's strategic vision also relies on the Americans because they receive civilian and military assistance. However, the Mubarak regime is conducting a rigid policy toward the Palestinians, following American and Israeli influence. Mubarak is reacting to events and not making them, especially concerning the issues of entering Rafah and Hamas. Eight Arab countries decided to send low profile Arab representatives to the summit. The Lebanese government did not even have a representative since they lost the lead on the initiative and on many Arab issues in this 20th summit. The Saudi initiative, which is now called the Arab Initiative, was proposed and adopted in 2002 and rejected by Israel, and was the first issue on the Arab table. Nevertheless, as I tried to explain regarding Saudi Arabia and its boycott of the Damascus Summit, they are using the excuse of Syrian non-support of the Arab Initiative to solve the Lebanese constitution fiasco. The Saudis are using this Lebanese pretext in order to punish Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. However, by monitoring the media's summit coverage, it seems that the Syrian camp has succeeded in ignoring both the Saudis and the Mubarak regimes. Kaddafi, in an outstanding speech that was broadcast in the Arab world, attacked Arab politics, especially concentrating on the Saudi monarchs. Other analysts argued that Saudi Arabia and the other Arab countries that boycotted the summit should appear and present their cases and their ideas in front of the Arab public. The visits of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice on the 29th of March 2008 and Dick Cheney in the middle of March were timed to communicate that their solution is preferable to the Syrian solution. Rice, by coming and meeting Olmert and Abu Mazen in Jordan, showed that the American solution is the only game in town, in contrast to the Arab Summit in Damascus. Ms. Rice came to Israel, primarily to spend time, although we can say that the US has succeeded in creating a split in the Arab camp. However, US foreign policy looks very poor and without any purpose other than to neutralize any possibility of progress in the Middle East between the Arabs and the Jews. Strategically, however, after this summit, the US actually has no real agenda to push the region forward and to convince the masses in the Middle East of the necessity of an American policy (see the harsh criticism of Amru Mousa, the Chairman of the Arab League, toward the US). The current US administration will continue to give the impression that it is doing something until the end of its term. Rice met Abu Mazen on the 30th of March 2008 and talked about the political process. Abu Mazen received an invitation to come to the White House on 24th of April 2008 to discuss the process further. Finally, on his visit to Israel on the 14th of May 2008, Bush will meet Abu Mazen again to talk about the process. The US, however, will continue to talk about the process forever. While this talking is going on, dangerous things are happening in Iraq and time is working against the interests of America. Concerning Israel, the US is wasting time. The 14th Arab Summit in Beirut, which was held in 2002, adopted the Arab Initiative. This initiative has been on the table for the last six years without any response from Israel or the US. Currently in Damascus, this initiative might be ignored after it has been rejected by Israel. All the files have been opened, but without any solution. The Lebanese file has not been solved and will be on the agenda with the possibility of escalation. The Palestinian file also has a great probability of escalation and polarization with the external support of Abu Mazen, the US and Israel. Finally, the Iraqi file is burning and escalating more and more after the decline of Maliki and the Bush Administration, and the starting of the spring offensive in Afghanistan.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments