Afrasianet - Subhi Ghandour - What characteristics can be launched in the current situation in the Arab region? Split .. Disability .. Inertia .. Or laziness? Perhaps each of these qualities is valid, but the most expressive expression of the reality of the Arab nation is that it is an open nation of regional and international powers. What is happening on its land is the state of permissiveness in all its meanings and images.
As long as the internal military coups to change governments is now unacceptable in the world as a whole, what kind of democratic system can result from the chaos of civil wars or foreign military intervention?
If some Arab governments did not enjoy the rights of their citizens and the rights of other Arab states, would the Arab nation have reached such a level of weakness, impotence, division and alienation from abroad?
That the Arabs are now a long-standing nation until this time, because it is due to weakness and damage inside, and to the outside. But the failure to remedy weakness and repair the corruption is what allowed and allowed the outside to intervene and hegemony and ignite internal strife.
The one nation with a single culture and common destiny is now wrestling with forces, groups and entities, and the land of competencies, minds and good things are flowing out of its land, and in its one community calls for further divisions on ethnic, sectarian or even regional bases. If the entities of this Arab nation are based on sound constitutional conditions guaranteeing the right of popular participation in political life and safeguarding the political and social rights of citizens, would it have lived as weak and conflicted as it is now?
Despite the diversity of challenges facing the Arab nation and its different areas, each of them affects the entire Arab region and does not mean a country without the other. Foreign powers (regional and international) play a decisive role in how to deal negatively or positively with each of these challenges.
Unfortunately, in the reality of the internal Arab situation, despite the participation in the challenges and concerns, the Arab governments deal with these issues (and others as well) from a special perspective, not in the context of a common Arab vision that preserves the right and deter aggression and achieve Arab interests.
On the external side, the regional and international parties concerned with the conflicts in the region have a comprehensive vision of the problems of the entire Arab region. There are also foreign "solutions projects" to these problems that may not be compatible with the hopes and aspirations of the peoples of the Arab region.
The real problem is how to determine the appropriate solutions and means to deal with these diseases that transport Arabs over time, from bad to worse. .
In the contemporary historical context of the Arab nation, what happened after the 1967 war was a good example of repetition in more than one contemporary era, especially now.
The Arabs in 1967 were at the height of the Arab / Arab conflicts, including internal military wars (the war of Yemen and its Egyptian / Saudi interaction), conflicts between more than one Arab ruler, and a sharp political division over the nature of the regimes and the methods of governance. Etc.), and in a highly polarized international climate in which America led a war, cold and hot, implicitly, against the other camp and all those who deal with it from third world countries ...
Despite all these circumstances, the Khartoum summit in 1967 succeeded in overcoming the obstacles and put forward a common Arab vision for how to deal with the challenges of the stage at the time and what is required of the Arab interim goals. Also, the Khartoum Summit succeeded in building a joint Arab solidarity that ended the Arab / Arab conflicts and put all the Arab energies in the service of the battle against the Israeli enemy. The Khartoum Summit coincided with a joint Arab effort to combine political and diplomatic action on the international scene with the construction of military preparations for the liberation of the territories occupied in 1967. The heroic war of attrition on the Egyptian front coincided with the acceptance of UN Security Council resolutions and international initiatives. It was this era (1967-1970) that paved the way for the October 1973 war, which combined the use of Arab military and economic potential.
Today, the problem in the Arab body itself, as there are no conflicts in the region now about the nature of systems and methods of change .. All the Arab countries are now governed by systems very similar politically and economically ...
There is no international polarization in the world today in order for Arab governments to emerge between a friend and an enemy of this great country. All Arab governments (as now, most of the world) seek the "friendship" of America, Russia and China together.
Therefore, the Arab problem is the absence of the Arab decision to develop a common Arab vision, and not to assume the responsibilities of the leadership role desired by more than one Arab party, as if the Arab regional system is satisfied with this old reality as long as it maintains the continuation of the regimes and special interests in them!
After the 1967 war, the Arabs were carrying the gun in their hand and the olive branch in the other hand. Today, the hands of the official Arab state carry all the branches of the olive tree and carry nothing else to deter any aggression or safeguard the rights or maintain the minimum resolutions of previous Arab summits. What "peace" can be achieved in the region if it is based on a combination of an Israeli rifle, an American cowboy and an Arab olive branch?
The US President Trump justified his recognition of Jerusalem as the eternal capital of Israel and the transfer of the US Embassy to it, that this is the reality that has existed for more than fifty years, the same excuses that Trump gave his decision to Israel's right to seize the occupied Golan Heights. Why does Trump not use his "realistic approach" in recognizing and dealing with the ruling Cuban regime for over half a century? Why did not the United States surrender to the "reality" of the Communist camp and fight it by various means for decades?
Unfortunately, there are Arab pens written in a logic similar to Trump's concepts of realism and wonder why the Arabs and Palestinians did not accept the existence of Israel and recognize it at the end of the 1940s, despite the Zionist armed gangs massacres and displacement of the Palestinian people on the eve of the declaration of the Israeli state! They also criticize the late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad for not agreeing to the "Rabin deposit" which did not include the full withdrawal from the Golan Heights.
If the "Trampic approach" was adopted to understand the realism, Europeans would not protest Russia's annexation of the Crimea and South Africa would have ended its apartheid regime. Nelson Mandela insisted on the right to equality despite his arrest and torture for more than twenty years. Lebanon and the Gaza Strip from Israeli occupation, which has been the "fait accompli" for many years !.
The difference is very large between "realism", that is, the departure from the existing reality, and the surrender to the bad reality and subjugation to it despite the realization that it is not right or fair.
Sound "realism" is in the pursuit of the desired change, overcoming the obstacles and overcoming the elements of weakness despite the difficult local, regional and international conditions. True "realism" sees the source of the deficit and the cause of the problem in the rejected reality, working to fill the deficit and overcome the problem, but it does not accept this reality as inevitable and the amount can not touch them or object to them! True "realism" rejects the humiliating tendency in the same place and moves with courage, patience, determination and trust in God, the nation and the soul, and wins despite the magnitude of the challenges.
The challenges to the Arabs will remain, and will continue to accumulate, as long as the platform for dealing with them does not deviate from factional deals that happen secretly and publicly. They achieve special benefits, but they do not lead to the treatment of general diseases in the region that turn into epidemics that also affect those who have concluded deals and believed that they achieved private security Or individual peace.
The Western European countries have suffered from bloody wars and conflicts, and competition for hegemony, more than any other continent in the world, but the mere rebuilding of European societies on sound foundations led them to believe in the importance of integration and union among them. All the conflicts of the past and the differences of culture, language and history - existing in the present - but to build a better common future.
This is what the Arab nation (past and present) missed and misses from an inevitable correlation between the Union and democracy, leading to a better future at all levels.