Posted on 03/28/2004 7:55:51 PM PST by Mark Felton
TUNIS, March 28 Arab governments were in disarray on Sunday after the Arab League summit meeting, set to grapple with vital regional issues like democratic reform, Arab-Israeli bloodshed and the American occupation of Iraq, was abruptly called off just before it was to open Monday.
Advertisement
The exact reason is a matter of some dispute, but all sides viewed the meeting's collapse even as some heads of state were on their way as an embarrassment. It was a stark public admission that the commitment to change voiced by Arab leaders risks becoming just more words.
The Arab League is infamous for its fractious gatherings, but even its most experienced bureaucrats described the cancellation as extraordinary. Some commentators thought the collapse inevitable from the start. The very idea of reform remains too divisive, and many nations' governments have yet to decide how to deal themselves with issues like elections.
"Every Arab country has its own deep problems, so I don't believe you can find a general answer," said Khairallah Khairallah, a political commentator and former editor in chief of Al Hayat, a London-based Arabic newspaper.
There were still attempts on Sunday to salvage the collective effort, however. The office of Egypt's president, Hosni Mubarak, issued a statement expressing his "surprise and regret" over the cancellation. President Mubarak offered to have the gathering in Egypt, arguing that differences of opinion were hardly sufficient cause to abort the meeting.
Foreign ministers said they were exploring possible dates in April. Tunisia still objected, however, saying the problem was the issues, not the setting.
Given the the American invasion of Iraq, and spiral of violence in the region, including terrorist bomb attacks from Casablanca to Riyadh, there had been some expectation that Arab leaders might commit themselves to change.
Certainly the Bush administration had hoped for some kind of broad endorsement of reform that might demonstrate that its decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein was having a positive echo.
Senior officials and analysts here said events in Tunis, while not without precedent, represented in stark colors the Arab world's inability to cope with American efforts to redraw the region's political map.
"You feel they are completely lost," said Mr. Khairallah, the political commentator. "The Arab League is finally feeling the impact of the fall of Baghdad. It took them a whole year."
A reluctance to take the first step toward reform was evident in the two days of preparatory talks about the agenda, which bogged down in details like how to present Arab culture at the Frankfurt book fair next fall, said several foreign ministers who took part.
Meanwhile, crucial issues like a joint statement of principles on political change and the league's reformulated position toward peace with Israel had barely been discussed and remained unresolved, they said.
Late Saturday night, as the 22 foreign ministers were reaching a strained if amicable consensus on those key points, Tunisia pulled the plug, announcing that it would not preside over a gathering willing to make what it called only a tepid commitment to reform.
"There was real horror on their faces," said Nabil Shaath, the Palestinian foreign minister, describing the mood as Tunisia announced its decision. "They felt that despite all their disagreements, this summit was important."
Another foreign minister described the rush to grab cellphones to call home and tell the various kings, presidents and princes due to start arriving Sunday to stay home. Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, the Libyan leader, was reportedly on his way to Tunis, while the Iraqi delegation, lead by a Shiite Muslim cleric in a remarkable break from the past, had journeyed along Iraq's treacherous roads as far as Kuwait.
On the crucial issue of political reform, the general consensus had divided into two broad groups, participants said. One group was made up of those who wanted to resist what was seen as a fiat from the Bush administration for the Arab League to push for sweeping changes. The other group included those who said the call for change was not a Washington monopoly and that a wider urge for greater democracy had to be addressed.
"From disarray comes revolution and true reform."
Let's just hope that people in the US are willing to wait it out, as that will be more turmoil and uncertainty when it happens.
Got to get one's own house in order before telling the neighbors how to keep theirs, or forming neighborhood patrols.
If the turmoil and uncertainty keeps the islamics focused on saving their own @sses instead of making war on us, that will be a welcome relief.
With any luck (and a push from the US), the militants will lose and the rest of the arabs will embrace civilization.
Elections, while being a divisive issue for the Arab League nations, is not the most divisive issue. Elections may even be a bad idea right now in such a place as Saudi Arabia -- not that the NY Times would agree with that.
Anyway, the most divisive issue in the Arab League remains that a few members are still aligned with the terrorists. For instance Lebanon, "Palestine" and Syria are still are on the wrong hump.
This is why the meeting was canceled and this is what the NY Times hides.
IMO.
Only then does one understand the gravity of the decision -- and the direction they are pushing.
This was a development of profound importance. Yet, there is not so much as a hint of what the story is really about until one sifts through all the chaff and digs out the kernel for one's self.
The Times is a shadow of what it once was and should be (and still believes it is).
I think he's related to Duran Duran. I'll have to check.
Give him a call at his office in Walla Walla.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.