Mideast in Transition
Ahmed Hany
June 19, 2008
In the Mideast, all are waiting. All are fed up of the present situation and of violence. All talk to all directly or indirectly and no one listens to the other. All have to take decision but they do not want to take risks. While politicians talk to their rivals, they doubt their allies. All have doubts about the future. All maneuver and postpone solutions. These are called signs of a transitional phase. The area from Pakistan to Morocco is waiting for changes across the Atlantic Ocean to devise their new policies. That will not happen before January 2009 when a new American President inhibits the White House. However, this new president, democratic or republican, will find a different Middle East because changes are imminent. Even the US is not like the sole power that was present 8 years ago.
The main problem in the Middle East is that it is used to export its problems in exchange for partial solutions that ignite more problems. Always the Middle East problems find its way to Western Capitals because there is no a powerful device in the region to deal with its problems. Moreover, the temporary alliances in the region made its countries not trusting each other much. The Palestine problem that should have united them, unfortunately divided them for two main reasons. The first reason is the Palestinian themselves who have never been united. The second is the absence of logic and reasonable tolerance for the other about the different views on how the Palestinians could get their rights. The result was that every country supported a Palestinian faction and on a later stage, this faction served the cause of its patron more than serving the Palestinian cause itself. It became too easy to accuse others with treason and agency. This helped Israel to have more sympathizers in the West because there was always someone declare that he would throw Israel out or destroy it to have applauds.
The presence of expansionist projects or a will of a ruler to annex his neighbors forced countries of the region to devise different defence strategies against its neighbors. The dictator rules of the last century always talked about Palestine and their media talked about their will to dominate others as if it were the only way to liberate Palestine. The colonial forces drew political lines that stirred troubles between neighbors. They left many undefined areas between two countries that both claim about having it. Astonishingly, these both neighbors were allies to the same superpowers who got much benefit from selling weapons to both countries.
The weak regional organizations that gather the countries of the region that are the Arab League AL and the Islamic Countries Organization were weak and they had neither authority nor effective methodology to impose solutions. The racial and religious minoritiesī rights were ignored largely. This added to security problems.
The corruption and the failure to have a model for advancement opened the gate for the fundamentalists to have a say. Their propaganda was directed some sectors with a message that stated that God punishes you because of the corruption that you live in and tolerate. While the regimes did not do enough to solve the poverty, health and education problems the extremists were recruiting disappointed youth from slums to explode themselves to go to the paradise instead of the hell they live in their communities. Even in oil rich countries, this happened with the minorities and poor communities. The regimes were forced to tighten the security grip because of the failure of the corrupted governments to provide an integrated social solution for the problem.
The main local changes in the region that will shape it depend on the outcome of the present problem. Political reform has started with alternative accelerating and de-accelerating phases. There is a consensus now among ruling parties and the elite that the future needs internal reform and advancement strategies to solve both internal and external problems. However, this consensus did not translate into a collective and integrated advancement view gathering all countries. This both threatens chances of advancement and deteriorates the regionīs political situation.
On the regional level, in Israel the majority are convinced that the future and the existence depend on peace with Palestinians, but until now, it did not make up its mind to go seriously into the process. Its not deciding situation opens the gate for the Jewish extremism and terrorism to force the weak government to take destructive decisions to the peace process that the country is dependant upon it to survive. The reluctance about a truce with Hamas and the stubborn decision of not to talk with it spread more violence between both sides. The Israeli refusal to talk with some factions reflects a weaker Israel than thirty years ago. After the 1967, defeat the Arabs refused to talk, negotiate or recognize Israel. After 1973 victory, it became much easier for Sadat to declare the peace initiative. Hamas accepted the Arab peace initiative and came to power according to the elections that were done according to Oslo accords. That means that it recognizes Israel. However, its leaders are reluctant to declare that not to angry Iran and Syria that started talking to the Hebrew State. Syria is an ally to Iran but its president declared that the US has to put the negotiations under its auspice. Even the Qatari brokered Lebanese agreement is a truce more than a solution. The future of this solution depends on Hezbo-Allah actions and whether it will side to the Lebanese national interests or it will make itself an Iranian ploy to ruin the Syrian-Israeli negotiations if it would be fruitful. This also would depend on the Syrian ability to end the armed role of Hezbo-Allah if it reached an agreement that guarantee the return of Golan Heights. While Iran has doubts about Syria it continue to play with the US over influence in Iraq, the nuclear file and its dreams about extending its influence to the East Mediterranean.
The most important factor that will determine different paths is the fate of the US in Iraq. It will be the first duty of the new American President to decide how to deal with the Iraqi quagmire that he will inherit from George W Bush. Until now, the decreasing violence level there reflects the aggressive military operations by the American and Iraqi Forces. Nobody could predict what would happen if the US withdrew. Obama favors withdrawal and Mac Cain refuses that. Both support Israel. Both cannot engage in another war. Both promised that they would not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, their support and promises or even their decision about Iraq, will be determined by only one factor that is securing tight control over global and Energy resources to defend Pax-Americana and to contain China and other rising Asian powers. That is why everyone here waits for the changes in the American Strategy from confrontation to containment if Obama won or for a mixture of containment and confrontation Strategy if Mac Cain won. For books by the author:
http://stores.lulu.com/ahmedhany
The main problem in the Middle East is that it is used to export its problems in exchange for partial solutions that ignite more problems. Always the Middle East problems find its way to Western Capitals because there is no a powerful device in the region to deal with its problems. Moreover, the temporary alliances in the region made its countries not trusting each other much. The Palestine problem that should have united them, unfortunately divided them for two main reasons. The first reason is the Palestinian themselves who have never been united. The second is the absence of logic and reasonable tolerance for the other about the different views on how the Palestinians could get their rights. The result was that every country supported a Palestinian faction and on a later stage, this faction served the cause of its patron more than serving the Palestinian cause itself. It became too easy to accuse others with treason and agency. This helped Israel to have more sympathizers in the West because there was always someone declare that he would throw Israel out or destroy it to have applauds.
The presence of expansionist projects or a will of a ruler to annex his neighbors forced countries of the region to devise different defence strategies against its neighbors. The dictator rules of the last century always talked about Palestine and their media talked about their will to dominate others as if it were the only way to liberate Palestine. The colonial forces drew political lines that stirred troubles between neighbors. They left many undefined areas between two countries that both claim about having it. Astonishingly, these both neighbors were allies to the same superpowers who got much benefit from selling weapons to both countries.
The weak regional organizations that gather the countries of the region that are the Arab League AL and the Islamic Countries Organization were weak and they had neither authority nor effective methodology to impose solutions. The racial and religious minoritiesī rights were ignored largely. This added to security problems.
The corruption and the failure to have a model for advancement opened the gate for the fundamentalists to have a say. Their propaganda was directed some sectors with a message that stated that God punishes you because of the corruption that you live in and tolerate. While the regimes did not do enough to solve the poverty, health and education problems the extremists were recruiting disappointed youth from slums to explode themselves to go to the paradise instead of the hell they live in their communities. Even in oil rich countries, this happened with the minorities and poor communities. The regimes were forced to tighten the security grip because of the failure of the corrupted governments to provide an integrated social solution for the problem.
The main local changes in the region that will shape it depend on the outcome of the present problem. Political reform has started with alternative accelerating and de-accelerating phases. There is a consensus now among ruling parties and the elite that the future needs internal reform and advancement strategies to solve both internal and external problems. However, this consensus did not translate into a collective and integrated advancement view gathering all countries. This both threatens chances of advancement and deteriorates the regionīs political situation.
On the regional level, in Israel the majority are convinced that the future and the existence depend on peace with Palestinians, but until now, it did not make up its mind to go seriously into the process. Its not deciding situation opens the gate for the Jewish extremism and terrorism to force the weak government to take destructive decisions to the peace process that the country is dependant upon it to survive. The reluctance about a truce with Hamas and the stubborn decision of not to talk with it spread more violence between both sides. The Israeli refusal to talk with some factions reflects a weaker Israel than thirty years ago. After the 1967, defeat the Arabs refused to talk, negotiate or recognize Israel. After 1973 victory, it became much easier for Sadat to declare the peace initiative. Hamas accepted the Arab peace initiative and came to power according to the elections that were done according to Oslo accords. That means that it recognizes Israel. However, its leaders are reluctant to declare that not to angry Iran and Syria that started talking to the Hebrew State. Syria is an ally to Iran but its president declared that the US has to put the negotiations under its auspice. Even the Qatari brokered Lebanese agreement is a truce more than a solution. The future of this solution depends on Hezbo-Allah actions and whether it will side to the Lebanese national interests or it will make itself an Iranian ploy to ruin the Syrian-Israeli negotiations if it would be fruitful. This also would depend on the Syrian ability to end the armed role of Hezbo-Allah if it reached an agreement that guarantee the return of Golan Heights. While Iran has doubts about Syria it continue to play with the US over influence in Iraq, the nuclear file and its dreams about extending its influence to the East Mediterranean.
The most important factor that will determine different paths is the fate of the US in Iraq. It will be the first duty of the new American President to decide how to deal with the Iraqi quagmire that he will inherit from George W Bush. Until now, the decreasing violence level there reflects the aggressive military operations by the American and Iraqi Forces. Nobody could predict what would happen if the US withdrew. Obama favors withdrawal and Mac Cain refuses that. Both support Israel. Both cannot engage in another war. Both promised that they would not allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, their support and promises or even their decision about Iraq, will be determined by only one factor that is securing tight control over global and Energy resources to defend Pax-Americana and to contain China and other rising Asian powers. That is why everyone here waits for the changes in the American Strategy from confrontation to containment if Obama won or for a mixture of containment and confrontation Strategy if Mac Cain won. For books by the author:
http://stores.lulu.com/ahmedhany
Print
Email
