Articles
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, November 2008, page 50
Arab-American Activism
Mahmood Ibrahim Addresses AAPG
 |
|
|
|
AN ANALYSIS of Syria’s political options was presented by Prof. Mahmood Ibrahim on July 31 at the monthly program of the Arab American Press Guild (AAPG) in Los Angeles, CA. Apathy on the part of Arab leaders, the academic said, has enabled the U.S. and Israel to forge ahead in carrying out their vision for the region.
While Israel has been gratified with the destruction of Iraq as a power center in the Middle East, he noted, the U.S. seems to support Turkey stepping to the front in the region—perhaps as a counterbalance to Iran’s ascendancy. The latter is evidenced by the secret but widely known negotiations between Syria and Israel in Istanbul. These discussions include conditions and timetables for Israel’s withdrawal from the Golan Heights, among other issues.
Ibrahim, a history professor at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, warned that these negotiations simply give more time to Israel to do whatever it wants. He pointed out that the Israelis have used the same process in the so-called peace process, giving them time to build more settlements and other illegal constructions on the West Bank.
There is disunity among Israeli leaders. Tzipi Livni, the vice prime minister of the Kadima party, wants preconditions on withdrawal; outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and former Labor Prime Minister Ehud Barak are willing to discuss a withdrawal to the borders of June 4, 1967; whereas Likud’s leader, former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, refuses to discuss giving up so much as one inch of the Golan. Syria steadfastly has resisted U.S. pressures to sever its ties with Iran.
Another new dynamic is the Mediterranean Union, supported by France’s President Nicholas Sarkozy. Along with the European Union’s 27 states, this union would include Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Turkey and Tunisia. Such an alliance creates a new orbit to draw Arab Mediterranean states away from Iran’s influence and normalizes relations with Israel without arriving at a peace agreement.
Syria and Lebanon now recognize each other’s sovereignty and soon will exchange ambassadors, Dr. Ibrahim continued. He did not discern a fundamental change in the Lebanese government with its 30 parliamentary seats, 16 of which go to the majority, 11 to the opposition, and 3 to the president”˜s party. In the past, however, the distribution of ministerial portfolios was sectarian in nature, whereas today it is split according to political loyalty: Muslims and Christians sit with the majority, while the opposition includes Christian Gen. Michel Aoun and Hezbollah.
Dr. Ibrahim described the sectarian fighting in Tripoli that ceased July 19 and 20 as a battle between the poorest of the poor who should be united in striving for a better distribution of Lebanon’s wealth, instead of artificial Sunni/Shi’i differences.
A new player in Lebanon is the pro-U.S. Gulf state of Qatar, which has a stake in its investments in Lebanon, and is trying to mend relations in such a way as to lessen the influence of Hezbollah.
Summing up prospects for the region, Prof. Ibrahim said all Arab states need a fundamental restructuring of how they conduct politics. Not one of these governments seriously operates for the progress of all its people, according to Ibrahim.
In conclusion, he mused: “Why is everyone so fearful of a Shi’i ascendency? As an historian, I can say one of the golden ages was when the Shi’i Fatimids were in control. The rise and decline of political power, whether Sunni or Shi’i, didn’t depend on being either.”
—Pat McDonnell Twair
