Friday, January 16, 2009 - 6:04 PM
The Arab public really is blessed. For instance, for weeks Arabs have been calling loudly and angrily for their governments to do something about the carnage in Gaza. Where an ordinary public might have to settle for, say, a summit meeting of their leaders to hammer out a plan for action, those lucky ducky Arabs get two, even three dueling summit meetings. If only they could accomplish half, even a third as much as other regional groupings, no?
On the one side, Qatar is hosting a summit with 13 Arab states, including Syria, Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, Hamas leaders, and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmedenejad (2 states short of a quorum to make it an official meeting). Egypt refused to attend, in part because -- in the words of its own government -- al-Jazeera had hurt its feelings. Saudi Arabia refused to attend, with pro-Saudi writers denouncing the Doha gathering as the "summit of division." Fatah's Mahmoud Abbas stayed away, while Fatah officials openly criticized the Qatari initiative. At the summit, Qatar and Mauritania -- two Arab states known for their openness towards Israel -- have just announced that they are freezing their diplomatic and economic relations with Israel.
On the other side, Arab foreign ministers gathered in Kuwait for an alternate session dominated by the Egyptians and Saudis in preparation for an economic summit previously planned for Monday. The Foreign Ministers backed Egyptian cease-fire efforts, while the Saudis called for the Arabs to go back to the UN to demand implementation of Resolution 1860 (the passage of which they had previously claimed as their great success against all odds). A relief package of some $500 million for rebuilding Gaza was floated as well. I'm sure all eyes will be glued to Kuwait on Monday to see if they can deliver something ahead of Obama's inauguration.
Meanwhile, the GCC leaders meeting in Riyadh yesterday in an emergency summit called to discuss Gaza seemed more concerned with criticizing the Qatari summit than with Gaza. The presence of Ahmedenejad in Doha particularly incensed Saudi commentators. and they agreed to postpone any decisions until the upcoming economic summit in Kuwait. The Qatari-Saudi rivalry is clearly back.
Three observations about the choices made by key states between the dueling summits:
The Jordanians have tried to portray their stance as outside of any camps in the polarized Arab environment -- "always with the Arab consensus", as the Jordanian newspaper al-Dustour put it -- and many politicians on both sides of the divide have appealed for Arab unity and consensus. But there is no Arab consensus, and the camps appear to be hardening. Even if a cease-fire can be reached before the inauguration, as many are hoping, the costs of the war will continue to be felt well beyond the direct suffering of a devastated Gaza. The intensification of this "new Arab cold war", the weakened position of most of the pro-U.S. Arab governments and Fatah, a much more radicalized political environment, and the likely increased repression by Arab governments in response of growing pressures from below, are only four more costs of Israel's war on Gaza which will continue to be paid well into the next administration.
[NOTE: post updated to add the three bullet points after I got back from a meeting and before any comments were submitted. Apologies for any confusion.]
No wonder Israel does what it wants. It doesn't fear the Arabs.Israel's greatest victory was not achieved on the battlefield; it was given to it by the pathetic and spineless Arab tyrants of Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
Imagine if there was democracy across the Arab world. Look at Turkey! The Turkish government's response has put the Arabs to shame. I think Israel's worst nightmare would be the democratization of Arab countries.
If Turkish Government were serious on Gazza issue then they would also cut diplomatic and economic relations with the US, rather than Israel. But of course like Mauritania and Qatar,Turkey also cannot do that, because it is against her National Interests;->
There is a saying in Turkish "Deal with the Master rather than the dog!";->>
But, why worry?! All is happening according to the theory to keep the Balance of Threat in the ME;->
And the theory is:
Salvare Apparentias Theory of FP (SATFP).
1. There exist states. (Not ThorsProvoni's "states" yet)
2. A State composed of a nation, a national leadership, national interests and power (economic, military, population, land, etc? ..(any others? pls feel free to add).(Laws??!! perhaps?! naaaa! it wouldn't matter much for they would all put the signature under the prototype one for all constitution anyway;->)
3. There exists a competitive arena where states acts as they do.
4. There exists no central authority in that arena that can enforce moral or legal constraints.
5. States commit morally dubious acts (dubious according to what? The Blog knows) (see axiom 1)(Why this is here? Didn't the Blog declare that SATFP is essencially amoral?)
6. A State's foreign and defense policy reflects national interest of the state.
7. A State seeks to increase her national interests when her existence is threatened.
8. A State's power is a potential threat to other states. A state is by definition paranoid of other states.
9. Truth and reality behind the phenomena is a threat for National Interests of the States. (J.Thomas)
10. Salvare Apparentias Foreign Policy is the art of keeping the threats of states in Balance besides saving the foreing policy related phenomena. (How? By shuffling and mixing nations/races/cultures?!, subjecting them to prototype secularo-fascist laws to reduce their multiplicity to singularity? the Blog knows).
Grand Sen~or
"I think Israel's worst nightmare would be the democratization of Arab countries."
M.J. Rosenberg of the Israel Policy Forum in one of his posts at TPM Cafe [I don't have the specific link] made precisely that argument: Israel should make peace now with Arab tyrants as a way to help stabilize the situation in its present state. Arab democracy would not be good for Israel.
This post is more than a little disingenuous: more Hasbara/Public Diplomacy.
The divisions are between US clients and those governments who are at least somewhat responsive to the desires of their citizens.
Who (if anyone) came to the Foreign Ministers' Meeting besides Saudi, Kuwait, Egypt and Fatah?
On the other side, we have Qatar, Syria, Algeria, Comoros, Lebanon, Mauritania, Sudan, Djibouti, Libya and Hamas plus Turkey, Senegal and Iran. I count 9 Arab League members, maybe 10 if Hamas counts. What are the lineups? Not reading Arabic, most of the links were indecipherable to me.
What's the worst that could happen? Israel goes back to the way things were before the peace treaty with Egypt, when none of the Arab states recognized Israel, and every Arab League meeting was basically a resolution not to negotiate with Israel forever? That might stroke the egos of most of the Arab populace, but it won't exactly mean much except for those invested in said peace treaties and agreements - i.e. the Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi, and American governments.
The Turkish government's response has put the Arabs to shame.
You mean the Turkish PM's bold strategy of talking tough while excusing doing nothing on the premise that he's running a state, not a grocery store? Certainly, I'd take the extra hot air over some of the alternatives, but what can you do?
Israel is doing just what is told.
Rice already declared that Israel and the US had an agreement to cut the tunnels/channals of weapons flow to Gazza.
Which aparently fits quite well to the RATFP of the US as "keeping the Balance of Threat" for the National Interests of the US which of course doesn't mean that it is also in accord with the National Interests of Israel. See RATFP Axioms below.
I think Qatar and Mauritania should rather freeze their diplomatic and economic relations with the US rather than Israel. Israel is just doing the dirty job of the US in return Jews get all the blame all over the world for some co-lateral damage. But of course Qatar and Mauritania caanot do what it should be done, because it is against their National Interests. In the same way Israel couldn't _disagree_ what was Rice talking about, to disagree was against Israel's National Interest.
If you blame Israel, you should also blame Turkey and Qatar due to their FP moves in accordance to their National Interests.
You see guys, there is no point to get mad or frustrated if you have a theory like SATFP you can explain FP phenomena to your heart contend;->>But if there is still bugging you with all those explanations then bring your theory and show us how you reached to your worries;->>
But don't get frustrated with all that. You can always ask the following question to overcome your frustration and to soothe your nerves;->>
"This Sultanate of the US! how long it will last like that?!"
in Turkish "Bu Saltanat ne kadar surer?!"
You reckon it will last till the Jews wake up Israel Lobby - before the shit hit the fan??!!;->>
Grand Sen~or
Salvare Apparentias Theory of FP (SATFP).
1. There exist states. (Not ThorsProvoni's "states" yet)
2. A State composed of a nation, a national leadership, national interests and power (economic, military, population, land, etc? ..(any others? pls feel free to add).(Laws??!! perhaps?! naaaa! it wouldn't matter much for they would all put the signature under the prototype one for all constitution anyway;->)
3. There exists a competitive arena where states acts as they do.
4. There exists no central authority in that arena that can enforce moral or legal constraints.
5. States commit morally dubious acts (dubious according to what? The Blog knows) (see axiom 1)(Why this is here? Didn't the Blog declare that SATFP is essencially amoral?)
6. A State's foreign and defense policy reflects national interest of the state.
7. A State seeks to increase her national interests when her existence is threatened.
8. A State's power is a potential threat to other states. A state is by definition paranoid of other states.
9. Truth and reality behind the phenomena is a threat for National Interests of the States. (J.Thomas)
10. Salvare Apparentias Foreign Policy is the art of keeping the threats of states in Balance besides saving the foreing policy related phenomena. (How? By shuffling and mixing nations/races/cultures?!, subjecting them to prototype secularo-fascist laws to reduce their multiplicity to singularity? the Blog knows).
So what's this Security Memorandum that Rice and Livni just signed?
Ah! now you guys started asking meaningful questions;->
I don't think anything mysterious there it is all according to the SATFP as I explained above.
Grand Sen~or
Khalid Meshaal was the keynote speaker. His presence, and the fact that he was given the floor before anyone else indicates recognition of Hamas' legitimacy as the voice of the resistance.
That says a lot, in my opinion.
22 days and still standing. Poltical leadership intact and solid support by the Arab/Muslim public. The zionist grip on American foreign policy is also intact, but rather than look at the apparent disunity of these summits i think it's better to focus on the message being transmitted, i.e., Hamas is the legitimate political voice of the Palestinian resistance.
I think you guys still unaware how one can explaing FP phenomena according to the SATFP's "National Interest" and "Balance of Threat" concepts. According to SATFP the assumption "The US FP is gripped by Israel Lobby (you call it Zionist if you like;->)". It is in fact visa versa "The Israel Lobby is gripped by the US FP". To say that "The US FP is gripped by the Israel Lobby (you call it the Zionists if you like;->)" is looking for a scapegoat - always a handy ones are Jews;->>But on the other hand you can legitimately argue that in that operation in question Israel has National Interests as well to keep the Balance of Threat as much as the US. That is why they reached to an agreement which Rice was talking about.
As I said before everything is happening according to the SATFP. There is nothing to worry about _unlaess_ you have a better theory to explain what is in reality happening.
That is the challenge in this blog - I guess;->
Grand Sen~or
Well, your "theory" is interesting and amusing.
But it ignores:
"laws/constitution" reduces them to "tradition"
and the "will" of individuals shaping those "laws etc"
and sees "reality/truth" as a threat. (This might be the result of SATFP salesmen's argument that ""reality" is a threat, that is why we have to save the phenomena and market it as reality to keep you guys happy";-> Think about this seriously please, in fact I am going to add this as another axiom of SATFP - thanks J.Thomas, I have already done it, see the updated axiom 9 above on SATFP).
Maybe the worst part of your "theory" is to try to explain the phenomena based on existing socio-politico-economic structure(SPES). It is based on the concept of "state" which became no-more functional.
I agree with you that you cannot _predict_ even the near future phenomena with it, but that wasn't the aim of your"theory" anyway;->
I understand you have developed it to snap-shot what is happened at this very moment;->
And that's why with your "theory" you also _cannot_ explain the causes why the phenomena amounted to that snap-shot.
BTW, I am not endorsing the SATFP here, but I just see it as the theory of the Blog and use it here to show how it ignores the reality and tries to save the phenomena based on existing SPES. In that sense your "theory" is more realistic than SATFP if we ignore your predictions about truth and reality beyond the snap-shot. SATFP has nothing to do with reality, that's why it is called SATFP. But this theory is still sold/marketed in this Blog as _realist_;->
Thanks,
Grand Sen~or
What is wrong with "zionism" ?
Are you against it because it has:
1. one Law - Jewish Law (the Laws of Moses)
2. one State - Israel (in grand scale as Solomons Kingdom covering perhaps the whole Globe
3. one Leadership - Zionist Leadership of Rabbis
4. one Nation - Jewish nation and her lambs
5. one Culture - based on Jewish traditions and laws
6. one official language - Yiddish/Hebrew (as you wish;-))
if that is why, then I strongly reccomend you to read your own constitution regardless where ever on the Globe you live and tell me the difference between your constitution and the fundamentals of the above listed Zionist articles. It is sweet when the EU$ and all the other minor states compose their Constitutions in accordance with 1-6 and sour when Zionists do it, is that it?!
Please do! I pray you! Show me which State on the Globe doesn't have 1,2,3,4,5,6(?). (I realize that some states have more than one offical language as exception.)
(and when it comes to the culture I am talking a culture based on institutions establised according to the laws.)
Actually forget about 2,3,4,5,6 show me one State which allows more than one law. They are all mono-law as a default to the definition of "State".
In Turkey when a Gypsy girl wants to criticize/challenge another, she says:
"Hah! Our pot is dark under, but yours is darker!!!"
"Hadi! Tencere dibin kara, seninki benden kara!"
Grand Sen~or
Marc Lynch is associate professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University.
Read More
(12)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE