Different Strokes for Different Folks
| Monday April
28, 2003
Wahib Binzagr, CBE Arab Nations consider the Arab League has failed to prevent the
governments behind the coalition forces to take the route of invasion
and destruction for the removal of one ruthless dictator who committed
atrocities with arms supplied by Russia and the West in front of the
remaining world governments. Presently millions of people in the world are disheartened to see by
their satellites Iraq and its people destroyed, their historic and
material wealth stolen, families slaughtered and, alas, their country
occupied. The promised price is American-motivated democracy off the wings
B-Bombers. President Mubarak of Egypt is quoted to have stated to his
subjects in public that the Arab League should revise its constitution
which was signed in 1945. He stipulated that unanimous voting between
twenty-two member states is impossible. He maintained that complicated
issues are beyond solving this way. Apparently the President added, “There has to be a two third and
simple majority depending on resolutions”. One wonders whether this
approach will fix it or get him off the hook. The enigma is so complex
that it takes more than the back of an envelope to fathom solutions. Luckily numerous discussions are hot on the burners of the peoples of
the twenty-two member countries of the League. Different levels in the
respective countries come up with different thoughts with aims to
strengthen the commitments rather than introduce symbolic ties under a
common umbrella with so much holes, that make it incapable of protection
from sun or rain. One school of thought suggests, rather than
reinventing the wheel, taking guidance from the experience of other
nations. The domain of sensitive issues such as sovereignty should be
entrusted with regional councils, without compromise of the intrinsic
common objectives embodied in the charter of the League. The aim of this thought is to achieve a win-win objectives for the
League and ensure that it is driven by results and achievement rather
than prejudices of member governments. The Gulf Cooperation Council has
been operational for more than twenty years. The Moroccan council is under serious considerations. Once ink has
been put to paper for the long awaited Palestinian State, a council for
Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon can see daylight. Egypt,
which represents more than one third of the population of the League,
may group with the remaining adjacent Arab countries. This leaves Yemen
with wider choices from the geographical groupings. Admittedly, this
begs the credibility of the “thought” without necessarily
compromising it. The idea behind the thought is for the member states to
be grouped geographically with total and unwavering loyalty to the
charter of the League, which they constitute. At the risk of over burdening the discussion, “the thought” is
for the idiosyncrasies to be with the regional councils and the big
policies are with the League. The good news of such thought may be the comfort it provides to small
member countries of the League that they may not be marginalized
steamrollered by the “big brothers.” Equally it may cause the spoilers to pay their dues. Also, it could
provide a case for the Secretary General’s position to be rotated
between the member states after the status and authority of the
departmental heads are enhanced to fit the new responsibilities which
are over due for complete upgrading to the expectation of their people
and in line to the challenges of the new world order. The Arab League
certainly failed miserably over the Palestinian catastrophe. It missed
the mark in containing the Saddam plague. To be effective it better
hurry up in assisting towards the achievement of an Iraq that its people
wish to build. On this major issue there is a big vacuum. If it is not
filled by the Arab League, the Arabs have no credible recourse when it
is solely left for the Coalition to attempt to remodel Arabs lives
according to Christian Zion alliance. On Christian Zion Mr. George S. Hishmeh, in his article entitled
“Christian Zion Alliance Takes The Grip on Bush’s Foreign Policy”
says: “The influence of the Christian Zionists, a sub-group of
Christian evangelicals, who number 98 million, stems primarily from
their close relationship with the leadership of the Republican party of
President George W. Bush.” Michael Prior, an Irish University
Professor and author pointed out recently in Washington DC that “This
evangelical Christian constituency was a major factor in the election of
Jimmy Carter in 1979. However, Carter’s call for a “Palestinian
Homeland” in March 1977 precipitated his downfall and defeat.” Arabs wake up to become, with knowledge, equal partners with the
Americans or you will continue to be marginalized by their Governments
and steamrollered by their numerous think tanks. Arab News Features 28 April 2003 |
Copyright 2014 Q Madp www.OurWarHeroes.org