Homo-geneity in Arabia, Iraq and Puerto Rico, Lebanese Miasma
The US Senate vote in favor of a federal Iraq was met with howls of anger and dismay in the Arab world. Most of it was knee-jerk reaction to a concept that is novel in the Arab states: reduction of centralized power in favor of local autonomy! Sounds like something Bush would espouse, not in Iraq but perhaps in, say, the USA!
Actually a federal system would be ideal for most Arab states that are tribally and ethnically heterogeneous, with the exception of Egypt, which is homogeneous (no, the two funny foreign terms have got nothing to do with the naked little guy with bow and arrow). It is especially appropriate for Iraq, given how much water has flown under the bridge already. The Senate vote merely recognized obvious facts on the Iraqi ground (cliches are useful).
Hypocrisy check: Arab governments and media commentators howled, as expected, before they had read the full text of the measure, which is based on the original Biden-Gelb proposals. Actually Arab governments don't howl, they just sniffle and titter. Perhaps they will mumble if they feel bold enough to face anyone other than their own helpless peoples- a rare occurrence these days because all bold Arab leaders have been dead for some time.
Most of the comments in the media, and by Arab potentates, have railed against the vote 'to divide' Iraq. In Arabia, it is either one extreme (oppressive central rule, which is the norm) or another extreme (division and breakup). There is only black and white, with no gray area in between: something that might resonate on Pennsylvania Avenue.
The same governments that opened their airbases, naval facilities, and lands for the operation that overthrew the Ba'ath dictatorship want another strong central regime in Iraq, preferably with a Sunni honcho on top, sort of like the system the British installed in the 1920s. Some are openly lamenting the demise of the gas-and-chemical-loving old Iraqi army, and the old security services that kept people safe- safe until the midnight knock at the door came. But the Americans, strongly attached to the electoral process and the one-man one-vote ideals of the Republic, are not likely to oblige this time around, even if they could engineer it, which is extremely doubtful fifty four years after Operation Ajax.
BTW: what the hell does the US Senate have to do with Iraq's internal governing structure? Can Iraq's parliament vote to support statehood for the District of Columbia or Puerto Rico?
Now for Lebanon: the election of a president was postponed until late October because the warlords and their factions could not agree. The March 14 group, inherited by Mr Hariri and cemented with a lot of local and foreign money (Saudi, Western), sent its leader to Washington this weekend for consultation. Apparently Mr. Bush gave Hariri an Iftar meal and stiffened his backbone during halftime, because he came out for the third quarter roaring, insisting that the next president must be from his (March 14) group. This is not likely to happen because the opposition, also cemented with a lot of local and foreign money (Iranian in this case), will do what oppositions are wont to do: oppose the non-opposition. Overall, things look worse for Lebanese accord than they did before Mr. Hariri's visit to Washington.
The plot thickens: Mr. Bush said after his meeting with Hariri that foreign powers should not dictate who Lebanon's president should be. He did not specify which foreign powers are banned an which are allowed to do so. Hassan Nasrallah, Secretary General of Lebanese Hezbollah, claimed in a speech that Israel was the culprit behind the political assassinations in Lebanon during the past year. He said that both Israel and the United States want a 'certain' kind of president for Lebanon, and insisted that both sides must agree on who the president will be. He said that a popular election may be the last resort: that would be a tricky business in the precariously balanced Lebanese population mix.
When I read Arab media recently talking of Saudi Arabia mediating among Somali factions, I did a loud 'OH, OH'. I tried a Reaganesque 'there they go again' but my wife said that it did not sound right with my accent. Saudi attempts at mediation are admirable, but they have consistently failed from the Gulf to Lebanon to Palestine. They remind me of one of my favorite books: Don Quixote, written by a Catholic infidel long ago.
BTW: It is awfully quiet along the Nile these days- not even a 'booo'. Is the old man in some sort of coma? Is his designated Dauphin already pulling the strings? Or are the military and security services, the real rulers, pulling his strings? In any case, the whole country is quiet, which is a very un-Egyptian stance.
Cheers
Mohammed
Comments