|
From Nationalism to Country-Building: A Necessary
Shift
in Emphasis
Ammar Abdulhamid
Introduction
Observers of Middle East contemporary politics have always contended that
the Palestinian cause has often been used by the various ruling Arab regimes
to distract the minds of their oppressed peoples from the need for internal
political, economic and social reforms. There is an urgent need, however,
now that the region seems to be undergoing conditions similar to those that
existed in the early twentieth century, to flesh out this argument even
further.
Indeed, the
Palestinian cause seems to be only one manifestation of the real weapon
often wielded by Arab governments to manipulate the sentiments and thoughts
of their populations, with the, unwitting in most cases, collaboration of
Arab intellectuals. The real weapon is Arab nationalism itself.
Arab
nationalism has been the most powerful oppressive and anti-democratic force
in the Arab world for almost a century now. Ever since it appeared in Arab
politics, it has served to distract Arab peoples from the real task of
country-building, shifting their attention to the cure-all fantasy that is
"Arab unity," especially in the post-independence era.
Even as it
is being steadily replaced by Islamic fundamentalism, Arab nationalism still
acts as a disruptive force in Arab societies, as the recent demonstrations
all over the Arab world against the war in Iraq show. By carrying pictures
of Saddam Hussein and discounting the culpability of the Iraqi regime in
bringing about the confrontation with the United States, that is, by
glossing over the internal and external crimes of the Iraqi regime, the
fervent demonstrators simplistically misidentified the homeland with the
leader and, in the name of freedom, trampled on every ideal that gives
freedom its meaning. In effect, the demonstrators gave plenty of impetus to
their own governments to continue to oppress them and deny them their basic
rights in the name of such double-edged notions as national security and
national solidarity.
The basic
problem of Arab nationalism is that it has been viewed as a means rather
than a goal. But then, as an ideological construct, it cannot but inspire
such confusion. As such, Arab nationalism was touted as the solution to all
Arab problems, while the idea that the path towards Arab unity lies in
having each Arab country focus first on addressing its basic political,
economic and social problems, with some measure of coordination with other
Arab countries, was dismissed as provincial, even separatist,
thinking.
All Arab
ruling regimes have exhibited such "provincialist" and separatist tendencies
at one time or another. Seeing that they are neither capable nor interested,
it seems, in undertaking the real challenges involved in country-building,
they keep falling back on virulent, nationalist modes of address in order to
divert their peoples' attention from issues of internal reforms that should
be the natural byproduct of "provincialist" thinking.
The presence
of Americans in our midst is likely to lead to a revival of Arab nationalism
and a strengthening of Islamic fundamentalism and extremism. As the Syrian
case reveals, there are still leaders in the region who cannot think and
behave in a manner commensurate with their actual size and capabilities as
leaders, not to mention the size and potentials of the states they happen to
rule. Such figures cannot be good country-builders, but then their people
have not so far shown any indication that they could be ready to move beyond
nationalism and into country-building.
Can the U.S.
presence be used somehow to facilitate such a move? The following are a few
recommendations that could help in this regard:
Media
The United
States needs to sponsor the creation of free and independent media outlets
in Iraq that can serve as models throughout the region. The existing
Lebanese model has been mostly compromised over the years by two important
factors: 1) the close associ-ation between various media outlets and
existing Lebanese factions reflecting Maronite, Sunni, or Shi'a interests,
and 2) the exceptional nature of the Lebanese phenomenon in the Arab world.
That is, the "free" discussions that take place via Lebanese outlets have
come to be perceived, over the years¸ as more of a manifestation of a
certain Lebanese cultural trait, rather than as a paradigm that other Arab
peoples might seek to emulate.
The Arabs
need new outlets and models that can underscore the need and importance of
free media in the affairs of free societies. If the United States, or
rather, if the Iraqis can do that with the help of the United States (though
I personally doubt it), then an important battle will have been won in the
ongoing confrontation in the region.
NGO and developmental
activities
The United
States needs to use its presence to exert pressure on the region's regimes
and leaders to allow various U.S. and international NGOs to operate, or
operate more freely, in the region. This will give the United States and the
international community a chance to build direct ties to the region's
peoples through existing NGOs, and to begin building some credibility and
showcase the various benefits that more open relations with the United
States and the international community can bring. Indeed, the tarnished
image of the United States cannot be cleansed by invasion and military
interventionism inasmuch as it can be by a heavy and constant investment in
supporting NGO and developmental activities in the Middle East, something
the United States has been unwilling to consider up to now.
It is high
time that the Americans realize the illogic involved in maintaining such a
paradoxical state of affairs, where the volume of vital interests that they
have in a region is incommensurate with their investment in cultivating a
proper image and supporting developmental activities. Although this state of
affairs may have been in part because of a lack of cooperation by some
Middle East regimes, the United States now seems to be in a better position
to do something about it.
Education
The need for
creating effective and modern educational systems and programs in the Arab
world is staggering. Its very future seems to depend in no small part on
addressing this issue. If the Americans truly want to champion the cause of
democratization in the region, they must be heavily involved in the
education field.
The answer
does not lie in the creation of American universities following the example
already set in Cairo and Beirut, where tuition costs are so prohibitive that
only the children of the often-corrupt elite with no interest in
democratization can attend. Rather, the solution lies in the establishment
of community colleges and schools where scholastic achievement plays a more
important part in the selection process than financial capacity. Students
who attend these schools and colleges will have more reason to appreciate
U.S. support of these institutions, which may not have existed otherwise.
AUB or AUC students, who come from a more privileged background, seem to
have no real reason to feel indebted to the United States. The violent
demonstrations usually organized by AUC students can testify to this regard.
There is
also a great need to upgrade existing school systems and curricula through
various pilot projects in selected cities and districts, with special focus
on empowering rural communities, minorities, and women.
Networking
The United
States should use its presence in Iraq to help build networks between
regional NGOs, civil society advocates, human rights monitors, and
opposition groups in the region. Baghdad should host training workshops and
seminars on various civil, political, economic, and social issues, not only
for the Iraqi people but also for people from all over the Arab world. If
the United States truly wants to create a democratic system in Iraq, or, at
the very least, a system that can accommodate a process of democratization,
with the intention of spreading this "noble" experiment to other parts of
the Middle East, input from the Arab people cannot be excluded. Nor should
it be allowed to filter in through existing governmental channels in the
various Middle East regimes, since these channels, by their very nature,
seem to be designed to corrupt such experiences. Rather, it should be seen
and experienced directly. As there were Arabs who were willing to come to
Iraq to fight against the United States, there exist also Arabs who could
help in, and would greatly benefit from exposure to, the potential process
of democratization in Iraq.
A grand
overture: The new Middle East initiative
One way the
Americans could bolster their image and their chances of being perceived in
a more positive light by the people of the Middle East is for them to make a
clear policy statement underscoring the exact changes they want to see in
the Middle East, and the benefits that could result. Vague statements in
this regard will not be sufficient. Clarity and vision are needed, much more
than has been shown in the Powell initiative. The new Middle East initiative
needs to include the following elements:
·
It should state the
problems confronting the region, including the Arab–Israeli conflict,
minority rights, underdevelopment, poverty, environmental problems ,and the
dwindling supplies of fresh water.
·
It should suggest methods
of handling these problems through existing international and regional
institutions, and, if needed, by creating new ones.
·
It should clarify how the
United States can help and what its interests are.
·
It should remind regional
players of the positives that the United States has helped bring about,
including the generous aid package it provides to Egypt and its involvement
in securing and supporting development in the Gulf states.
·
It should pledge to
support the processes of development and modernization in the region to the
tune of billions of dollars (and not $29 million USD), to be invested in the
countries that show greater signs of openness, and in cooperation with SMEs,
not just large corporations.
If the
United States truly wishes to be involved in the affairs of the Middle East
for an appreciable period of time, there is no escaping the need to
enunciate a clear vision that can help frame their overall venture
positively and make it more conducive to regional stability rather than to
further radicalization. Showcasing the benefits of "Americanization" through
a success in Iraq will not be sufficient. It must be coupled with promises
and immediate attempts at spreading the benefits to the rest of the region
through co-operation with NGOs and civil society activists, and through
engaging the existing regimes in a relentless and complex process of
pressures and overtures, quid pro quos, and other diplomatic and economic
means. Threat of military intervention should be the last resort, as it will
serve to radicalize the region even further and undermine whatever
development efforts the United States might be supporting or attempting to
support.
This paper was presented
during a multilateral meeting in Europe.
|