DUBAI, 26 October 2004 — Many Arabs wrongly believe that Arab states have only lost the conflict with Israel on the battlefield. In fact, the Arab states have consistently sustained a loss nearly as momentous and heart-rending as the military loss.
Those familiar with the decision-making mechanism in the West would realize that think tanks and research centers are the “throbbing hearts” of that process and one that helps condition public opinion. Unfortunately, the Arab world has only recently realized that it has also lost the “battle of the word and dialogue” because the “throbbing hearts” are missing. The tragedy of the Arab “Ummah” (nation) and its repeatedly ill-advised decisions are not new. It started shortly after Israel emerged on the Middle East scene as a state recognized by the international community. In fact, 1951 marked the beginning of this “hemorrhage” of myopic decisions when Arab governments consensually agreed to boycott any regional or international meetings in which an Israeli or even a Jew was invited.
At times, the ban is enforced even if there is no Israeli or Jew attending the meeting on the pretext that a person or a group allegedly known for “supporting Israel” is attending the event. This concept is obviously so elastic that it could embrace anyone. The justification for this attitude is the need to “enforce an Arab strategy slated to ostracize Israel from the international community”.
But by trying to isolate Israel from international meetings, we, and not Israel, have found ourselves out of favor. Rather than corner Israel into a shell of isolation, we have willfully, and perhaps inadvertently, let that shell drop over our own heads. Today Israel strolls at will across the numerous conferences and symposia held in almost every corner of the world.
By choosing to boycott international dialogue, we have not, and certainly will never, stop any party, however inimical we may deem it, from taking part in the international dialogue. Our self-imposed “absenteeism” has achieved nothing but give our enemies the chance to monopolize the international dialogue space — a space no less critical than the battlefield where wars are fought.
With no nationalist Arab voice making itself heard on the stage, other voices could easily proclaim what they wish and claim what they want. Unfounded and inaccurate claims about Arabs and Muslims pour in unchecked; the oppressor easily dons the mask of the oppressed, the occupier turns himself into a “rightful” liberator, and the resistant is projected as a bloodthirsty terrorist. In short, the truth, as defenseless as it has ever been, is assassinated in broad daylight. Worse, a minority of Arabs clearly realizes that the decision to boycott international meetings has not, and will not, pre-empt other parties from discussing our vital issues. On the contrary, many across the world have taken greater courage to do just that. Take, for instance, the Israeli lobby. Who else but the Arabs themselves paved the way, unwittingly, for the Israeli lobbyists. Who else but the Arabs allowed Israeli lobbyists to interact freely and efficiently at international meetings. It was our wrong decisions that contributed to the emergence of the Israeli lobbyists first and then helped them become efficient, so much so that our prime preoccupation today is to counter the Israeli lobby.
So we should welcome a partnership agreement the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) signed recently with Bahrain. As per the terms of the agreement, the IISS will supervise the organization of an expanded conference on “Gulf dialogue” entitled “Summit meeting of national security establishments”.
The three-day conference, to be held in Manama, will start on Dec. 3, 2004. The conference is poised to debate issues pertaining to the Gulf regional security. Invitations to participate in the conference have been extended to a wide pool of Gulf as well as international dignitaries.
The officials from the GCC states must not continue to walk the wrong path of “absenteeism” or continue to bite the “sinful apple of evasion”. Instead, they need to realize the importance of such meetings. Even if they differ with others, all they need to do is build a firm and sustainable strategy for constructive participation in the dialogue. Let others listen to our arguments. Let the whole world realize that we too exist, that we have our own issues and views. By taking part in these conferences, we can acknowledge that we have not been forthcoming on many issues and like others, we are no faultless angels. At the same time, we must remind others that their “sins”, their blunders, and even their crimes are no smaller than ours, if not excessively greater. If Israel or any other “unfriendly” party dispatches one delegate, we must send 10 — those who have the ability to argue and competence to counter-argue effectively.
The “sins” of the past seem to have delivered a generation of Arabs with poor knowledge of the etiquette to conduct a dialogue with and devise strategies against the “other”. The officials must learn to trust their co-citizens, at least those who are credible and responsible. They must be given opportunities to play their citizenry role by defending the interests of their country and the larger Arab “Ummah”. Nationhood and the genuine concerns about the interests of the “Ummah” are not the exclusive prerogative of leaders. The officials must learn from the “enemy”, which has proved that a free and confident citizen is the best capital for the welfare of the nation.
The officials need to articulate a well-defined strategy to wage the battle of dialogue with the “enemy” whenever there is a chance, either through international think tanks or through the international media. They must create a special center to train and groom a new generation of citizens culturally capable of rising to the challenges of the modern age, a generation able to engage effectively and efficiently in the battles unfolding across the international dialogue stage.
All we need to do is demonstrate a stronger will and greater courage to take the right decision to fill this dialogue gap. The funds for such an endeavor is certainly far less than the cost of a single warplane or tank, which would, ironically, end up in a warehouse until they rot.
— Abdulaziz Sager is chairman of Gulf Research Center, Dubai.
