The past few days have seen peace conferences on crises in two Arab states: that in Lebanon and the Darfur conflict in Sudan. What stands out about both is that neither the Arab League nor mainstream Arab voices played any part in them. The Lebanon conference was a French initiative and took place in Paris.
The Darfur conference took place in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, but that cannot be seen to count as Arab involvement; Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi has publicly turned his back on the Arab world, making it abundantly clear that he sees his country’s future as an African not an Arab state. The two are hardly incompatible and nothing he says or does can diminish Libya’s Arab identity, but for the moment the situation is that Libya presents itself as an African country. In any event the Tripoli conference was a UN/African Union affair.
Given the nature of the Darfur conflict, the AU obviously has a major role to play in finding a solution. But what about the Arab input? All help in resolving either the Lebanese or the Darfur crisis should be welcomed. But it is regrettable in the case of the latter the Arab League has been unable or unwilling to take firm action to help end the conflict. In the case of the former it is unsettling that it is the one-time colonial power rather than the Arab League that can bring all sides to the table. Despite Lebanon’s confessional divisions, all of them are Arab.
The world would be aghast if the Italians invited the Somali warlords to a peace conference in Rome or the Belgians organized one to end the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, or the British took on the Darfur issue, especially if they then succeeded. It would say that former colonial masters still wield power and those independent nations and their present-day allies and regional partners are ineffective and incompetent. That is not France’s intention in Lebanon. As with its initiative last month on the Darfur crisis, the aim seems genuinely humanitarian. Whether they can broker a settlement is unknown.
The Darfur conference did not provide any noticeable breakthrough, but it seems that some progress has been made with Lebanon; it may not last, but parties supporting the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and those opposed are now talking as a result of the conference. How come France can succeed in getting all the parties to resume dialogue and not the Arab League?
Arab diplomacy has to intensify. No one can call themselves truly free if they depend on others to resolve their problems. Arabs have to be seen fixing Arab problems such as Lebanon and Darfur — not to mention Palestine and Iraq — and have to succeed. But that requires a unity of purpose and an effective will to seek resolution. And it has to stem from a majority of states embracing a policy, even in the face of opposition from one or two others, and then pursue that policy with total determination.
