It is a sad fact that the fate of the Arab Summit, scheduled to be held in Damascus next week, is already doomed to failure. The absence of key Arab leaders from this annual event can only be interpreted as a political indictment of the host country over its policies, especially in Lebanon. Few observers pin high hopes on its outcome and, in light of the tenuous regional reality, the event will add to the sense of gloom and despair permeating through the Arab world today.
It is a summit only in name, with many Arab leaders choosing to skip the event and opting to send deputies. The message is clear but Syria has chosen to take the risk of organizing a botched event rather than yielding to Arab demands over Lebanon. If anything, the Syrian position reflects on its own internal predicament and the way it sees looming challenges.
Presummit conditions have been less than hopeful. The Lebanese factions have failed to resolve their differences. The country has been without a president since November, and even though Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa has attempted a last-ditch effort to bring the two sides together, the gap remains wide. In the eyes of some Arab states, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Syria has done little to pressure its allies in Lebanon, in particular Hezbollah, to move toward reconciliation.
From Syria’s vantage point, the view is ominous. It claims to follow a hands-off policy in Lebanon, but it also knows that what happens in that country will eventually affect its own national security. The international tribunal over the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has been perceived as an American ploy to implicate Damascus in the crime. The Syrian leadership has been on Washington’s list of evil nations for years; accused of sponsoring terrorism and of destabilizing Lebanon, among other things. Its special relationship with Tehran does not endear it to moderate Arab states nor to the West. And by giving refuge to Hamas political leadership, it is accused of taking sides in the ongoing internal Palestinian rift.
Syria’s concerns and fears carry some validity. The Bush administration has consistently pursued a hostile policy toward the Bashar Assad regime. The Iraq invasion and the toppling of Saddam Hussein have fueled Syria’s suspicions. Technically it is still at war with Israel and the peace process has not addressed its grievances over the Golan Heights.
For Damascus the stakes of giving in to Arab and international pressure at this crucial phase are simply too high while the odds are not acceptable. Recently Syria has sought to strengthen its position in preparation of the worst. There are those who believe that no matter what the outcome of the summit will be, the region will see another war in the summer involving Israel, Lebanon and Syria. The killing of top Hezbollah military commander in Damascus, Imad Mughniyeh, a month ago has raised concerns that the stage is being set up for a future conflict.
As much as Lebanon appears to be the main stumbling block on the road to a successful Arab summit, the meeting’s agenda is bursting with other issues. The Arab world today is no better than it was a year ago, when the last summit was held. Since then the Palestinian situation has deteriorated to deplorable levels, with Hamas taking over the Gaza Strip and the PNA losing control over its negotiations with Israel.
The Arab peace initiative has failed to gather momentum and the United States has once again taken the lead by holding the Annapolis conference and dictating terms on how the peace process should proceed. The PNA has succumbed to Washington’s financial and political hold and the Arab side has failed to stand up and be counted. It is thus ludicrous to talk about the prospects of the Arab initiative when Israel and Washington have colluded to seal its fate from the onset.
Apart from the Palestinian conundrum, there are other issues which the Damascus summit must address. Iraq has just marked the fifth anniversary of its invasion and occupation by the United States, and five years on it is still threatened by divisions, civil and sectarian strife. The UN has been sidelined and few in the Arab world talk today of the catastrophe that befell that country. It is shocking that Iraq has disappeared from the public and official screens and that, on the eve of the convening of an Arab Summit, this country is still staring into the abyss.
There is much skepticism among the public over the viability of Arab Summits. After all, even so-called successful summits in the past have failed to resolve the most immediate challenges or rise to the level of popular aspirations. Such harsh reality must be considered in light of the fact that the Arab League is more than 60 years old, slightly senior to the UN itself.
The Damascus summit may go down in history as the last of Arab summits, if not in occurrence then in substance. The Arabs have failed to appreciate and copy the examples of other regional groupings which have employed their alliances to confront their differences rather than amplifying them. By using the summit event to pressure Damascus on its own policies, the risk of derailing the entire Arab League organization has increased to dangerous levels.
The question that must be asked now is what follows the ritual convening of the Arab Summit in Damascus? Barring a miraculous breakthrough, the event will further cripple Arab collaboration in face of regional and international challenges. The organization has failed to respond to crises, whether in Gaza, Darfur, Somalia or Iraq. The fault, to quote Shakespeare, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.
