Syria’s no to Arab League imperils pan-Arabism
by JPG
By postponing the visit of the Arab League secretary, Damascus could undermine its own power. Could Arab forces act against it?
Damascus (AsiaNews) – Late last night, Syria state news agency SANA confirmed news coming out of Cairo. “Syria on Tuesday asked the Arab League Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi to postpone his visit to Damascus for objective reasons he was informed of,” the agency reported. “The visit's new time will be specified,” it added. Al-Arabi’s visit had been decided by a special meeting on 28 August of Arab League foreign ministers. In the absence of the Syrian foreign minister, Damascus was represented by its permanent delegate.
In its press release, later refuted and criticised by Syria and Lebanon’s foreign minister, the Arab League had urged Syria to stop the “bloodshed” and “resort to reason before it is too late”.
Only on Sunday did Damascus accept Al-Arabi’s visit. The latter said he did not ask for any Syrian guarantees but vowed to listen and speak frankly about the country’s crisis.
According to diplomatic sources in Cairo, al-Arabi brings a 13-point Arab League initiative to solve the Syrian crisis, which calls for an end to the violent repression against the opposition in order to avoid an inter-confessional conflict and remove any pretext for a foreign intervention.
The League’s proposals urge President Bashar al-Assad to engage seriously representatives of the opposition, separate the armed forces from political life and declare his “commitment to making the transition towards a pluralistic government and use his powers to speed up reforms and announce multi-candidate elections . . . for 2014, when his current mandate ends.”
These proposals are important because they constitute the last opportunity for the pan-Arabist Syrian regime to save face.
Except for Lebanon, which is under the thumb of Hizbollah and is split between pro-Syria and Lebanon-first partisans, almost all Arab countries are demanding Damascus stop its crackdown and adopt urgent reforms.
From the champion of Arab resistance to Israel, since 15 March Syria has become a villain for its violations of human rights.
Until the start of this year, Sheikh Hamad Ben Khalifa al-Thani, the emir of Qatar, was a political friend to Assad. Quickly though, he was the first Arab head of state to close his nation’s embassy in Damascus.
Noting the daily killings in Syria, the emir on 5 September said, “it doesn’t seem that the Syrian people will back down from their demands”. For him, the issue is how to break the impasse.
In its initiative, the Arab League singles out “foreign intervention”, which in Mideast speak means non-Arab.
In Syria, both pro- and anti-regime are steadfast in their patriotic opposition to “foreign” intervention, which in practice means Western (i.e. US-European) intervention.
By contrast, an Arab intervention would be acceptable, some say, because Arab nationalism unites all Arab countries. Indeed, no one ever speaks of a Syrian nation, but rather of a Syrian homeland, which is part of the Arab nation.
In its press release, later refuted and criticised by Syria and Lebanon’s foreign minister, the Arab League had urged Syria to stop the “bloodshed” and “resort to reason before it is too late”.
Only on Sunday did Damascus accept Al-Arabi’s visit. The latter said he did not ask for any Syrian guarantees but vowed to listen and speak frankly about the country’s crisis.
According to diplomatic sources in Cairo, al-Arabi brings a 13-point Arab League initiative to solve the Syrian crisis, which calls for an end to the violent repression against the opposition in order to avoid an inter-confessional conflict and remove any pretext for a foreign intervention.
The League’s proposals urge President Bashar al-Assad to engage seriously representatives of the opposition, separate the armed forces from political life and declare his “commitment to making the transition towards a pluralistic government and use his powers to speed up reforms and announce multi-candidate elections . . . for 2014, when his current mandate ends.”
These proposals are important because they constitute the last opportunity for the pan-Arabist Syrian regime to save face.
Except for Lebanon, which is under the thumb of Hizbollah and is split between pro-Syria and Lebanon-first partisans, almost all Arab countries are demanding Damascus stop its crackdown and adopt urgent reforms.
From the champion of Arab resistance to Israel, since 15 March Syria has become a villain for its violations of human rights.
Until the start of this year, Sheikh Hamad Ben Khalifa al-Thani, the emir of Qatar, was a political friend to Assad. Quickly though, he was the first Arab head of state to close his nation’s embassy in Damascus.
Noting the daily killings in Syria, the emir on 5 September said, “it doesn’t seem that the Syrian people will back down from their demands”. For him, the issue is how to break the impasse.
In its initiative, the Arab League singles out “foreign intervention”, which in Mideast speak means non-Arab.
In Syria, both pro- and anti-regime are steadfast in their patriotic opposition to “foreign” intervention, which in practice means Western (i.e. US-European) intervention.
By contrast, an Arab intervention would be acceptable, some say, because Arab nationalism unites all Arab countries. Indeed, no one ever speaks of a Syrian nation, but rather of a Syrian homeland, which is part of the Arab nation.
.png)
See also
