Ambassador of The League of Arab States to the UK, Mr Ali Muhsen Hamid, 1.2.05
Mr Hamid is a regular contributor to the media and is active in a number of campaigns for the Palestinian cause. He was born in Yemen and was awarded a BA in Political Science from Cairo University in 1970.
He is appreciative of the Conservative Party for its central role in developing the democratic process, political pluralism and the freedom of the press. The Conservative Party is seen as a progressive party – for change. There are difficulties that he faced in writing this text on Arab-Western relations: there are 22 Arab countries of differing levels of political and economic development and population size who often have divergent interests and stances in their international relations.
The Arabs – Europe's neighbours – are a very cohesive population block, brought together by a common language, religion and geographical extension stretching from North Africa to the Indian Ocean and possessing rich natural resources marked by their diversity. Arabs, currently numbering about 300 million, originate from the Arab Peninsula which was the source of large migrations which began before Islam and continued until the eighteenth century. Most Arabs believe in Islam.
Arabs are proud of their common history and of the glories of their past, which left a clear imprint on Europe’s Renaissance. This role represents one of the positive aspects of interaction between the Arabs and Europe. After the Arab world was under Ottoman then European rule, the Arab political, scientific and cultural role was vastly diminished and Arabs lost their independence and their distinctive international standing. The influence of these diverse imperial forces continues to this day. The political, economic and educational backwardness which is manifest in the Arab world is an effect of this.
These conditions weakened the Arab ability to confront challenges, one of the most prominent of which was the creation of the Jewish state in Palestine in 1948. Since that time the Arab region lost its stability and peace.
The Arabs fought for independence from the Ottomans, but allied western forces dashed their hopes, and western armies took the place of Turkish forces. Arabs believed there was still a ray of hope, at the end of the First World War, when American President Wilson issued his fourteen points, which included peoples’ right to self-determination, but they were shocked, or dismayed, to learn that these principles applied to Europe alone.
The creation of just one state in Palestine in 1948, was in contravention to UN Resolution 181 in 1947, stipulating that two states be established: one Arab and the other Jewish. This led to overt and covert expressions of tension in Arab-western relations. Arab believed that Western support of Israel amounted to ‘a language of double standards in international relations’.
The desire for independence and a dignified life were at the heart of the Arab struggle to free themselves of foreign rule. In the fifties Egypt failed in securing the finance from the World Bank to build the High Dam and also in concluding an arms deal with the United States. The Arab world thus deemed it wise to avoid being sucked into the formation of military blocks during the cold war between the US and Soviet camps. The Arabs therefore had no alternative but to adopt a policy of non-alignment. They were able to play a marked role in their adoption of that policy, aiming to preserve their independence.
But the West looked upon non-alignment as an immoral stance – at least when the policy first emerged, and did not respect this independent Arab resolution. Because the door to the West was closed, the Arabs had to open their doors to the USSR and the People’s Republic of China. Whenever there was some progress in military or economic co-operation between Arab countries and the Soviet Union, the West began to worry. However, the worry did not extend to offering Western support as an alternative to the Soviet Union.
The history of Arab-Western relations is full of bitter moments and lost opportunities. Although rosy in parts, it isn’t without pathways full of nettles and thorns which weren’t planted by Arabs, who have, on the contrary, tries to clear the path and find a constructive way forward. A pathway based on mutual understanding, positive dynamism and mindfulness of pan-Arab resolutions since the fifties, and specifically, since the creation of the League of Arab States in 1945.
The Arab League now seeks a new common vision. We need a relationship that does not reflect Kipling’s statement that: “East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet…”
The world has become very small indeed. In an age of global business commuting we need to look towards new horizons. Most Arab capital is in fact deposited in western banks, and most of their trade is with the West – the only thing that has changed is the absence of the High Commissioner!
The Ambassador wonders why the West doesn’t ask itself these questions: “What did we achieve in the Gulf during the colonialist period? Why does the West not look at Dubai’s achievements over the past 35 years as one of the emirates of the UAE since it became an independent state?”
Arabs are constantly trying to create partnerships with the UK through the Euro-Arab dialogue process that started in 1975, within the framework of the League of Arab States and the European Common Market, but the dialogue did not really achieve the desired objectives. This was mainly because of Europe’s bias towards a narrow point of view on the Palestinian issue and because of the confinement of that dialogue exclusively to economic issues and not the divide over political issues. Pressure from the US to exclude the issues of oil and Palestine from the talks was evidently a formidable one.
This situation has very much been at the expense of better Euro-Arab relations and has produced negative effects on both parties. One of these negative effects is the Arab view now becoming more prevalent that the West is decidedly mean in its dealings with the Arabs, except when it comes to commercial interests and their development.
Washington entered actively into the Arab political fray after the terrorist events in 9/11/01. This was not a good justification for its enmity towards Arabs and Muslims. Israel’s had in the matter is clear. The Arabs condemned the terrorism of 9/11 and gave their full co-operation in the fight against it, but the US did not acknowledge their help despite their hand in the US success in combating it. Arabs in London and in other important capitals have come to reject the policy of ignoring the interests of the Palestinian people, but the American neo-conservatives and the Israeli lobby adopt a very different logic – believing that the cause of terrorism was not the Israeli occupation but Islam because it incites violence and hatred of one another. Therefore, in their eyes, the Palestinians – who are the victims of daily Israeli terrorism – became once again terrorists.
The Arab peoples’ feeling is that their history of Arab civilization enables them to feel truly proud that there is nothing in their past of which to be ashamed. They were not terrorists, nor anti-semitic in any way – because they are semitic themselves.
Arabs are the closest people on earth to the West and to Europe – we are neighbours. Our present and our future are inter-related and there are no major disputes between us, other than that connected with the unjustifiable bias in favour of Israel and its policies of expansionism and colonialism. The Arabs understand support of Israel’s right to exist, but cannot understand the support of expansionist policies. Although there are many residual scars in Arab-Western relations, they do not justify negativity in current policies nor do they check Arab ambition to establish stronger and better relations with the West. Together we need to strive to know the reality of the prevalent state of affairs on both sides. Is the West ready and earnest in wishing to deal with the Arabs as equals? As human beings, the Arab people share the West’s concerns and many common interests which should be mutually respected. Despite the long-standing historical links between Arabs and Europe, there are only a few people in the West who understand Arabs – known as Arabists.
There has been no intention here to intimidate anyone nor to paint an imaginary rosy picture. The West however appear to be doing just that – after having made Arabs and Islam victims, they are now transferring the battle front to the Arab Muslim community. Arabs reject the call for religious reform both in principle and practice.
Some would say that the future looks bleak for Arab-Western relations but the Ambassador believes that there is hope because there has been much co-operation between both sides in the past. The present and the future call for deeper co-operation based on equality, partnership and the fulfilment of mutual interests. The Arab people, just as Westerners, are victims of instability not only in the region but in the whole world.
The Arabs are the largest producers of oil and gas, and the West has the largest consumer markets. There should be a mutual interest in creating a strong policy for stability in the region – policies that would contribute to changes in the direction of modernisation and democracy and of greater closeness and understanding between the Arab and western people.
It is vital that the UK does not listen to those who would depict the Arabs are enemies. Arab people have opened the doors to peace and hope that their stance and our stance will become identical.
The Israeli factor has been a depressing and obstructive one in any real development in relations with the West. Here are some questions that should be answered: who poses a greater threat to the other? who needs more security? Absolute power is a form of corruption, and Israel wishes to have absolute power.
The independence of European policies from Israeli and American policies is something which serves the peace in the region. Such independence should encourage the US to take a less biased and more equitable policy which would lead to the resolution of the Palestinian issue, the termination of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights …
The Ambassador invited us to put ourselves in the position of the Palestinian, then ask what should be done about those occupying land and expelling people from their country. Yet here we are debating the right of every citizen to self-defence against burglars.
In conclusion, a strong, flourishing, democratic Arab world is in the interests of Europe and in the interests of peace and stability. The French writer Philippe Nemo summed up Western civilisation, in six points: “the rule of law, democracy, freedom of expression, analytical rationalism, science and a free market based on respect for private property.” Our values and our culture are based on these very same principles – we must look to the future and work together for the sake of rational relations which inspire common values and enduring shared interests.
[Ed: Postcript - Following the talk there followed a challenging discussion time with a number of controversial questions]