Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators. It is not the wish of our government to impose upon you alien institutions. It is our wish that you should prosper even as in the past when your lands were fertile, when your ancestors gave to the world literature, science and art, and when Baghdad city was one of the wonders of the world. It is the hope that the aspirations of your philosophers and writers shall be realized, and that once again the people of Baghdad shall flourish, enjoying their wealth and substance under institutions which are in consonance with their sacred laws and their ideals.¹

– British General F.S. Maude, 
Proclamation to the People of Baghdad, 1917

[With the] stalling of things in Iraq… [Bush] needed a major success to move forward… Sharon understands that the U.S. is going to stand by Israel when it comes to security and this very treacherous road map.² 

– Israeli official close to Sharon

Unholy alliances expected at Sharm El Sheikh

In light of the bombs that shook both Riyadh and Casablanca, Sharon’s formal acceptance of the roadmap only after US security assurances were given, and America’s failure to turn its military victory into some form of stability in Iraq, the summits at both Sharm El Sheikh and al-Aqaba are indicative of the complexities awaiting the US in its bid for regional dominance. However, with American troops present in Afghanistan, Iraq, and dozens of other Arab and Islamic states, US summit diplomacy becomes a clear attempt to institutionalize the new pax-Americana in the region with the help of ailing Arab allies.

US-endorsed diplomacy is always invigorated when the Arab system is suffering from exceptional weakness and recovering from a crushing defeat. In terms of its timing, and even in many of its basic tenets, the new roadmap is very similar to the 1982 Reagan Plan which was presented only after the PLO had been evacuated from Lebanon and Beirut was occupied. Moreover, the new summits bear a striking resemblance to the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference that was convened after Iraq had been defeated in the Gulf War and a blatantly pro-US regional configuration was in the making.

Despite that, the diplomatic hurdles of setting up the new summits have proven quite difficult. The United States originally wanted one summit, but sources said Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Abdullah refused to attend a summit with Sharon who, in turn, was not particularly eager to be surrounded by Arab leaders. So the Bush administration had to schedule back-to-back summits, one with Arab leaders in Egypt and one with the Israeli and Palestinian premiers in Jordan.³ The Arab-American Summit in Sharm El Sheikh on June 3rd is expected to host, in addition to George W. Bush, the leaders of Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, as well as Palestinian Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas. Then, on June 4^th, Bush is due to meet in Jordan with the Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers, both separately and together.

New Axis Patterns

Interestingly, the new flurry of US regional diplomacy sidelined both Lebanon and Syria –key regional players in the Arab-Israeli conflict– due to their unwillingness to fully endorse US plans for the region, and their request for a more balanced approach in dealing with regional problems. In addition, the summits will convene amidst increasingly vocal, anti-Iranian criticism emanating from the US, with the Bush administration warning Iran against pursuing weapons of mass destruction, hosting “terrorists,” or acting to destabilize Iraqi politics or establish a government in Iraq along the lines of Iran’s Islamic system.

Despite multiple Iranian gestures that it stands firm behind the “war against terrorism,” the White House postponed indefinitely a high-level policy meeting on Iran scheduled this week. Diplomatic sources in the State Department claim that there is no shift in US policy towards Iran being contemplated at the moment, and that “the ball is in Iran’s court.”⁴ New reports indicate that the hawks in the US administration favor regime-change in Iran by increasing its diplomatic isolation, destabilizing the country through covert operations and directly backing an armed uprising by exile groups such as the Iraq-based Mujahedeen-e-Khalq organization.⁵

The current diplomatic moves by the US in the region signal the formation of a new axis lead by a concert of consenting pro-US states, most notably, Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, and a deeply mistrustful anti-Israeli-policy axis lead by Syria, Iran and Lebanon. The former will be offered the carrot of more economic support for their compliance and stronger security cooperation to bolster their regimes amidst increasing domestic opposition. The latter is threatened with the stick of coercive measures including sanctions, covert action, regime change, and the use of force.

The Tensions Behind the Summit - The New Strategic Landscape

Over the past decade, the Middle East witnessed multiple conferences and summits with the avowed goal of peace-making, ranging from the historic agreements between the Jordanians and Palestinians and the Israelis in 1993 and 1994 to the Sharm El Sheikh “Summit of Peacemakers” in March 1996 to the other Sharm El Sheikh Summit of October 2001. What most people saw were just the summit highlights – world leaders, handshakes and signing ceremonies – but they were spared images of grave injustices, flagrant humanitarian violations, and massive settlement building activity being perpetuated by Israeli occupation forces in the Palestinian territories.

Despite increasing ambiguity as to what the new summits’ agenda would exactly involve, the two summits must be analyzed in terms of the new strategic landscape in the Middle East in relation to the Arab-Israeli front and in light of the situation in Iraq and the facts on the ground in both arenas of conflict.

The two summits come at a time when Israeli military attacks, demolitions of Palestinian homes, and settlement-building activities continue unabated in the Palestinian territories. Setting aside Sharon’s reserved acceptance of the roadmap and US assertions that his security concerns will be taken into account, the Israeli hawk preempted all peace- making efforts by claiming that Jerusalem is the eternal and undivided capital of Israel and that the issue of the rights of Palestinian refugees is not negotiable.⁶ On another front, Iraq continues to be in a state of anarchy and chaos with very little being done by the occupying forces to fill in the power vacuum and find a legitimate leadership for the Iraqi people. More importantly, areas like Al-Falluja and Al-Anbar in Iraq have become hotbeds of resistance to occupation forces, as the past week witnessed multiple attacks that led to the death of more than ten US troops and the destruction of US helicopters and armored vehicles.

Despite US rhetoric that the summits aim to end violence and misery for the people of the Middle East, the plight of the Palestinians and Iraqis continues under occupation, and the Arab people remain victims of the repressive reign of US-supported regimes. The flagrant imbalance of power currently prevailing in the Middle East in favor of the US and Israel leaves no doubt that both the Sharm El Sheikh and al-Aqaba summits will deal with a long list of US demands given to Arab states for immediate implementation.

In addition to the obvious attempts by the US to secure unequivocal Arab support for the roadmap, chief among the US’s specific concerns in the summits would be an end to all forms of incitement against Israel, more repression of Islamist movements and resistance groups, and more support for US policy in Iraq, in return for some cosmetic steps in the future to alleviate Palestinian suffering and the aforementioned carrot of Arab-American economic partnership.

Given the upcoming US presidential elections and the need for the valuable Jewish vote, it is inconceivable that President Bush will be in a position to put pressure on Ariel Sharon. In fact, the Bush administration promised to addressSharon’s list of demands “fully and seriously in the implementation of the roadmap.”⁷ Those Israeli demands, if addressed, would render any supposed Palestinian gains from the roadmap virtually nonexistent.

As long as Middle East summits continue to ignore the prevailing lack of justice in the region and the massive human rights abuses being perpetrated internationally in the name of fighting “terrorism,” the summits will amount to nothing more than a visit by George W. Bush to inaugurate his new imperial domain and legitimize his conquests alongside Ariel Sharon. Indeed, the history of imperialism repeats itself…

Kareem M. Kamel is an Egyptian freelance writer based in Cairo,Egypt. He has an MA in International Relations and is specialized in security studies, decision-making, nuclear politics, Middle East politics and the politics of Islam. He is currently assistant to the Political Science Department at the American University in Cairo.

1- Niall Ferguson, “The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power,” Council on Foreign Relations April 30^th, 2003

2- Glenn Kessler, “Bush Looks To Gain Momentum in the Middle East,” Washington Post May 28^th, 2003

3- Ibid.

4- Andrea Koppel and Elise Kobbet, “US Delays Iran Policy Meeting,” CNN.com May 29^th, 2003

5- Tony Karon, “Is Iran Next?” Time.com May 30^th, 2003

6- Abd Al Bari Atwan, “An Early End to the Roadmap” Al Quds Al Arabi May 30^th, 2003 (in Arabic)

7- Glenn Kessler, “Bush Looks To Gain Momentum in the Middle East,” Washington Post May 28^th, 2003

The articles posted on this page reflect solely the opinions of the authors. Views Archive Advanced Search Views & Analyses