A call to establish an Arab “Westphalian regime”

Why is it necessary to adopt a Westphalian Arab system to face the challenges of Turkish and Iranian penetration into the Arab region, invoking ancient history to justify their return to the Arab region, and their control of several Arab capitals means the Arab countries are no longer masters of their decisions? What do we mean by the Westphalian system? Can what has worked in Europe succeed in the Arab region? Or does the fragility of Arab societies prevent their success? Will the arrival of a new administration in the United States cause it to reconsider its positions in relation to each other, so that only one man can stand up, as has happened on several occasions in its story, or does it just breed unrealistic daydreams?
The name “Westphal” goes back to the place where the “Peace Conference” was held in the region of German Westphalia, which, by a political treaty signed on October 24, 1648 and called “Peace of Westphalia”, ended the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) between Catholics and Protestants, It ended with a peace agreement, the first of its kind in Europe, as some historians describe it, and by recognizing that the two sects would not interfere in each other’s affairs; Because it is the defense of the faith that drives the wars of religion, while the essence of the “Westphalian system” is based on the inadmissibility of interfering with the religious beliefs of other peoples. From this idea was born the beginning of the emergence of the concept of the nation-state. The sovereign state, and the beginning of the emergence of the concept of modern state as a legal entity independent of its rulers.
The Treaty of “Peace of Westphalia” does not in fact prevent conflicts and disputes between countries which, taking a religious character, have led to the destruction of Europe; Rather, it means that conflicts take the form of limited wars in order to fulfill the interests of the nation-state.
The other important factor of the Westphalian order is the balance of power between the alliances between certain European countries and the counter-allies.
The Treaty of Westphalia is the result of the bloody history of Europe, and it is also the result of the ideas of certain European thinkers, which were summed up in two words: “the sword” and “the feather”, and the sound of the cannons and swords that knew the European arena from 1618 to 1648, which accompanied it, alongside the battlefields The opinions and jurisprudence of thinkers, such as the famous Dutch international jurist Grotius Hugo, who was l ‘one of those who laid the foundations of international law based on “natural law”, and one of his books is his book on “The Law of War and Peace”. Another brilliant politician is the French cardinal Richelieu. In the first half of the 17th century, the two personalities played a leading role in the vision of the future of European construction after the Thirty Years War, in the context of peace and security, but both died before 1648. The date of the signing of the Treaty of Westphalia, which established the three most important principles: the principle of state sovereignty, the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states and the principle of nationalism and the national security of states.
While the first two principles (the principle of state sovereignty and the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of states) are part of the basic principles of the United Nations Charter, to which member states must adhere at least in theory, then the concept of “national security” as a term is seen as adjacent to the nation-state; Whether in its interpretation and application at the national level, through the state’s defense policies and its ability to protect the country from the threats it faces, and its capabilities also to protect its citizens by providing vital needs. such as basic health, education, transport services, etc.
The other concept of “national security” relates to the capacity of the state or states to cope with the challenges facing external forces and whether the sources of this threat are limited at the national level, or exceed it. to threaten Arab national security.
We refer here to a few examples related to the tripartite aggression against Egypt in 1956 by Great Britain, France and Israel, and how the Arab countries and the Arab peoples showed solidarity with Egypt, even by the Arab regions that had not yet achieved independence, as happened in Aden in southern Yemen when the unions were shut down. Workers provide fuel to British ships and the rest of the port services, which are under British occupation. And as a setback in the 1967 war, in which Saudi Arabia forgot its differences with Egypt because of the war in Yemen, and provided financial and political support to the Khartoum conference, not just to the ‘Egypt; But also for the countries which were affected and lost by the war of June 1967, because they felt that Arab national security was threatened by the repercussions of this setback which hit the Arab countries of confrontation.
Perhaps the most profound model is the October 1973 war, which combined military action and an oil embargo, and prompted several countries at this stage to launch several initiatives. Among them, a call to establish an Arab-European dialogue called “Arab-European Dialogue” and a call to establish a dialogue between the North and the South; Between industrialized countries and developing countries, which the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia requested during the emergency meeting of the United Nations General Assembly held in April and May 1974 at the request of the Algerian Republic , in addition to the “Organization of African Unity” which at the time held an extraordinary meeting in November (November) 1973 with the aim of strengthening Arab-African relations, in particular in the effort of African producing countries. of raw materials to take advantage of the experience of the oil embargo to obtain the advantages obtained by the Arab oil-producing countries by increasing its prices on world markets and by controlling the producing countries over their natural resources.
It is the extraordinary mobility and the political and financial gains that the Arab countries made at the time. Later, we will discuss the elements of the successes and failures that have followed that a number of Arab countries have managed to lose the sense of national security and Arab national security.
And to talk about the rest …