League of Arab States vs. League of Arab States

No one can predict the behavior and actions of the League of Arab States and its officials and the achievement of its goals. The Arab League sent its secretary general in the Sudanese crisis to Khartoum after the overthrow of the former president to mediate between the military council and the popular movement of the time, which drew critical reactions at the time of the entry of the Arab League into the European Union and Ethiopian Mediation, not to mention the sharp criticism of the delay in the intervention of the Arab League.

On the other hand, the Arab League is absent from most of the current crises in the media, politically, development and humanely, in particular the Lebanese, Iraqi, Algerian and many other Arab crises.

It is surprising that the Arab League has not found itself, did not know the importance of its role until now, and has not found its vital role which meets the size of Arab aspirations and is consistent with the history of this university through all that has happened and is happening in the Arab region.

The Arab League has yet to learn from all the previous lessons that have swept through the region. The Arab League has not played the minimum of its role in order not to come into conflict with what contradicts the policies of the member states.

Why has the Arab League not established itself as an Arab and regional actor on the model of similar organizations? Why did she choose to withdraw, withdraw and dissociate herself from it?

It is true that the seriousness of the differences between some members on certain issues is an obstacle to the adoption of common positions or the adoption of joint Arab projects, but that does not mean that the Arab League must step down and withdraw.

It is not always necessary for the Arab League to act with a 100% deal, or even a 50% deal. The university may find it difficult to agree and agree on certain positions and projects, but there are certainly positions and projects that can be carried out and on which to work and which are consistent with the positions of the States. 10%, 20% or 30% members. . What prevents the Arab League from working on positions on which there is a consensus of 1%, 10% or 15% and leaves what is unanimous? Assuming that the reason for the Arab League’s withdrawal from the Arab political, development, media and humanitarian arena is due to differences among members, sometimes on certain issues.

But the problem with the Arab League, in my opinion, is its poverty of ideas resulting from its poverty of active minds and creators of ideas. The Arab League needs a crisis cell capable of producing ideas and methods to implement them at its highest levels.

The Arab League needs to organize its priorities, attract creative Arab minds and allow those minds to diagnose all Arab problems, instead of accumulating employees who have eaten and drunk. The Arab League should prepare scenarios to resolve the latent crises in the Arab world and the Arab-non-Arab crises. The League must work seriously on the minimum limit and the upper limit, both possible and necessary, and it is no longer acceptable for the Arab League to continue to be part of the Arab problems instead of being part of the solutions.

* Quoted from “Okaz”.