First: Disappointed hope: Partiality towards Israel and partnerships with despotic governments.
The French orientalist François Burgat, has conducted an elaborate study, upon request from the European Committee on Foreign Affairs, to evaluate European policies towards the Arab world. Burgat chooses an expressive title for his study: The Expectations of the Arab World from the European Union: disappointed hope as an alternative to the United States.
Burgat extensively examines the places where European policies towards the Arab World have failed. He evokes the stringent conditions which Europe imposes on Hamas, whereas these conditions become more relaxed when Israel is concerned. Burgat moves to evoking the suspension of European aid to the democratically elected Palestinian Authority government. He then points out to the utter European silence during the first week of the destructive Israeli assaults against Lebanese residential areas and infrastructure in July 2006. He pauses on the indication of the fact that every European official visiting the Arab region mentions the necessity to release the three Israeli prisoners held by Hezbollah and Hamas, whereas no one of these officials makes any mention of the thousand of Palestinian and Lebanese prisoners, among whom there are 500 Palestinian woman and child, held in Israeli prisons.
Why do Europeans then care only about Israelis?
There is another feature denouncing the fragility of the institutional policy of the European Union, which constitutes the main impediment to deepening European relations with this region of the world. It is namely that the European Union has failed to recognize the increasing unpopularity of its governmental partners, i.e. official institutions and despotic governments that often overlook human rights and commit serious breaches to individual rights and public freedoms.
We must not forget that the French president commented on the Algerian elections of April 2004 by saying that these elections were clean, when it was widely believed that they were not. Also, we must not forget that the Tunisian experience of modernization was described as being perfect, and that Arab dictators were then awarded the Louis Michel Prize (for Democracy and Human Rights). This blatantly contradicts the second article of all partnership agreements with the European Union, which officially stresses on the centrality of respecting human rights.
In addition to European partnership with despotic governments in the Arab World, the Europeans restricted the concept of civil society to the so-called 'secular' actors. They excluded, somewhat consciously, large groups of Islamic oppositions, educated individuals or organizations emanating from this part of the 'political scene'. They presumed, i.e. the Europeans, that the secular "actors" monopolize the capacity of modernizing the Arab societies. The fact that this component of a very small minority (laymen) has monopolized the representation before the International Community, might be after all appealing to Europeans, because this component very actively participates in imparting a satanic aspect upon its Islamist rivals and in excluding them.
Europeans rely on a reading of Islamist currents that presents them as being completely immune against liberalization and democratization dynamics. This view is completely erroneous and indicates a serious error in evaluation emanating from this prevailing western view, in this case, the concerned European institutions. Europe's familiarity of the Islamic component which constitutes an overwhelming majority in the Arab region has hence shrunk, and the possibility to recognize it has also shrunk. There are however, some exceptions to this reality that are worth praising: representatives of the European Union successfully built links with the Lebanese Hezbollah and to maintained them; moreover, they did not suspended the cooperation with the ministry of power when a member of Hezbollah was appointed at its head.
Europe somehow fails to recognize the historical process that explains the emergence of Islamic powers and their centrality on the Arabic political scene. Europeans do not limit themselves to recognizing the importance of the popular base of moderate Islamic oppositions, but they also sense the ability of this latter to create modernization in all the domains of political liberalization.
It could be noticed here that more than two years ago, and important number of American research institutes concurred to the view that considers moderate Islamists to be the key to Arabic reform. Those Islamists have adopted the basis of democracy, and have showed a true support to the state of law; furthermore, they started to forge different alliances (alliances with different sides), starting with Lebanon where the very Christian General Michel Aoun made an alliance with Hezbollah, arriving to Yemen where the socialists entered into alliance during the presidential election of September 2006 with the Yemeni Gathering for Reform, close to the Muslim Brotherhood Movement.
To sum up, Burgat's report ends with the note that when European partiality for Israel is combined with the failure to build rational relations with the actors in Islamist currents, the most eminent manifestation of this failure being the boycott of the democratically elected Palestinian Authority government, Europe's sacrifice of its long term political principles on the altar of short term electoral and financial interests and the concentration of its partnership to become solely with despotic regimes, then the consequence of all this would be that Europe is subject to find itself, on the long run, in an unstable situation with an entire part of the world.
Second: about the resistance; in the light of the difference existing between the European and the Arabic approaches :
In spite of the existence of tens of articles issued by the United Nations since its foundation, which protect the rights of peoples under colonialism or foreign occupation or domination or racist regimes, to resist by all means, including armed resistance, to liberate themselves from these conditions, and to exercise their right in self-determination (such as declaration 1514 issued on the 14th of December 1960, the declaration of fundamental human rights principles concerning all armed conflicts, and the principles of the legal status of combatants against foreign colonial domination and racist regimes, which came under resolution 1303 issued on the 12th of December 1973), in spite of all these facts, the struggle of the Palestinian people was throttled and its resistance was accused of terrorism. On the other hand, Israel remained outside the circle of all the regulations (standards) of international law and it was not bound to apply international resolutions, nor were sanctions imposed upon it, whereas such resolutions were applied on other countries such as Iraq.
We hence realize that the eight articles of the European counter-terrorism list (issued on 28/12/2001) witch determined (defined) terrorist acts, apply to the practices of the Israeli government, however, this latter remained actually outside the circle of accusation under the pretense that according to international law states have their own regulations.
Accordingly, the international community exempted Israel from respecting the UN and Security Council resolutions, as well as from any consequences of terrorist acts, a fact that consolidates more and more the image of the western bias for Israel and the prevalence of double standards in international politics.
Resistance cannot be understood from a political perspective unless through the observation of the complicated circumstances which govern the peoples of the region as a result of the persistence of the occupation and its excessive aggressions, as well as the oppression against these peoples from exercising their right to independence, sovereignty, freedom and self-determination.
It is worth mentioning that Europe's problem with the resistance is not of conceptual nature but is related to its political one. European memory still preserved a link with the concept of resistance, particularly that link which refers to the history of both the French and the Russian peoples during World War II. Moreover, the centrality of the freedom concept in liberal ideology, regardless of applied ideological differences, is based on a somewhat resemblance with the concept of resistance, regarding the finality that it seeks. We have mentioned on several occasions that what the resistance seeks in principle, without mentioning the ideological foundations on which its ethics are based, is simply, freedom, sovereignty and independence. However, these basic components of the concept of resistance are soon disregarded and lost in the crowd of political considerations and interests. Yet, what most captures the attention is the European black list that classifies movements and organizations which it considers as terrorist; the list does not mention Hezbollah or the Islamic Resistance (it included the names of three individuals which it considered are members of Hezbollah).
This implies that the European position recognizes Hezbollah as a resistance and not as a terrorist movement, despite considerable American pressure on the European position; knowing that this position is not a final one, but open to changes according to political developments, especially that the European debate over this subject hides a sharp division among its sides. Moreover, excluding Hezbollah from those lists does not in any way mean a European approval on the Hezbollah military activity in the Shebaa Farms an in other regions of South Lebanon.
On the other hand, those lists included a different position towards the Palestinian resistant brigades; the first list issued on 28/12/2001 classified the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine as well as the Ezzeddine al Qassam Brigade – Hamas military wing – as terrorist organizations. This classification was maintained in the second list of 3/5/2002, which was more elaborate and included eleven additional organizations, among which, Al-Aqsa Martyr's Brigades – connected to the Fatah Movement – the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), and the Fatah Movement – the revolutionary council – and the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, who is accused of financing the Islamic resistance Movement (HAMAS).
This process was then crowned by a unanimous resolution of the foreign ministers of the European Union on 6/9/2003, which decides to include the political wing Hamas within the list of terrorist organizations, and to freeze its bank accounts.
This escalation in the European position against the brigades of the Palestinian resistance constitutes a serious regression with regards to the developing independence of the European position from the American one, and to its endeavor to establish a certain balance concerning the Question of Palestine.
Summary.
It is obvious that resistance is the major issue which occupies an important space in the disagreement between the Islamic side and European side. This issue is expected to deteriorate in the future, due to the fact that resistance groups insist on the resistance as the sole choice with no other alternative, in liberating the land and in self-determination, and due to the fact that Europe persists in mixing resistance with terrorism.
On the light of this, it becomes urgent to give an exact definition which permits to establish this discrimination, although the disagreement is not exclusively related to the strategies which produce definitions and concepts. Be it as it may, this does not deny the need to find this definition.
For this purpose, we have to be aware of the following:
1- There are institutional articles in the United Nations Pact, article 55 for instance, which stress on the right of self-determination, and prohibit discrimination according to race, language, religion or gender. Moreover, the Geneva Convention in 1949 has treated combatants for freedom as equals of regular army soldiers with regards to applying human rights in case of killing, injuring or captivity. Resolutions and declarations are many which authorized the bearing arms for the sake of exercising the right of self-determination and gaining independence.
2- Conventions and resolutions which emanate from the UN and which define terrorism ad terrorist acts have excluded states an official armies from those definitions; that is, states and official armies have special regulations related to war crimes and crimes against humanity.
3- According to the two previous premises, international terrorism according to international law, can be defined as acts of violence which are not classified under the struggle against foreign colonialism and domination, against land usurpation or against racist government, without prejudice to innocents who did not help, directly and consciously, the colonialist occupier or the racist governor, if these acts were not committed by regular army.
4- The state of Israel whom international law does not subjugate to the regulations or terrorism, thanks to the western hegemony over the UN institutions, is also exempted from being subdued to regulations dealing with crimes of war and crimes against humanity.
5- The European position does not only condemn martyrdom operations against civilians, it also condemns operations which hit military targets inside the occupied lands of 1966; according to the international law and the UN regulations, these operations are completely legitimate because they are carried out on an occupied land.
6- The resistance inside Palestine believes that there are two justifications for martyrdom operations:
First: self-defense against killing and genocide operations which target the Palestinian people.
Second: deterring the enemy in order to reach a certain balance on the ground, which brings the civilians out of the circle of confrontations. This could be noticed from the fact that the Palestinian resistance has, on several occasions, expressed its readiness to cease martyrdom operations against civilians, in case Israelis stop targeting civilians and Palestinian civilian zones and the relentless policy of assassination. However, the Israeli response to these calls was all the time: rejection.
7- Although the European position is less biased than the American one, it is nonetheless still a captive of double standard policies in approaching the position on the Palestinian Question. The European policy in accusing the Palestinian resistance brigades of terrorism, from an Arabic perspective, helps only to cover Israeli assaults and to encourage Israeli governments to go to excess in the policies of killing, destroying and displacement, and consequently, it makes the conflict a permanent one.
Third-The West and Islamic Movements in the Conditions of Dialogue :
There is a growing role for religion in international conflicts and maybe one of the great indicators to this is the experience of the neo-conservatives with their religious background, in the American administration, although their experience in power is about to come to an end.
In the Middle East, political facts cannot be understood without taking into account the role of religion as a major factor driving policies.
So, one can easily notice the growing importance of sectarian affiliations which transfer conflicts to the lower social levels. Also, one can easily notice that Arab opposition movements and major political trends which play a major role in facing governments are essentially constituted of Islamic movements.
Moreover, resistance movements or national liberation movements, which combat occupation in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq, are also Islamic movements.
In addition, what is happening in Afghanistan and the confrontation with authorities and western powers is driven by fundamentalist Islamists.
In a nutshell, religion, or more specifically, the Muslim religion, seems the main reference for political positions and practices, albeit diverse, in the Middle East, whether through opposition to authorities in power, resistance to occupation, or formation of active popular political and cultural orientations.
But this summary does not seem sufficient in our opinion to move from a general approach to a detailed one. The general approach is often the victim of propaganda, and anyway, it does not offer satisfactory answers, while there still remains the need for a deeper understanding and a scientific definition of concepts and trends.
The stand of Islamist movements vis-à-vis the West seems full of discrepancies and differences, hence their different stand vis-à-vis dialogue with it.
This also seems linked to the understanding and vision of these movements of the role of religion in international conflicts. In this regard, it is necessary to distinguish between three major Islamic trends:
- The political Islamic trend which limits its concerns to political issues, relying on the “Islamization” of society and the expansion of social activities. It has a moderate-reformist character. The Muslim Brothers movement in Egypt is the political model for this trend, whereby the Justice and Charity Group (Jama’at Al Adel Wal Ehsan) in Morocco constitutes its social model.
- The second trend is that of Resistant Islam, which emphasizes fighting occupation. It builds its political ideology on the priority of resistance, and considers that liberation is the entry point for achieving radical transformation and change in the political situation. Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon are the most eminent models of this trend, knowing that Hezbollah joins the role of resistance to that of a political party, with a political reformist vision and a parliamentary bloc, taking part in governing the country and integrating constitutional institutions, the democratic process and respecting political plurality.
- The third trend is the so-called Jihadist Islam whereby an armed struggle is fought on a religious basis in all directions, against the West, political regimes, other religious or confessional groups, and even those who belong to the same religion, thus fighting them also. An example to this trend is Al-Qaeda with its various facets.
In fact, it is of utmost importance to note that the religious approach to conflict with the West is almost restricted to the third trend, where the conflict is of religious nature and one can hear in it terms such as faith and unbelief, Islam and crusades, etc.
In contrast, other trends offer another understanding of the problem with the West, thus allowing the political dimension to prevail over the religious one. But this does not eliminate the religious factor that is present to various extents in different Islamic movements.
But as far as Lebanon is concerned, Hezbollah, which is one of the major Islamic parties in Lebanon and the region, refuses the use of religion in political conflicts, neither at local nor at international level. It fights Israelis in Lebanon because they are occupying it and not because they are Jews. Its disagreement with the West is not based on the West being Christian, but stems from its rejection of Western hegemony, the support of the West to Israel, its bias towards it, its turning a blind eye to the sufferings of Palestinians, the double standards, and the selective approach to international resolutions.
So disagreement with the West and with the US more specifically is purely political and not religious.
But the political problem seems in turn big and complicated, and it seems that the conditions and elements for a final solution to the Palestinian problem and how the West deals with it, are not available. It is even highly probable that the next decade in the Middle East will be one the most explosive ones, for various reasons…
So the West, in general, needs to reconsider its Middle Eastern policies. Here, Europe is to assume a major responsibility, by virtue of proximity and the existence of the joint Mediterranean sphere, at political and security levels, and due to intermingling, because of the presence of big Muslim migrant communities in European states.
This revised vision is a necessity for building a serious strategy for dialogue.
In my opinion, it is necessary to restore respect of international resolutions in Western policies, get rid of biased policies and selective approach to international law, to respect specificities and sacred symbols for Islam, pay due attention to the sufferings of Palestinians, their displacement outside their land, and their right to return, a major element which cannot be disregarded.
Then, changes in the Middle East have to be taken into account. For one cannot ignore Islamic movements, like one cannot ignore resistance movements, for communication with the popular bases or any projection of future policies in the Arab region cannot be realized without dialogue with Islamist movements whose conflict with the West is considered to be political and not religious.
Actually, many indicators refer to a political and intellectual activity with these movements, especially in the way they adapt to democracy, their reconciliation with the state, their recognition of plurality, their practice of peaceful opposition, and the improvement of their development concerns. In that regard, Lebanon is a unique experience and an advanced model of the moderate social and political vision along with alliances that include Islamists and Christians, within a common vision regarding political reform.
Four–The Core of the Problem…and the Need for a Comprehensive Revision :
The Arab world suffers from many entwined crises, political despotism, development experiences failure, security disturbance resulting from the Palestinian cause and the continuity of Israeli occupation of Arab territories…
Violence practicing became a natural result to this situation. It takes many forms and its jumping-off points and reasonable grassroots differ. In addition, violence exceeds nowadays the Arabic scope and extends to Europe and America.
The cultural approach (mainly the American one) which focuses on analyzing the study of differences in values and concepts as an entrance to understand violence reasons will remain incapable of touching the problem core.
However, the economic approach (i.e. the European economic approach) gives special importance to loans and aids policy; and concentrates on poverty aspects in analysis. This approach will remain under the best circumstances unable of assimilating violence aspects…
Furthermore, we think that the political approach (somehow missed) which takes into consideration the continuity of Palestinian people sufferance, biased western policies, standards duplicity and crippling international resolutions implementation is related to the problem core and thus allows to product a constructive approach and efficient policies.
Although Arab region peoples still remember European colonialist period particularly what is related to region division strategy into divided entities as it is the case in Sykes Pico agreement between French and British mandates from one hand or what is related to Belfour declaration that found up the establishment of Israeli entity in Palestine from the other hand, the question on current relation between European and Arabic parties with its contemporary complications should not be established on the historic background. However, this historic background did not become a psychological obstacle before the suggested relations.
A confusing impression on European policies is often bred at Arab peoples. These European policies sway between incapacity of acting and influencing from one side or the affiliation with Middle Eastern American policies from another side.
During the last years, Atlantic leaning including all concealed western apartheid and security tension based upon strategic illusions more than anything else grew up in European policies to the detriment of Mediterranean leaning.
In this period where American policies in the Middle East suffer successive big failures, exhaustive deterioration and increase of Arabic hostility toward them, European affiliation to those American policies during this period of failure reflects bad luck and strategic mistake that Europe will bear its negative consequences without reaping anything in return.
In our opinion, European policies toward the Arab world need a comprehensive revision and re-evaluation according to many rules are:
- Rehabilitation of international resolutions related to the Palestinian cause.
- Taking obvious distinctive distance away from Middle Eastern American policies.
- Linking violence grassroots in the region with region peoples' sufferance and occupations as a result to policies of humiliation and unjustified interference.
- Adopting an official policy that clearly condemns the exposure to sacred places and rejects religious provocation.
- Establishing partnership policies with more parity.
- Making a strategic decision to hold dialogue with fundamental Islamic movements as they express current social vitalities in the Arab world.
