The Lie of Claims to Independent Arab Decisions

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

If we follow Arab political statements, the articles of writers loyal to the regimes, and the debates that appear on various television screens regarding the question of the Arab regimes’ subservience to external powers and the Arab states’ loss of true sovereignty and free political will, we find that the Arab regimes generally, and those loyal to them, always affirm that their states are independent and possess an independent political decision, that their regimes are not subject to the tyranny of the great powers, and that Arab leaders are too great to relinquish their countries’ independence and political will.

This claim, which we hear constantly, is untrue, and is not believed by people in the Arab homeland, small children included, who have not even experienced political conflicts, flattery, deception, and manipulation.

Every regime claims to be independent and sovereign, a claim that contradicts the tangible realities on Arab soil every single day. Arab land, and Arabs generally, remain under colonialism — whether old, traditional colonialism, or the new colonialism called imperialism, or under cultural and intellectual colonialism. Arab land is desecrated by foreign soldiers and by global economic powers, and eaten away intellectually and culturally, either through global media, communications, and connectivity, or through associations and non-governmental organizations funded by external powers and run by sons of this great homeland who have attained high levels of education and made themselves available to serve foreign interests.

Even socially, Arabs have not preserved their social independence, and the practices of regimes and societies, which carry a great deal of injustice, have led to external powers intervening and imposing their will on a number of matters, including women’s rights, children’s rights, and people’s rights to freedom of expression and opinion. External powers even intervene in the Arab judiciary in order to raise the level of its integrity, if any exists, or to train people in integrity and the pursuit of justice in handling various cases. External powers even monitor Arab police forces to make sure they are truly in the service of the people, not merely a repressive tool in the regime’s hand.

The Arab regimes can be classified as follows: there are Arab regimes, like the Jordanian and Palestinian regimes, that cannot pay salaries at the end of the month if they do not receive money from foreign states, the United States and Europe especially. How can these regimes be independent and sovereign? Supposing the funder asked the regime to carry out a particular task, such as guarding Israel’s borders and pursuing Palestinian fighters, could the regime refuse the request? It will not refuse, and it will go before the people to tell them that the people’s interest and the national interest require responding to the funders’ requests in order to preserve the people’s daily bread — this, if it even admits it is subject to these requests and lowers its false banner proclaiming an independent national decision.

Another category of regimes relies, for its security and survival, on the capabilities of foreign military powers. It is well known that America and Israel have provided, and continue to provide, security and military services to a number of regimes, because their existence is important to Israel’s security and to preserving American interests in the region. Arab states, in the Gulf especially, have remained for decades under the American security umbrella, despite possessing the material means to develop technology and manufacture the weapons needed for self-defense. But these Arab regimes do not control their own affairs, and cannot decide to recruit specialists and experts to build a modern technical base and set out toward producing their own technology.

The third category is represented by the regimes that experienced military coups, removing the political system colonialism had installed in the 1950s and 1960s. These regimes proved to be severely enslaving of their people and fiercely despotic, a failed example for escaping the predicament of subservient regimes. These regimes badly mistreated their own peoples, could not achieve anything of the Arab nation’s ambitions, and, through their brutality and misconduct, ultimately summoned foreign powers and armies to violate the sanctity of Arabs, homelands and citizens alike.

Cairo may claim to be independent, but it must remember it has received loans from the World Bank, something that does not happen without American approval. Khartoum may claim independence, but the misconduct of its leaderships led to all this bleeding and tearing apart of the country through foreign manipulation of internal affairs. Other capitals may claim independence, but the facts on the ground belie the claim.

Foreign armies are present in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, and Libya. Foreign military experts are present in most Arab countries, and the national desire to summon external powers into the Arab homeland exists among several Arab regimes. Sometimes Arab regimes and the Arab League themselves summon foreign powers to achieve stability in Arab countries. It is disgrace enough for the Arabs that they always wait for Israeli and American elections, hoping they might produce winners who will solve the Arabs’ problems for them.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “كذب الادعاءات باستقلالية القرارات العربية” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.