Does the Arab League express the will of people or the will of tyrants? The new Arab League Secretary Dr. Nabil Al-Arabi who was chosen after the revolution to be the Egyptian Foreign Minister; then he was nominated as the new AL secretary to save the post for Egypt; betrayed the trust of the revolutionaries when he met the Syrian tyrant Bashar Al-Asad. He defended the Syrian regime while the Syrian army was shooting people who wanted to copy the 25 January Revolution in Syria.His words in Syria shattered any hope that the AL may express the will of tax payers in the twenty six countries that form this dead body. In fact the accurate translation of its name is the League of Arab States not the Arab League as it calls itself. It is clear now that it is the League of the Arab regimes. Club of Tyrants who coordinate security subjects together to prevent their people from freeing themselves and to author some bad plays to show that they are forced to rule by emergency laws and dictatorship until they free Palestine. Their role in the international strategy is safeguarding the oil supply for rewarding by keeping a blind eye about their human rights violations. All of them were happy that Syria was the first royal republic after the regime changed the constitution to fit the new king president Bashar to inherit his father. The west that talks much about human rights agreed first for the creation of the first Middle East royal republic as long as it serves the Israeli cause; for thirty years the Syrian army fought in Lebanon and against its people only and it did not shoot a single bullet at its occupied land in Golan. The west changed its stance and took measures against Syria when the young king president became an ally to Iran not because of regime's violations of human rights or due to lack of democracy. Moreover late President Sadat invited the Syrian regime to negotiate peace and retake Golan but late President Hafez Al-Asad refused and attacked the Egyptian hero of war and peace. Late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia said in Khartoum summit after 1967 defeat that Golan was sold. Al-Asad the senior was the defence minister during 1967 war. When Dr. Nabil Al-Arabi was in Damascus he supported the Syrian regime and asked the international community not to press on the Syrian king president to step down. Did he ask the Syrian tyrant to stop killing his people and to stop using his armed forces against civilians? Egypt is the biggest country in this community that never did anything in the right direction to create an economical giant despite the fact that all resources are present to build it. The Egyptian taxpayers share in the budget of this league that pays the salary of the secretary who ignores the systematic killing of an ally people that shared in most of their wars. Even the regime that the AL secretary defended betrayed the Arab cause by opening the Eastern gate to the Iranian influence and abetted it to spread it to Lebanon and Gaza. Does this policy reflect the new foreign policy of Egypt after the revolution and is it in the best interest of Egypt? Could the membership of Egypt in the tyrant club that run by the petrodollars and the will of dictators best serve the interests of Egypt to be a model for freedom and democracy in the Middle East? The democratic Egypt deprives Israel from claiming that it is the only democracy and allows Egypt to be acceptable model for Arab-phones and to present the moderate revolutionary model against the theocratic autocratic model of Iran. The rulers of the club of tyrants will not be happy with that. Personally I think Egypt should firmly stand by people who want freedom regardless of the tyrants' rage. Anyway some or many of them are behind the counter-revolution here and that should be taken into account until they are brought into account.
