The outcome of the Sharm El-Sheikh conference on Iraq was hard to figure out. Doaa El-Bey judges the results Although the Sharm El-Sheikh conference on Iraq cast more light on failed US policy, it couldn't resolve the crisis or put it on the threshold of a resolution. Buthayna Shaaban wrote that the conference was held merely to highlight Washington's utter failure to find a way out of the Iraqi crisis. However, such recognition fell short of the administration acknowledging an American political and military defeat in Iraq. A concession by the US, according to Shaaban, should have led it to substitute its current aggressive policy with a more civilised position based on dialogue, the respect of rights and freedoms of peoples and their independence. In the London-based daily Asharq Al-Awsat, Shaaban pointed to the paradox in the US request made to what it called "the international community" to help it find a resolution to the Iraqi crisis, though it took the decision to go to war in Iraq unilaterally in spite of the opposition of the international community. Shaaban criticised the media for making the conceptual mistake by the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that held Iraq and its neighbouring states responsible for the violence in Iraq. "I was amazed to find that not a single Arab journalist in the numerous press conferences held asked Rice about her assessment of the major crime the US committed in Iraq or the complete US responsibility for torturing, killing and displacing millions of Iraqi civilians inside and outside Iraq," Shaaban wrote. She concluded by emphasising that the US occupation in Iraq was the main reason for the Iraqi crisis "which is a real holocaust". The withdrawal of US troops is the only way to end the crisis because terrorism in Iraq is the outcome of war. Mahmoud Al-Rimawi wrote that the conference, attended by 50 states and organisations, was not without any achievements. The fact that it drew up a five-year plan to support Iraq and reduce some $30 billion of its debt is significant. But that achievement would have been more effective if it had followed a political and security plan. Al-Rimawi added in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Khaleej that Iraq is in need of an inter-Iraqi compact rather than an international compact which was the aim of the conference. "The plan to save Iraq lacks a major component -- the absence of a unanimous political strategy that can unite the majority of Iraqis and lead them to the salvation of their state," Al-Rimawi wrote. He agreed that a realistic solution was needed to deal with trying to resolve the Iraqi crisis. What is required is to link support to the government with certain policies. Thus the government is expected to represent all its people rather than certain organisations and adopt a carefully crafted policy that should be applied with any government, not only with the current administration. The independent Syrian daily Tishreen wrote in its editorial that in calling for the Sharm El-Sheikh conference, the US had supposedly realised that the catastrophic situation in Iraq could not be resolved without a reconsideration of its policies which led to the occupation of Iraq; reconsidering past stands, correcting mistakes and reaching a compressive solution to other Middle East issues. "It is high time for the US to realise that its policies in the region, especially its continuous support for Israel, will hamper the resolution of any of the intermingling Middle Eastern issues," the editorial read. The editorial suggested in its conclusion that the US should adopt a more pragmatic approach and open a constructive, even-handed dialogue with Middle Eastern parties. Nahla Al-Shahaal wrote that the conference should be assessed in light of conflicts in Iraq and the US. The conference came at a time when the Democrats are denouncing Bush's policies in Baghdad and forcing him to withdraw US forces from Iraq. Thus to Bush, any minor success that the conference achieved would help him in his battle with the Democrats and help stop his falling popularity within his own party. The other battle is inside Iraq where the US is trying through its recently introduced security plan to draw up another plan for comprehensive political, economy and administrative reformation as well as national reconciliation. However, the US administration is facing a series of dramatic contradictions which it created in Iraqi society when it accepted dividing it along sectarian lines. "Given that Sharm was attended by many international parties, the final communiqué aimed to appeal to all of them." Thus, as Shahaal wrote in the London-based independent daily Al-Hayat the demand for a schedule for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq was non-committal. The troops in Iraq will not stay indefinitely. A federal state was not ruled out but the communiqué underlined the unity of Iraq and left it to the various parties to interpret it in their own way. Turkey's fight for democracy seemed to contradict Iraq's lack of democracy as some writers pointed out this week. Ayman Al-Safadi praised the performance of the governing AK Party which he said had achieved a political as well as legal victory when it withdrew its candidate for president, Abdullah Gul. Its victory came when it bowed to the constitution and concluded that if it stuck to nominating Gul it would have to confront many parties including the military institution. The party came out of that fight with its second victory, pushing for the president to be elected directly by the Turkish people instead of the parliament. In the Jordanian daily Al-Ghad, Al-Safadi said the AK Party's experience and its decision to stick to the constitution and to democracy was an example that all Arab governments and parties, including Iraq, should follow.
