Pundits offer a few solutions to the Middle East bleakness, writes Rasha Saad In the London-based Saudi newspaper Asharq sAl-Awsat, Hussein Shobokshi warns that the direction of the political compass in the Arab world has changed completely. Citing examples, Shobokshi referred to the fact that "in Palestine now the enemy is another Palestinian, one who holds a different political opinion." In Lebanon, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora has become "the number one enemy of the Islamic resistance," represented by Hizbullah and its supporters. "Qatar openly welcomes, with a smile, the Israeli official Shimon Peres, the godfather of the first Qana massacre, to Doha. Libya's relations with African countries such as Chad, Congo and Burkina Faso have become more important than its relations with the rest of the Arabs, and Damascus, [which is] the capital of the Arabs, becomes Iran's prime ally." In "The Arab world and new directions", Shobokshi wonders if this is a state of confused priorities or new and changing convictions. He argues that the main threat in the region are the Sunnis in particular and the Arabs in general. "They need to make a painful but crucial decision vis-à-vis strategic and dangerous movements on the Iraqi scene." He explained that the decision is based on movement of sectarianism or ethnicity. If it is based upon the former, Shobokshi argues, then the Sunnis "should open the door to cooperation with Turkey and benefit from its sound relations with Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt as well as its expansion in the Central Asian countries." If, on the other hand, this movement is based on ethnicity between Arabs and Persians, Shobokshi wrote, then the game must be based on including rational Shia Arabs, specifically Iraqis, who do not follow the Iranian "wave". "There are rising Shia voices in Lebanon and Iraq that demonstrate a widening gap between the Shia of Iran and the rest of the Shia, a factor that should be used positively," Shobokshi concludes. In the London-based pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat, Patrick Seale believes that in the absence of a radical change of policy by both the US and Israel, regional powers need to look to their own defences by agreeing on clear goals. In "Dangerous weeks ahead in the Middle East", Seale contributed some goals that should be considered. He suggested that the Gulf states reject both American and Iranian hegemony but "strive instead to become an area of tolerance and modernity where Western and Iranian influence and interests can coexist." According to Seale, a new balance needs to be found in Lebanon to reflect demographic and political realities. "In particular, the state's institutions and power-sharing arrangements need to be revised to give the Shia community a greater, although not a dominant, stake in government decision-making." Syrian-Lebanese relations, Seale argues, need to be put on a healthy basis which should involve Syria recognising Lebanon's independence in return for Lebanon recognising that. "In the absence of an Arab-Israeli peace, Syria has legitimate security interests in Lebanon and cannot tolerate its neighbour falling into the orbit of a hostile power." Seale also urges that a Palestinian national unity government be formed on the basis of a common programme which offers Israel recognition within its 1967 borders and an end to violence in return for a reciprocal Israeli commitment to end the occupation, renounce violence and recognise the Palestinians' right to an independent state. Among suggestions, Seale wrote that Arab states should mount a major diplomatic effort to win European and American support -- and the support of the Israeli public -- for the Saudi peace plan endorsed at the Beirut summit of March 2002 which offered Israel normal relations with all 22 members of the Arab League once it withdraws to its 1967 borders. Focusing on the tragic Palestinian scene, Ahmed Al-Rabei in Asharq Al-Awsat criticised the "repulsive" statements of Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh in which he held US interference and Arab silence responsible for fuelling the Palestinian civil war. Al-Rabei quoted Haniyeh as calling upon the US "to release the Palestinians from its grip so that they may not fall into civil war," and Arab states to "bear their responsibilities of Arab nationalism, and to not remain a passive audience to the fire that will devour the Palestinian arena." Al-Rabei said the truth of the matter is that those fighting are none other than the Palestinians themselves who are distorting their cause, abusing and insulting it beyond belief -- in fact, abusing their own history. It is enough, wrote Al-Rabie, that the Ezzeddin Al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, named after one of the most important symbols of resistance in the history of Palestine, opened fire on Palestinians, thus racing with the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, the militant group affiliated to the Fatah movement, to claim responsibility for the innocent Palestinian lives lost in Gaza. On the other hand, Al-Rabie added, the Saudi initiative to halt inter-Palestinian fighting was accepted by all Palestinian parties, yet more than 40 Palestinians were killed following the endorsement of the initiative. "It must be stressed that no one can be more Palestinian than the Palestinians themselves." Al-Rabie explained that without this internal will, all well-meaning efforts will remain fruitless. And if they were to bear fruit, it could only result in a temporary truce if this tribal and partisan mentality were to prevail. "That, in addition to the absence of rationality and the lack of patriotism towards fellow Palestinians who have always fallen victims to Israel and to their very own misguided leaders who have lost all sense of nationalism and ethics."
