To change its position in the international power game, the Arab world needs to convince others that talking about peace is not its only option, writes Amin Howeidi* The Arab scene is one of anger and despair. After each crisis, we hear people calling for retaliation and others advising pragmatism. Peace is of course preferable to war, but at what price? When we talk about national security, we have to consider the bare facts. What we're faced with is more than the simple options of war and peace. What is bringing us to heel is more than the disputes between the trigger-happy and the prudent in our midst. What we need is deterrence, and that's a weighty matter. Deterrence is a multi-faceted thing. You have to have the means and the resolve to use them, and you have to let your adversary know that you're ready to use force when necessary. Your adversary should know that its actions come with a price. That's what keeps the adversary at bay. That's why deterrence is a matter of life and death. Had Arab countries owned, even collectively, a credible means of deterrence, their luck would have turned. Israel is our adversary. And that's a country known to possess a powerful arsenal of weaponry and is willing to use it. What encourages Israel to attack is our lack of deterrence. Our eagerness to negotiate for peace makes things worse. For it is important to let the adversary know that peace is not the only option. This is why Israel is so eager to disarm the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine ahead of any talks. Israel is acting like a wolf, and we're acting like a shepherd with no guard dogs. One important caveat: You mustn't use inadequate force, for that would be courting trouble. So we must have a credible deterrent on a national or pan-Arab level. And we must be willing to use that deterrent if our national security comes under threat. That's what we all should begin to discuss. What's perplexing is that we probably have the men and material. If you believe everything you hear in this region, we spend more than Israel on weaponry, and our armies outnumber those of NATO. We ought to be in good shape, but we're not. We're being pushed around and we don't seem to respond. Our historic rights are being taken away, our national security torn to pieces, and our maps keep changing in a disturbing fashion. Once again, the question is not one of choosing between war and peace. No reasonable person wants war, and certainly not against overwhelming odds. But sooner or later we'll have to defend ourselves. Many now say that Arab countries should have come to Lebanon's help in keeping with the joint defence treaty. Forget it. The joint defence treaty exists only on paper. The documents are there, signed, but they are not being implemented. Just as is the case with most Arab League decisions, Arab collective military effort is impossible at the moment. We don't even have the kind of leadership that could make it happen. Arab armies are at odds. Arab armies turn their weapons against sisterly countries. Some people among us declare war without notifying the rest, as happened lately in Lebanon. And others sign peace agreements without consulting in advance. It all reminds me of Napoleon when he said: "I would rather fight a group rather than fight in a group." Let's not put the carriage in front of the horse. Let's not talk in terms of peace and war, for the battle is long. And the loser is the one who gives up first. Let's first get together and decide to create a deterrent. This is a matter of life and death. But remember this: we will not have a deterrent if we remain divided. * The writer is former Egyptian minister of defence and chief of general intelligence.
