Libya still livid

Arab diplomats remain unsure how Muammar Gaddafi will respond to efforts to soothe a row ahead of the coming Arab League summit. And what the summit may achieve is still an open question. Dina Ezzat reports
On 13 January, 1964, Arab leaders met at the headquarters of the Arab League for a summit that they promised their peoples would take place every year. But 38 years later, the leaders are still disputing when, where and with whom to hold the conference.
The latest row involves Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and leaders of a Lebanese Shi'ite group, and centres around the disappearance of Shi'ite Imam Moussa Al-Sadr almost 25 years ago. Al-Sadr went missing in mysterious circumstances during a visit to Libya in 1978 and has not been seen since. Shi'ite groups have long held Gaddafi responsible for Al-Sadr's fate. Earlier this month, a Lebanese Shi'ite leader demanded that Gaddafi be barred from the next Arab summit, scheduled to be held in Beirut in March, unless he comes accompanied by Al- Sadr. The coming summit is the second in a planned series of regular Arab summits, which were agreed on in Cairo in October 2000. The first summit was held in Amman, Jordan, in March 2001.
Yesterday, Arab League Secretary-General flew to Libya in a bid to placate an enraged Gaddafi, who is demanding that the summit venue be changed from Beirut to Cairo. Moussa's meeting with Gaddafi came in the wake of intensive meetings and contacts that he has held with several Arab capitals to try and find a way to persuade Tripoli to drop, or at least suspend, its demand that the summit be moved. Moussa's efforts during the week have included visits to Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan as well as telephone calls to practically every influential Arab capital. Those efforts have borne some fruit. The Lebanese government has issued an official statement welcoming Gaddafi and distancing itself from the statements made by the Shi'ite group.
"The decision over the convocation of the summit is a government prerogative and the Lebanese government welcomes all heads of Arab states," said Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Al- Hariri after meeting Moussa on Monday.
In addition, Al-Hariri's office issued a statement which read, "Lebanon welcomes all Arab leaders to meet in Beirut to discuss the critical conditions facing Arab countries...The prime minister is resolved that the participation of Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi along with other Arab heads of state is important for the success of the summit." The statement added, "The Lebanese government and people welcome all Arab leaders."
In addition, the formerly loquacious speaker of the Lebanese parliament, Nabih Berri, has fallen silent. Berri earlier contributed to the debate by suggesting that the summit be delayed. Berri has also tempered his remarks that alluded to Gaddafi's involvement in the Al-Sadr affair. "Speaker Berri was very clear about his commitment to the summit and his respect for all Arab leaders," Moussa told reporters, as he stepped out of a meeting with Berri on Monday. In his statements Moussa referred to the determination of all Arab leaders to see the summit take place on schedule. "Nobody is prepared to take the blame or bear the responsibility for a summit failure," Moussa said.
Arab diplomatic sources tell Al-Ahram Weekly that "all Arab leaders" want to see a solution that will convince the Libyan leader to send his representative to Beirut for the summit in March. But, a Cairo-based Arab diplomat observed, "With Gaddafi, no one can tell. He might just decide to go after all. But even if he misses the summit, nobody wants to see Libya miss the summit in toto. That would open the door for other states to miss the meeting, which would undermine the summit." The source added, "But if Gaddafi is absolutely determined to keep Libya out of the summit, we have to calculate which would be more harmful: to move the summit from Beirut, or to keep it there and accept that Libya's participation in previous summits was not always very upbeat."
A Libyan diplomat commented, "Libya has nothing against the Lebanese government and does not want to hijack the summit; no." He added, "But nobody could ask the Libyan leader to go to Lebanon after he was threatened by some Lebanese militia, when we all know the way a Lebanese militia can act."
Judging by the general consensus, the likeliest outcome is that the summit will take place in Beirut, probably with very low-level Libyan participation. But agreeing on a venue for the summit is only the start of the battle. The issue of the agenda remains to be settled. The Syrians want to include clear language of Arab support for all forms of resistance against military occupation. The Palestinian Authority, which wants to keep the Intifada under control, is hardly in favour of this line. Instead, they want high level support to be offered to Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, who is besieged in Ramallah by the Israeli government of Ariel Sharon. It is doubtful that Sharon will let Arafat attend the summit. The Iraqis, who have previously agreed to see Arab summits totally dedicated to the Palestinian issue, now want moves made to help them end their political isolation. But the Kuwaitis, although they want measures to secure stability in the region, adamantly refuse to accept normal relations with the regime of Saddam Hussein "ever again." And, just to add spice, the host country may want, however quietly, to raise the issue of the whereabouts and fate of Moussa Al-Sadr.
"The argument over what to do with the Arab-Israeli conflict is a daily routine for Arab states. It is the state of affairs between Iraq and Kuwait that will require some imaginative work and a serious political will," an Arab League source said.
Tomorrow, Moussa is expected to arrive in Baghdad for talks with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and top Iraqi officials. These talks are designed to foster what Arab diplomats call "a healthier Arab environment." Baghdad, according to an Iraqi diplomat, "is seriously willing to take the necessary measures to encourage closer Arab relations in these particularly critical times." Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is already sending positive messages in the lead-up to Moussa's visit. "If Iraq is strong, this is to serve the interests of Iraq and other Arab states; and if any other Arab state -- including Saudi Arabia and Kuwait -- is strong, then this is to serve the interests of this country and those of the entire Arab world," Saddam Hussein recently remarked.
Iraqi officials are making similar statements, which analysts read as signalling interest in a settlement. Even the Iraqi press has also softened its usual inflammatory language about Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Instead, the Iraqi press is commenting that Iraq sees itself as part of the Arab nation, which "is all one nation that has one name: the Arab world."
But these signals, caution Arab diplomats, should not be overestimated. "This does not mean that the Arab summit will adopt a resolution unilaterally to end the sanctions imposed on Iraq, because there are serious issues related to Kuwaiti prisoners of war that the Kuwaiti government insists must be solved," commented one source. He added, "There is also the continuing Kuwaiti argument that Iraq should be dealt with by the [United Nations] Security Council."
Given all these diplomatic briar patches, what can the Arab peoples expect from the summit? Answered one senior Arab League diplomat: "A declaration that offers support to Iraq, or any Arab state, against any potential US strike, reasserts the distinction between terrorism and legitimate resistance of occupation, with emphasis on the safety of all civilians, stresses the need for closer Arab cooperation, and encourages the reform process that Secretary-General Moussa has launched to restructure the league."
Recommend this page
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
Send a letter to the Editor