Despite all criticism, in part driven by envy, Dubai is a symbol of Arab renaissance and deserves to be rallied, writes Emad Fawzi Shoeibi* City-state Dubai is being punished today. It is being punished for straying from the well-trodden path and for thinking the unthinkable. Fired by its own ambition, Dubai rose high, turned the desert into a lively oasis, and never looked back. Across the world, economies prosper on resources such as water. City-state Dubai thought outside the box and survived on a dream. Its wealth came mostly from ideas, solutions, a removal of red tape, and a defiance of fear. Dubai has stepped out of the Arab mindset. It tried to speak the language of the capitalist world, without having staged a bourgeois revolution, without engaging in sectarian or religion wars, and without following the usual pattern. Dubai sprang onto the scene without ideology or theories. It imparted a cosmopolitan identity on a region known for its conservative ideologies. And it wasn't afraid to try new things. In a way, Dubai invoked the cultural diversity of coastal Greek towns. Success came at a price. The cosmopolitan nature of Dubai was questioned by those who disapproved of openness and diverse identities. The world may have talked a lot about globalisation and how it would change our lives, and yet small cities have a hard time of it without the support of a major country. Paris is a cosmopolitan city par excellence, and it is at home with its cosmopolitanism. Dubai had to try harder, and take greater risks. In the end, a major global tremor took no time in shaking it to the roots. One has to respect the Dubai mindset. One has to respect Dubai for surging ahead with no thought for the conventional constraints of development everyone talked about. While the rest of the Arab world dithered, Dubai acted. Economic development is not a decision for economists to make, but is rather a political affair. Development is governed by domestic decisions. The world economic condition is also a factor to take into account. Development is a question of possibilities, of what is permissible and what is impermissible. Taboos can be skirted, and Dubai skirted a bunch. There is a difference between development and mere construction. But in the case of Dubai this difference mattered little. Before long, a legend was created, and the good times lasted for nearly three generations. There is nothing wrong with development being led with the construction sector. And Dubai did just that, challenging all the taboos. For that it deserves respect. Had Dubai waited for others to sanction its growth, it would still be waiting. The theorists wouldn't accept anything less than a huge production-based economy. Dubai's ideas were unconventional to say the least. Henry Kissinger once wrote an article about the dangers of the United Arab Emirates making $900 billion a year, according to his estimate, because of rising oil prices. He published this article right after the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Now the loss of $200 billion seems quite tame. It is permissible to construct, but impermissible to launch into a full-fledged development scheme. This is the accepted wisdom. This is the equation of permissibility and impermissibility. And many countries, learning from Gamal Abdel-Nasser's fate, now stick to this equation. Some go slow on development because it is the safest way. They may have a point, for countries trying their luck at full-scale development are often ostracised. The Arabs live in a restricted horizon, their fate restricted by others: the West or the globalised world as a whole. Dubai rebelled against that fate. It acquired its own glass façades, as well as the highest tower in the world. Simon Hendersen, a Baker fellow and director of the Gulf and Energy Programme at The Washington Institute, jokes about what happens to the tallest building when all the tenants leave. Does it become the emptiest building? Arabs with dreams of full-scale development mustn't ridicule Dubai. To mock Dubai is to approve of the restrictions placed upon us. Dubai belongs to all the Arabs. It is a model that deserves support, not indifference. Dubai should once again rise, like a phoenix from the ashes, helped by its Arab brethren. The risk was worth it, although the ideologues may disagree and the police mentality may be offended. Dubai was part of our progress. We cannot gloat at it now, or even forget about it. Dubai is not dead yet. We, the Arabs, have a chance to learn from it. A nation that cannot learn is doomed. We cannot think small utilitarian thoughts when we think Dubai. This city-state is part of the Arab renaissance. It has gone far and it deserves some applause. Dubai was not a mirage, but a project for prosperity. At one point, it employed nearly one-fourth of the cranes in the world. If the West wants to make fun of Dubai, let them. Let them say that building glass and steel buildings was unrealistic. Let them joke about Little Manhattan on the Gulf. But tourists have spent a lot of money in Dubai's fancy hotels, and may do again. Dubai may be able to cover its foreign debt, now estimated at $80 billion, as well as the Dubai World debts of $26 billion. It will be hard, but not impossible. In Washington, analysts have voiced fears about the ability of Dubai to maintain a policy that is relatively independent from the region. This, Hendersen says, is impermissible. For example, Dubai has forged relations with France and gave the latter a base too. Some consider this as an impermissible attempt to achieve international balance. Despite the disputed islands, the UAE is trying to maintain even-handed relations with Tehran. Iran and the UAE have substantial economic ties and many Iranians own real estate in the UAE. Most of Iran's gasoline imports come from supply stations in Dubai and Fujairah. Of course, the US may put pressure on the UAE to stop shipping gasoline to Iran. And the Americans may rethink of their navy's regular use of Jabal Ali's facilities in the UAE. Dubai was our chance to get better at functional thinking and historical understanding. We cannot disown it now. * The writer is director of the Centre of Strategic Information and Studies in Damascus.
