Taking into account this city is indeed a precious part of the Arab and Israeli reality, in that the tourists referred to here are frequently Jewish folks, do you think President Mubarak of Egypt is disinterested in stopping the breeding grounds for terrorists that plague the region? Do you actually believe the leaders of Arabia are completely disinterested in peace? I don't. I also believe they are completely competent to pursue it themselves while protecting the USA from further extremists. Is Arabia an ally? Then why isn't it treated as one? To much money on the line? Maybe, huh?
Sharm el-Sheikh (click here) is located on the southern promontory of the Sinai peninsula. Sharm el-Sheikh is an extremely cultivated, exclusive bathing resort which is very popular with tourists.
You know a cease fire that lasts through the holidays. A cease fire that shows 'good faith.' Has it ever been tried? Nah. Even Vietnam had cease fires. They would engage for traditional holidays. Oddly enough they were respected on many an occassion. Man, oh, man it would be nice to have a cease fire that would last the length of Ramadan. Oh, well, if Bush doesn't even respect his own Christian holidays enough to 'try' to seek a cease fire from 'insurgent' groups then there is no chance of ever hoping the USA would actually negotiate a peace with these folks, huh?
Diverging US and Arab Views on the Sharm el-Sheikh Meetings
Raghida Dergham Al-Hayat - 04/05/07/
Sharm el-Sheikh - The poles of the Iraqi deadlock are pushing for a workshop committed to rescue the country, as well as themselves, each carrying a vision of some start and a hard-to-reach destination.
The ongoing ministerial meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, following the official launching of the International Compact with Iraq (ICI) on Thursday, is a clear demonstration of the Iraqi government's outstanding ability to bring together more than 50 States assuming a key role in its future, including Iraq's beleaguered neighboring States, the world's major powers with permanent seats in the UN Security Council, and the G8 group of industrial nations.
The objective pursued by the Iraqi government to introduce an element of dynamism into the US-Iranian and the US-Syrian relations seemed to dominate the general atmosphere of the ICI.
The same applies to the focus on the Saudi-US and Saudi-Iraqi relations in light of the increasing Saudi preoccupation with Iraq and the increasing US preoccupation with that role.
Egypt, for its part, was determined to float the Arab Initiative, reborn out of the Riyadh Summit, in the Sharm el-Sheikh ICI, as evident in its insistence to arrange for a meeting between US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the Arab ministerial group tasked with following up on the implementation the Summit's resolutions, which aim to place the Palestinian issue at the forefront of the Arab-Israeli peacemaking.
The Iraqi delegation, however, was keen on drawing all eyes and efforts to focus on the Iraqi file, since it is going through a critical stage that requires nothing short of the undivided attention and new regional roles for Iraq.
According to one of its senior figures, the Iraqi government is convinced that 'everyone was in need of' the US-Iranian-Syrian meetings, and that 'it was the Iraqi effort that kick started such dynamism', paving the way for a US-Iranian and a US-Syrian dialogue aimed at defusing the regional tension.
Key to this dynamism was the March 10 meeting held in Baghdad during which the breakthrough of the US, Iranian, Syrian, face-to-face delegates meeting under one roof took place.
Ever since this meeting, the different parties within the Iraqi government have been working toward creating the atmosphere needed for the foreign ministerial dialogue, which aims to secure the Iranian and Syrian backing of the Iraqi government, which, for its part, is trying to succeed in its security and political plans.
Among these meetings was yesterday's meeting between US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Syrian counterpart, Walid al-Moallem, as well as another meeting, possibly with Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.
These are not separate bilateral talks within the scope of the US' bilateral relations with both countries, but are rather meetings that will focus on Iraq, as have been the demands of the concerned Iraqi parties. Hard efforts were exerted from these parties to pave the way and set the appropriate atmosphere.
Iraq's Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, views these encounters as 'crucial' since they 'will result in major regional changes, and act as a turning and shifting point for the US policies with respect to the issue of regional security and the need to open dialogue channels with the region's nations', a dialogue previously ruled out.
Zebari categorically rejects notions that his government has embarked on implementing the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton Committee, which called on the US administration to engage both Iran and Syria for the sake of Iraq."
The Iraqi delegation, however, was keen on drawing all eyes and efforts to focus on the Iraqi file, since it is going through a critical stage that requires nothing short of the undivided attention and new regional roles for Iraq.
According to one of its senior figures, the Iraqi government is convinced that 'everyone was in need of' the US-Iranian-Syrian meetings, and that 'it was the Iraqi effort that kick started such dynamism', paving the way for a US-Iranian and a US-Syrian dialogue aimed at defusing the regional tension.
Key to this dynamism was the March 10 meeting held in Baghdad during which the breakthrough of the US, Iranian, Syrian, face-to-face delegates meeting under one roof took place.
Ever since this meeting, the different parties within the Iraqi government have been working toward creating the atmosphere needed for the foreign ministerial dialogue, which aims to secure the Iranian and Syrian backing of the Iraqi government, which, for its part, is trying to succeed in its security and political plans.
Among these meetings was yesterday's meeting between US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Syrian counterpart, Walid al-Moallem, as well as another meeting, possibly with Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.
These are not separate bilateral talks within the scope of the US' bilateral relations with both countries, but are rather meetings that will focus on Iraq, as have been the demands of the concerned Iraqi parties. Hard efforts were exerted from these parties to pave the way and set the appropriate atmosphere.
Iraq's Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari, views these encounters as 'crucial' since they 'will result in major regional changes, and act as a turning and shifting point for the US policies with respect to the issue of regional security and the need to open dialogue channels with the region's nations', a dialogue previously ruled out.
Zebari categorically rejects notions that his government has embarked on implementing the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton Committee, which called on the US administration to engage both Iran and Syria for the sake of Iraq.
He says: "There is a huge difference, because the Baker-Hamilton Committee demanded direct US talks with Iran because both countries are key players. We told them, however, that this was not the case. We told them to let us speak to them as Iraqis, who have issues with Iran and Syria, and then we will invite you to more talks that focus more on the single, central issue security and stability of Iraq."
As a result, Rice did not discuss the international tribunal or Lebanon during her meeting with Moalem, but instead focused exclusively on Iraq.
The same is expected with the Iranians, where the issue of sanctions, the nuclear file, and Iran's regional role are unlikely to be brought on the table.
According to Zebari, the main objective is to focus on Iraq and avoid floating other agendas pressed for by Syria or Iran and dealing with Lebanon, the Golan or the UN Security Council's resolutions with regards to Iran, as 'this will then make Iraq a secondary issue'.
This is exactly the kind of approach that constitutes a point of regional convergence and polarization. This also means that a regional competition over the priorities of the US agenda is currently talking place, whereby some are demanding an end to the exclusive focus on Iraq with the intent of pushing the US government into taking certain qualitative positions with respect to the Palestinian-Israeli issue, whereas the Iraqi government is demanding a categorical focus on Iraq, which is entering a critical stage of its fate in the next few months.
Rice's spokesman, Sean McCormack, settled the debate over today's possible meetings on Iraq by saying that Rice will only discuss the Syrian role in Iraq with Moallem, rather than the Golan or Lebanon. He added that should Moallem bring up the issue of Lebanon, then 'we will tell him the following: Lebanon's sovereignty, independence, and the establishment of the international tribunal' to try those behind politically motivated assassinations in Lebanon, most importantly those of late Lebanese Prime Minster Rafik al-Hariri and his colleagues, are 'definitely not subject to negotiation'."
He says: "There is a huge difference, because the Baker-Hamilton Committee demanded direct US talks with Iran because both countries are key players. We told them, however, that this was not the case. We told them to let us speak to them as Iraqis, who have issues with Iran and Syria, and then we will invite you to more talks that focus more on the single, central issue security and stability of Iraq."
As a result, Rice did not discuss the international tribunal or Lebanon during her meeting with Moalem, but instead focused exclusively on Iraq.
The same is expected with the Iranians, where the issue of sanctions, the nuclear file, and Iran's regional role are unlikely to be brought on the table.
According to Zebari, the main objective is to focus on Iraq and avoid floating other agendas pressed for by Syria or Iran and dealing with Lebanon, the Golan or the UN Security Council's resolutions with regards to Iran, as 'this will then make Iraq a secondary issue'.
This is exactly the kind of approach that constitutes a point of regional convergence and polarization. This also means that a regional competition over the priorities of the US agenda is currently talking place, whereby some are demanding an end to the exclusive focus on Iraq with the intent of pushing the US government into taking certain qualitative positions with respect to the Palestinian-Israeli issue, whereas the Iraqi government is demanding a categorical focus on Iraq, which is entering a critical stage of its fate in the next few months.
Rice's spokesman, Sean McCormack, settled the debate over today's possible meetings on Iraq by saying that Rice will only discuss the Syrian role in Iraq with Moallem, rather than the Golan or Lebanon. He added that should Moallem bring up the issue of Lebanon, then 'we will tell him the following: Lebanon's sovereignty, independence, and the establishment of the international tribunal' to try those behind politically motivated assassinations in Lebanon, most importantly those of late Lebanese Prime Minster Rafik al-Hariri and his colleagues, are 'definitely not subject to negotiation'.
The reason for the Rice and Moalem meeting and for the other possible meeting with the Iranian minister is that all parties are feeling trapped after having reached an extremely critical stage in Iraq that is threatening the fate of this entire nation in terms of its existence.
The Iraqi government wanted the ICI in Sharm el-Sheikh to provide it with unequivocal support, free of accountability and pressure. It is convinced that it is exactly this kind of support that will enable it to take the measures needed to achieve reconciliation and defeat terrorism.
It also believes that taking up a regional role geared toward achieving a convergence in the Iranian-US and US-Syrian relations will earn it a distinct regional status, giving it, too, chief trump cards.
Iraq's foreign minister does not deny this view. He states that the concept and perspective are as follows: for the Iraqi government to succeed in the security, political, and economical plan, there is a need for a favorable and supportive regional environment geared in this direction.
He says that succeeding in rescuing Iraq from being a domain for the settling of Iranian-US or Syrian-US scores hinges on its ability to find common grounds for dialogue or talks between these sides in a way that will eventually reflect positively on the security situation in Iraq.
He says: "Our message to the Americans is that we have the ability and the means to achieve all this. We are capable of helping you too, and not just receiving your assistance."
Other participants sought to confront the Iraqi government with its commitments and to subject it to scrutiny. They sought a realization of the promises of reconciliation, and an acceleration of its steps, as well as constitutional amendments, reassessing debathification, the eradication of the militia, and the oil law. They are not merely seeking promises, but rather mechanisms for their swift execution.
A source who was present during the wording groundwork of the final statement said that it was remarkable how Arab Gulf States resorted to a rhetoric that goes beyond the expression of support for the Iraqi government or the recognition of its achievements to what was tantamount to applying pressure on it; while, Iran, for its part, stood against such attempts with a notable impetus of an unequivocal show of support to the Iraqi government."
The reason for the Rice and Moalem meeting and for the other possible meeting with the Iranian minister is that all parties are feeling trapped after having reached an extremely critical stage in Iraq that is threatening the fate of this entire nation in terms of its existence.
The Iraqi government wanted the ICI in Sharm el-Sheikh to provide it with unequivocal support, free of accountability and pressure. It is convinced that it is exactly this kind of support that will enable it to take the measures needed to achieve reconciliation and defeat terrorism.
It also believes that taking up a regional role geared toward achieving a convergence in the Iranian-US and US-Syrian relations will earn it a distinct regional status, giving it, too, chief trump cards.
Iraq's foreign minister does not deny this view. He states that the concept and perspective are as follows: for the Iraqi government to succeed in the security, political, and economical plan, there is a need for a favorable and supportive regional environment geared in this direction.
He says that succeeding in rescuing Iraq from being a domain for the settling of Iranian-US or Syrian-US scores hinges on its ability to find common grounds for dialogue or talks between these sides in a way that will eventually reflect positively on the security situation in Iraq.
He says: "Our message to the Americans is that we have the ability and the means to achieve all this. We are capable of helping you too, and not just receiving your assistance."
Other participants sought to confront the Iraqi government with its commitments and to subject it to scrutiny. They sought a realization of the promises of reconciliation, and an acceleration of its steps, as well as constitutional amendments, reassessing debathification, the eradication of the militia, and the oil law. They are not merely seeking promises, but rather mechanisms for their swift execution.
A source who was present during the wording groundwork of the final statement said that it was remarkable how Arab Gulf States resorted to a rhetoric that goes beyond the expression of support for the Iraqi government or the recognition of its achievements to what was tantamount to applying pressure on it; while, Iran, for its part, stood against such attempts with a notable impetus of an unequivocal show of support to the Iraqi government.
All that has been said about the Iranian and Syrian demands for a fixed timetable for the withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq has quickly vanished behind a complete consensus, which gave rise to convictions that such demands were either cosmetic in nature or not genuine from the start. Because neither Syria nor Iran really wanted a timetabled withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq, and they don't want this withdrawal.
Another source, familiar with the developments behind the scenes, said the negotiations over the wording of the final statements revealed that the Iraqis are aiming for a 'simple process' without yielding to pressure and without complying with the process needed to create a change on the ground.
Accordingly, the Iraqi government has not been realistic when it comes to expectations with respect to its key neighbors, apart from the two on which it is focusing to pave the ground for their dialogue with the US.
The foreign minister of a GCC State in Iraq's vicinity said "Sixty ministers arrived at Sharm el-Sheikh to provide the cover for a meeting between two", namely: the US and Iranian foreign ministers.
This does not mean, however, that the Saudi-Iraqi relations are of less importance in comparison with their Iranian-Iraqi counterpart, quite the contrary, since the importance of these relations emerged in a exceptional manner during the Sharm el-Sheikh ICI, despite the extensive focus given to the meeting between the US, Iranian and Syrian ministers, or, rather, the absence of a meeting.
On the significance of the presence of Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal in the Sharm el-Sheikh conference, Iraq's foreign minister said it was of equal importance to the Saudi decision to acquit 80% of nearly $18 billion of the debts incurred by Iraq to Saudi Arabia.
It is a very, very welcomed and an admirably timely gesture, just as their participation in the ICI was an enormously significant gesture for which we thank them," he said."
All that has been said about the Iranian and Syrian demands for a fixed timetable for the withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq has quickly vanished behind a complete consensus, which gave rise to convictions that such demands were either cosmetic in nature or not genuine from the start. Because neither Syria nor Iran really wanted a timetabled withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq, and they don't want this withdrawal.
Another source, familiar with the developments behind the scenes, said the negotiations over the wording of the final statements revealed that the Iraqis are aiming for a 'simple process' without yielding to pressure and without complying with the process needed to create a change on the ground.
Accordingly, the Iraqi government has not been realistic when it comes to expectations with respect to its key neighbors, apart from the two on which it is focusing to pave the ground for their dialogue with the US.
The foreign minister of a GCC State in Iraq's vicinity said "Sixty ministers arrived at Sharm el-Sheikh to provide the cover for a meeting between two", namely: the US and Iranian foreign ministers.
This does not mean, however, that the Saudi-Iraqi relations are of less importance in comparison with their Iranian-Iraqi counterpart, quite the contrary, since the importance of these relations emerged in a exceptional manner during the Sharm el-Sheikh ICI, despite the extensive focus given to the meeting between the US, Iranian and Syrian ministers, or, rather, the absence of a meeting.
On the significance of the presence of Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal in the Sharm el-Sheikh conference, Iraq's foreign minister said it was of equal importance to the Saudi decision to acquit 80% of nearly $18 billion of the debts incurred by Iraq to Saudi Arabia.
"It is a very, very welcomed and an admirably timely gesture, just as their participation in the ICI was an enormously significant gesture for which we thank them," he said.
For his part, US Vice President Dick Cheney will visit Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan next week to review the Arab position, with particular emphasis on Saudi, with respect to the situation in Iraq.
Cheney may be contemplating expressing uneasiness during his visit to the region, not only on the account of Iraq, but also on the account of the embarrassment the Arab Peace Initiative is causing to Israel and George Bush's administration, which does not want to fall under Arab or international pressure to pressure Israel.
Well-informed sources close to the arrangements underway for Condoleezza Rice's meeting with the ministerial committee in charge of following up on the Arab Initiative said that Rice tried to avoid and evade this meeting under the pretext of her need to focus on the Iraqi issue in Sharm el-Sheikh, which is a discouraging indication of the US administration's position toward the Arab Initiative.
The insistence of Egypt, the conference's host country, however, shook the excuses made by the Rice delegation, who eventually agreed to the meeting on Friday.
There is no need to cram the Iraqi and the Palestinian files, nor is there a need to insist on calling on the US administration to hold one of these files at a higher priority.
The Iraqi government is perfectly entitled to place Iraq at the forefront of the international, regional and American attention.
There should also be no question over acknowledging the Iraqi government's achievement in mobilizing nearly 60 States to attend the Sharm el-Sheikh ICI - with the backing of the host country - for a day dedicated to the vision of Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salah of an 'International Compact' to aid Iraq toward reaching calmness and recovery and in a meeting attended by the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon and Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
It is equally important, however, for the Iraqi government to address and pay attention to the Arab countries' other sources of concern, and not to fall in the trap of overindulging in playing the role of the 'godfather' or the US-Iranian or the US-Syrian dialogue. For Arab countries, particularly those in Iraq's immediate vicinity, are not appendages, but are rather pivotal to the formulation of a better future that stems from a genuine reconciliation in Iraq."
For his part, US Vice President Dick Cheney will visit Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan next week to review the Arab position, with particular emphasis on Saudi, with respect to the situation in Iraq.
Cheney may be contemplating expressing uneasiness during his visit to the region, not only on the account of Iraq, but also on the account of the embarrassment the Arab Peace Initiative is causing to Israel and George Bush's administration, which does not want to fall under Arab or international pressure to pressure Israel.
Well-informed sources close to the arrangements underway for Condoleezza Rice's meeting with the ministerial committee in charge of following up on the Arab Initiative said that Rice tried to avoid and evade this meeting under the pretext of her need to focus on the Iraqi issue in Sharm el-Sheikh, which is a discouraging indication of the US administration's position toward the Arab Initiative.
The insistence of Egypt, the conference's host country, however, shook the excuses made by the Rice delegation, who eventually agreed to the meeting on Friday.
There is no need to cram the Iraqi and the Palestinian files, nor is there a need to insist on calling on the US administration to hold one of these files at a higher priority.
The Iraqi government is perfectly entitled to place Iraq at the forefront of the international, regional and American attention.
There should also be no question over acknowledging the Iraqi government's achievement in mobilizing nearly 60 States to attend the Sharm el-Sheikh ICI - with the backing of the host country - for a day dedicated to the vision of Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salah of an 'International Compact' to aid Iraq toward reaching calmness and recovery and in a meeting attended by the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon and Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
It is equally important, however, for the Iraqi government to address and pay attention to the Arab countries' other sources of concern, and not to fall in the trap of overindulging in playing the role of the 'godfather' or the US-Iranian or the US-Syrian dialogue. For Arab countries, particularly those in Iraq's immediate vicinity, are not appendages, but are rather pivotal to the formulation of a better future that stems from a genuine reconciliation in Iraq.
http://www.raghidadergham.com/
