The League of Arab States falters. Will new entities be born from her womb?

The idea of ​​founding the Arab League was born; According to some accounts, after a speech by British Foreign Minister Anthony Eden in 1941 on the necessity of the existence of this Council at the end of the Franco-British colonial era.
There were reasons for this appeal focused on preserving the interests of Britain and France, and a year after that conversation, Mustafa Al-Nahhas invited the Egyptian prime minister of the time to discuss the idea of ​​creating an entity that would bring together the Arabs, and after a series of meetings and consultations, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen agreed to establish the League of States. Arabia in 1945, which then expanded to 22 Arab countries, the last of which was the Comoros, which joined the League in 1993.

And after the recent position of the Arab League which implicitly supports the recent normalization agreements between some Arab countries and the Zionist entity; And the violation of the Arab Peace Initiative based on the land principle for peace; Some member states expressed their rejection of the League position in an important way by apologizing for the rotating presidency of the League, starting with: mourning for Palestine, then Qatar, Comoros, Kuwait and Lebanon, and last but not least Libya, and the rift in the Arab position has become the rule and consensus is absent.

In 2002, the Arab summit held in Beirut adopted the peace initiative launched by the late Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz (crown prince at the time), which provides for the withdrawal of the Zionist entity from the occupied Arab lands on the borders on June 4 1967 and the return of the refugees, together with the withdrawal. From the Golan Heights in exchange for the full Arab normalization with the Zionist entity, the recognition of its existence and the exchange of relations with it, the Arab countries accepted this proposal which became a project under the name of “Arab Peace Initiative”.

Despite the advanced and unprecedented steps of the initiative in the Arab world, the Zionist entity did not take a step forward, officially rejected the initiative, and the initiative remained in the drawers.
However, the official Arab position has since remained the same in the adoption of this initiative, until the normalization agreements arrived recently, which went outside the scope of the Arab consensus, and consequently the Minister of Affairs Palestinian foreigners apologized for continuing to lead the League League and five countries in the same decision.

The positions of some Arab countries towards the “countries of the Arab Spring” have caused a deep rift in Arab positions due to the conflict of interest. The Palestinian issue, which is the central issue, became a point of contention after it was a wholly consensual issue.

The main idea on which the League of Arab States was based and which formed its internal charter is to seek to strengthen the ties between the Arab countries, maintain their independence and preserve the security and safety of the Arab region in various fields.

This has completely come to an end with the succession of internal Arab crises since the beginning of the “Arab Spring” in late 2010, and Arab countries have become an arena of Arab-Arab and Arab-regional conflicts.

The positions of some Arab countries towards the “Arab Spring countries” have caused a deep rift in Arab positions due to the conflict of interest. The Palestinian issue, which is the central issue, became a point of contention after it was a wholly consensual issue.
What has made matters worse is the presence of external interference in the sovereign positions of some Arab countries, and the normalization agreements have come as the straw that broke the camel’s back, and this could be the real entrance to the end of the existence of the Arab League in an effective short period.

The Arab League’s stance on normalization agreements was the continuation of a series of profound differences, notably in the Syria, Yemen and Libya files. The regional relations that bind Arab countries with their neighbors Turkey and Iran, and this profound series of disagreements have also led to the weakness and even the absence of any influential role for the League at the regional and international levels.
The model of consent required in the decisions issued by the university is considered; It is the most obvious obstacle to the approval of any political position towards any crisis, since the decision requires the approval of all, and not with the democratic system in the approval of the decision by the majority system. This has become very difficult in the world of politics for several factors, including the entry of some countries into incompatible regional conflicts between Arab countries and also the Polarization system between states.

And that follows the course of events at the Arab, regional and international levels, with the difficulty of changing the internal system of the university and the decision-making mechanism to address political issues in a democratic system.

The three no’s declaration at the Khartoum summit in 1967, which is “no reconciliation, no negotiations and no recognition of Israel”.

Because this will inevitably lead to a real demise of the League and the existence of a new entity led by Zionism, which is what Abdullah Al-Ashaal, the Egyptian politician, has been talking about recently, as the impact of penetration and influence of the Zionist entity has become evident, especially with the presence of specific US international support for the Zionist entity and the normalization stages, and this will become clear after the elections. The next American.

And between the three no’s declaration at the 1967 Khartoum summit, which is “no reconciliation, negotiation and recognition of Israel”, and what happened recently in Cairo 2020 regarding the passage of the normalization agreements, it seems that the mutual interests between some countries, both Arab-Arab and Arab-regional, will be the basis for the formation of bodies or new councils, and there may not be joint Arab action outside the framework of some economic, cultural and social issues, as well as coordination security.