He stated that external development implies that the peoples of the region are unable to develop themselves and secure their interests.
Khaddam advocated for modernity through the liberation of the mind and the modernization of the state, laws, work systems, and all aspects of life, emphasizing that modernity is not inherently contradictory to values and heritage. He stressed the need for states to prioritize economic development programs aimed at achieving Arab economic unity, while also calling for a review of educational and training programs and existing policies based on the principle that Arabs are one nation, with the interests of these Arab states intertwined with the interests of the nation. He emphasized the belief that cooperation and integration provide the nation with dignity, a future, and freedom from imposed external political and economic hegemony.
The Syrian Vice President also pointed out that the suffering of Iraq and its future consequences are among the most serious challenges Arabs will face in the coming years, more so than any past challenges.
He believes that globalization will lead to cultural changes, the replacement of heritage, and the weakening of strengths, stating that globalization is beneficial when our structures are strong enough to both give and receive.
In discussing the aftermath of the September 11 events, the Syrian Vice President remarked that the world is currently in an unidentified, timeless, and placeless war. However, this war, with its consequences, is directed towards the Arab and Islamic worlds.
These remarks were made during a lecture delivered by Abdul Halim Khaddam on the current Arab political situation yesterday morning at the Ibn Khaldun Hall at Qatar University. The event was attended by His Excellency Mr. Mohamed bin Issa Al-Muhannadi, Minister of State for Cabinet Affairs and Head of the Honorary Delegation accompanying Mr. Khaddam, Dr. Noura Khalifa Turki Al-Sibai, Vice President of the University for Academic Affairs, His Excellency Mr. Haajem Ibrahim, Syrian Ambassador to Qatar, university vice presidents, deans, assistants, department heads, faculty members, and a large number of journalists, media representatives, and university students.
Here are the details of the lecture:
To begin, Professor Dr. Noura Khalifa Turki Al-Sibai welcomed Mr. Abdul Halim Khaddam to Qatar University, saying: “It is an honor for us at the university to receive this blessed visit from Your Excellency and your esteemed entourage. We appreciate and cherish this visit, as it symbolizes your continuous support for knowledge and its people, and is a blessed step towards strengthening the fraternal ties between the two brotherly countries, especially at this time, when cooperation, solidarity, and unity among all Arab countries are crucial.”
She added: “It is with great pleasure and pride that we welcome your acceptance of our invitation and your presence at the university, sharing with its community this lecture on a topic of great importance—the current Arab political situation, in all that this term implies.” Dr. Hassan Al-Ansari then provided an overview of Mr. Khaddam’s background.
Following this, Mr. Khaddam gave his lecture, beginning by thanking Professor Dr. Sheikha Al-Misnad for inviting him to meet with a distinguished group of Qatar University professors and students.
He said: “Discussing the Arab situation and the suffering of the Arab nation will not focus on events, as they are accessible to everyone, but rather on their causes, consequences, and what the situation might lead to if the current state persists.”
He added: “There are many questions posed by the Arab citizen, asking why all nations have managed to regain their unity while the Arab nation remains divided to this day, torn from within and without. Why is there a blurring of boundaries between freedom and occupation, between truth and falsehood, between justice and injustice? There are many questions, but they can be summarized by one: Where are the Arabs heading?”
He answered: “The suffering of the Arab nation has many causes—both internal and external. The weakness within has paved the way for external forces to exacerbate the causes and increase the suffering of this nation.”
Early National Awareness
He began by discussing the internal causes at the start of the 20th century, when early national awareness emerged. During this period, the Ottoman Empire saw the rise of the Arab Union and Progress Party, which called for the Turkification of non-Turkish peoples within the Ottoman caliphate. A few years prior, the Zionist movement had emerged with a conference held in Switzerland in 1897, marking the beginning of the Zionist project and igniting feelings of national awareness among Arabs. These feelings and aspirations arose, but there was no Arab project in place. Arab associations, parties, and numerous organizations advocating for Arab unity were established, but they resembled cultural clubs more than political parties. There were ambitions and ideas, but no concrete plans or methodologies for action. It wasn’t until Egypt’s Prime Minister, the late Mustafa El-Nahhas, invited the seven Arab states at the time to a conference to discuss the issue of Arab unity. The discussions led to the Arab League Charter, and the Arab countries, which had theoretical independence, were seven in number, with most still under British and French control.
Arab Charter
The independence was almost theoretical, with foreign influence still present. When the Arab League was established, it was not intended to launch an Arab project aimed at achieving Arab unity but rather constituted among states with mutual distrust and fear. At that time, Lebanon feared Syria, Syria feared Iraq, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia were concerned about the Hashemite family, and Egypt was apprehensive about Iraq. Thus, those who gathered and signed the Arab League Charter did not sign it with the aim of achieving Arab unity at any stage.
Article 2 of the Charter stipulated cooperation in the interests of the states while preserving sovereignty, which naturally became the basis of the current Arab system. He noted that with the establishment of the State of Israel, a new phase in Arab and regional history began, forcing Arab governments to sign the Arab Joint Defense Treaty. This treaty, with its provisions and commitments, was highly advanced and difficult to improve upon. Subsequently, in 1957, the Economic Agreement was signed, which was also well-crafted.
Arab Ambition
But what happened? Arab ambition was based on achieving a single Arab state. When we talk about Arab unity, it does not mean total integration but rather integration and parity, reaching a state where Arabs are in a unified circle.
The ambition was to achieve one state, and now there are 22 Arab countries.
He questioned what this has led to.
Firstly: Sharp divisions between Arab countries, deep-rooted national interests, and emerging contradictions in these interests have created an environment for disputes, reaching the point of using weapons in Arab relations, as we know in various parts of the Arab world.
Narrow interests have become stronger than shared national interests. He observed: This situation has resulted in a unique case of non-compliance. If we look at Arab agreements and read them, we find everything that the Arab citizen aspires to. If we examine Arab decisions at all levels, we find the best aspirations of the Arab citizen. However, the duality in Arab political thinking has been fundamental: ease of decision-making, ease of signing, and ease of non-compliance and evading obligations.
What has this led to? It has led to increased fragmentation within the Arab world, where narrow interests have grown to the extent that the contradictions between some Arab countries are wider than those between these countries and their external enemies.
Disintegration
Disintegration and non-compliance have placed the enemy in the role of a friend and sometimes placed a brother in the role of an enemy. We all know what was happening and is still happening in the Arab arena.
Meaning that the sense of brotherhood and national responsibility has declined to below zero. We see what is happening in Palestine and Iraq, but it feels as though it is happening on the surface of Mars. Why? Because fragmentation and disintegration have weakened the sense of responsibility towards the brother and towards the homeland itself.
Is it conceivable that European countries met in a small group in Rome in 1958, signed the Treaty of Rome, and reached the stage of the European Union, while Arabs signed the Economic Unity Agreement in 1957, yet barriers and contradictions, even in the economic realm, are a prominent feature of Arab economic relations?
Is it conceivable that we seek partnerships with external entities while failing to establish Arab partnerships? This is also a prominent phenomenon and a result of the existing fragmentation.
This reason has led to contradictions, conflicts, and the entrenchment of national interests, which are often not the interests of the people but of specific segments within that society, whether these interests are economic or political.
Foreign Domination
Mr. Khaddam added: And now, if we question whether Arab states have been able to provide security for themselves or ensure growth and stability for their citizens, we see that some Arab countries are rich in resources, others are rich in population, and some are in between. But has any Arab state been able to provide security for itself? What have the Arab divisions led to? They have led to the spread of foreign domination in the Arab world and the confiscation of Arab decision-making. The national state always makes decisions under the guise of national sovereignty. Has national sovereignty been secured under decisions made in the name of sovereignty? Is there real sovereignty in most Arab countries?
The main reason is that the Arab political system and its leaders did not realize that the part cannot achieve what the whole can. The part is incapacitated and ineffective, and it is the whole that produces. The Arab political system did not understand that the strength of the nation lies in its solidarity, integration, and unity, and that weakness leads to incapacity and further weakness. The departure from the direction launched by Arab nationalists at various stages, which aimed to achieve Arab unity, has led to the erosion, regression, and weakness we see today. Narrow nationalism has not provided security for anyone nor achieved advancement for any state, despite the financial and human resources of these states.
Fear
In addition to fragmentation, which is a primary cause of weakness, when the nation is torn apart, it becomes dispersed and unable to defend its existence, itself, its history, and its future. Another reason for the current state of the nation is the inherited fear among Arab citizens—fear inherited for many centuries: fear of the unknown, fear of the ruler, fear of others. Naturally, fear paralyzes the mind and impairs the ability to see clearly and make the right choices.
This fear has been accompanied by stagnation. The Arab world in particular and the Muslim world in general have been stagnant for many centuries. We have been left, by virtue of reality, to deal with and operate according to the conditions of those bygone eras when the Arab and Muslim worlds were in stagnation.
This stagnation has led to mental and intellectual rigidity, with imitation and tradition taking the place of creativity and innovation. Thus, we continue to live in a past that differs in nature and circumstances from what we are today.
Defeatism
As a result, a defeatist mentality has developed in the Arab mind, attributing everything that befalls us to fate and destiny. Everything is written, and therefore we must resign ourselves to what is decreed for us. However, Allah says in the Holy Quran that He does not change the condition of a people until they change what is within themselves. Thus, Allah tells His servants that they are responsible for changing their circumstances. Allah does not decree defeatism and resignation for people in a harsh reality. Allah has established the principle of reward and punishment, except for those who are young or mentally incapacitated. Therefore, a person is accountable for their actions. When they are lazy or negligent, they are held accountable, and when they do good, they are rewarded accordingly. This defeatist mentality has also created a psychological state, spreading many proverbs like “the eye cannot resist the awl” and “walk the walls and say, ‘Oh Lord, cover us.'” These phrases call for mental paralysis and the crippling of will. Nations that disable their minds and paralyze their will remain at the bottom of the scale of nations, which is a significant problem in the Arab and Islamic worlds.
The stagnation has imposed restrictions on the mind. Thus, in various stages, when a person presents their vision as a result of mental effort, there is often a backlash against this vision and the individual. When Arabs free themselves from their stagnation and use their minds, it is important to remember that Allah created the human mind to be used, not to be paralyzed.
Weak Economic Development
Mr. Khaddam added: The third reason for the state of the Arab nation is the weak economic development, widespread poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, and corruption. This factor plays a major role in the suffering of the nation. Another reason is the educational curricula in the Arab world. Although there has been significant progress in these curricula, they do not scientifically and objectively educate students to have the ability to think freely, conduct research, explore, question, and draw conclusions. This is essential for the process of modernizing and developing the nation. Additionally, there is the nature of the political systems in Arab countries. The Arab political system has not been based on involving the people in shaping their future and destiny.
This often leads to authoritarianism, which affects individuals and groups. Alongside these internal causes, there are external factors.
The first of these external factors is colonialism, which entered the Arab world in the early 19th century and expanded after World War I. Colonialism divided the homeland, imposed ignorance, and plundered the country’s resources. After World War II, national liberation movements emerged in most Arab countries, and during the 1960s, the independence of all parts of the homeland was achieved. But did true independence really occur? Independence could have been realized if it had been understood as progress, advancement, solidarity, and rebuilding the nation. However, the focus on reinforcing and deepening national borders created weakness within the nation and in every Arab country.
Arab Conflicts
This has made it easier for foreign powers to dominate and achieve their ambitions. Undoubtedly, Arab conflicts have played a significant role in this. The Arab world occupies a crucial strategic position. Before the end of the Cold War, it was strategically located between three continents, overlooking two oceans and three seas, and was intersected by major international transportation routes. This made the Arab world central to Western interests and Eastern ambitions. Consequently, Western interests, combined with Arab weakness, exacerbated the region’s vulnerability, misery, and suffering.
Mr. Khaddam emphasized that during the Cold War, Arabs had opportunities to act, but they did not utilize them. Some cooperated with the West for various reasons, such as viewing communism as a threat to religion or their regimes. Others collaborated with the Soviet Union due to the Israeli-Arab conflict and the need for Soviet support and military and economic aid. The question arises: if the Arabs had united and discussed their interests, could they not have negotiated with one side or the other and achieved some of their goals, especially regarding the Israeli-Arab conflict? Instead of leveraging their interests to pressure the West not to aid Israel, these interests exerted pressure on the Arab states to avoid taking serious stances in the conflict.
With the end of the Cold War came a new factor in weakening the Arabs: the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of a unipolar world, with one superpower assuming global leadership. This led to what is known as globalization. While globalization offers benefits for a strong infrastructure, it is dangerous for a weak and fragile one. Globalization removes borders for the flow of ideas, goods, and money, turning the world into a single village. It relies on competition, where those with intellectual, scientific, or economic power manage or lead this village. In such a scenario, globalization will lead to cultural changes, heritage replacement, and weakening of powers. Globalization is beneficial when our infrastructure is strong enough to both take and give. However, under current conditions, we are required to give without receiving.
The question each of us must ask is: Given these reasons and the worsening situation, what is to be done? Where are we heading?
One fact we all need to understand is that every pivotal event in history imposes its own context and new equations in international relations, and in the interests of states and peoples. World War II led to the Cold War, which resulted in a global ideological and political division into left and right. This affected concepts, values, and the movement of peoples, their interactions, and their development. The Cold War led to a conflict between East and West, which in turn spurred tremendous scientific progress achieved in half a century, equivalent to what humanity had accomplished over many centuries in the past.
The Cold War’s end has ongoing repercussions. One of the most significant is that major powers always need an enemy to occupy their attention and distract them from their internal, economic, and political situations. The events of September launched a new American global policy based on using force to defend U.S. security and interests worldwide. This led to the theory of preemptive wars, which was solidified by a Security Council resolution on combating terrorism.
Unknown War
So now the world is in a war of unknown identity, unknown time, and place. However, this war, with its consequences, has targeted the Arab and Islamic worlds. As a result, Sharon’s government used this war to take measures and actions against the Palestinian people, while the world remained silent. In this new international context, the war against Iraq occurred, and Iraq is suffering immensely. The suffering of Iraq and its future implications are the most dangerous challenges the Arabs will face in the coming years, more dangerous than anything they have encountered in the past.
Thus, the targeting is ongoing due to the significant interests in the region and the potential international developments in the coming two decades. The international situation will not remain as it is now.
Urgent Need for Development
The Syrian Vice President questioned what the Arabs should do. The world is changing, and the end of the Cold War has led to a new world with its own values and concepts. There was once a clear division between right and left, but now the logic has changed completely. While there was a right-left distinction, the nature of international developments introduces new concepts. If Arabs do not change their concepts and directions, things will not be favorable for any of them, whether for individual states or the collective. If this oppression, injustice, and sense of humiliation and poverty continue, will this create an environment for necessary change?
Development is an urgent need not only for each Arab state but for every Arab citizen. We must understand that without an Arab review, a negative environment will grow and extremism will emerge. The current Arab situation, with its feelings of persecution and humiliation, creates psychological states that either lead to confrontation or frustration. Frustration results in either withdrawal or deviation from the norm, such as violence. The current situation in the Arab world is extreme and abnormal. There is no other nation in the world experiencing the level of suffering that Arabs do. Is this normal, or is it a deviation from the norms of life? This extremism will lead to the emergence of further extremism. Thus, restoring balance requires a review of all aspects of life in the Arab world, including their national direction, the implementation of their commitments from agreements and decisions.
If the Arab Economic Unity Agreement had been implemented in 1957, we would have today an integrated Arab economy. Even countries that were or still are hesitant about implementing their Arab economic agreements would have benefited much more from their current situation. Some countries at that time obstructed implementation due to fear, external pressures, or fear of competition from other Arab states.
These countries had industries and faced marketing problems, so it would have been better for them to be part of a larger market rather than remaining isolated. How can one envision the future?
One cannot discuss the development of the Arab system without addressing the development of the national state in the Arab world. The national state needs to be reviewed. Since their independence, Arabs have not built states according to the objective standards of a modern state. Therefore, the political system should create a situation where some states trust each other and cooperate effectively.
Modern State
Mr. Abdel Halim Khaddam called for the establishment of a modern state with constitutional institutions and public participation in managing the country’s affairs. When a foreign delegation visits an Arab country, or when an Arab delegation visits a foreign country and asks for pressure on Israel, the typical response is that there is democracy in Israel and that they are committed to public opinion. When an Arab official speaks, he does so as if he is the sole decision-maker, and it becomes even stronger when he says he cannot act contrary to public opinion and its directions. The more genuine the role of the people, the stronger the state. Conversely, the weaker the role of the people, the weaker and more vulnerable the state becomes.
Modernity
Mr. Khaddam stated that the second point is that the state should embrace modernity. Modernity is not just about using scientific products, although this is important, but also about freeing the mind to delve into the depths of science, develop it, and create new products. Modernity means transitioning from mere replication to innovation, which can only be achieved by liberating the mind and building individuals based on the idea that they are not bound by pre-imposed constraints.
While some individuals may make mistakes, individual errors can be corrected. However, when constraints are generalized, the results are more dangerous. Modernity involves, as mentioned, liberating the mind, updating the state, updating laws, work systems, and all aspects of life. Modernity does not mean being contrary to heritage and values; rather, it should reinforce these values without negating or obstructing them. The state should develop economic programs within the framework of achieving Arab economic unity, meaning that the national state should consider itself part of a larger nation, and all its programs and policies should aim towards achieving the unity, mutual support, and solidarity of this nation. There should be a review of educational programs to achieve modernity in education and its methods, ensuring that education is linked to the needs and growth of society.
Regarding the Arab national sphere, there must be a review of the existing policy starting from the premise that Arabs are one nation and that the interests of these Arab states are tied to the interests of the entire nation.
We must believe that cooperation and integration provide security, dignity, and a future free from external political, cultural, and economic domination.
New Arab Pact
Mr. Khaddam called for the establishment of a new Arab pact. The primary requirement of this pact is for the national state to accept that it must cede part of its sovereignty for the benefit of the whole. This pact should involve a gradual cession of parts of national sovereignty in favor of collective action. National sovereignty would be guaranteed by the national guarantees, connectivity, and support achieved through joint Arab work.
Secondly, the new Arab pact should have a new structure. Currently, the structure includes summit conferences, ministerial conferences, and an administrative body for the General Secretariat of the Arab League. The executive authorities are embedded in the current Arab political system structure. There needs to be a mechanism for oversight and accountability, meaning that popular institutions with the right to monitor and follow up should be established. These institutions must be legislated to meet the requirements of the new Arab system.
Developing the Middle East
I believe these foundations have become a necessary requirement. There has been talk initiated by the United States and then by the G8 countries about developing the Greater Middle East. We must understand the difference between external development and self-development. This should remind us of the Peace Conference held in Versailles in 1919, which introduced the theories of mandate and guardianship.
External development implies that the people of this region are incapable of developing themselves and securing their interests. It means that development is imposed from the outside, tailored to fit the interests and lifestyles of others, which conflicts with our social, political, ideological, and intellectual structures.
I do not think any reasonable person in this nation can conclude that maintaining the current situation is beneficial for all.
When the Intifada began in Palestine, the Arab masses took to the streets. But let us see what is happening now. The news of killings and bloodshed has become routine, as if the Arab body has lost the minimum sense of the pain of wounds. This is also true for what is happening in Iraq and what could happen anywhere in this homeland. There is no choice for any Arab, whether in government positions or among the general population, but to recognize the urgent need to restore Arab unity and to reframe joint Arab action with clear objectives. This must be accompanied by self-development in every Arab country. Should we be optimistic? Yes, we should be optimistic because I believe that those who do not see the potential of the future are blind both physically and metaphorically. Let us consider that when there was a state of Arab solidarity in the early 1970s, was the condition of the nation as dire as it is now? Certainly not. There is great hope in God that everyone will realize the need to rid themselves of the illusion that they can find a place in a time where only strength in all its forms matters. Strength is available to us only through our unity, cooperation, and efforts to uplift this nation.
At the end of the lecture, the Deputy Syrian President responded to questions and inquiries from the audience.
