Three Summits and the Consensus of Opinion

Dr. Bouthaina Shaaban (ISSUES)

12 April 2009

Within one week, the world witnessed three important summits, which provoked a lot of speculation, expectations and a variety of responses.

However, all of them reiterated similar indicators about the nature of the world today and the kind of future all are busy shaping—ironically without full grasp of its real aspects. The first is the Arab summit in Doha on March 30. The second is Latam-Arab held in Doha, as well, on March 31. The third is the G20 in London on April 2. The major issue, prior to the Arab summit, was the question of attendance.

Who will come to the summit and who will not? Such a question is never ever raised in international summits no matter how sharp the differences might be. On the contrary, differences motivate participants to attend. They generate a lot of dynamism and mini-summits before the big one.

No wonder, French President Nicholas Sarkozy himself said, “Failure is not an option. The world will not understand our failure and history will 
never forgive it.”

Differences made some Arab leaders boycott the summit. World leaders have gone beyond this old-fashioned practice. For them, difference is motivating and invigorating. It brings them together. The greatest surprise at the Arab Summit was the attendance of the Sudanese leader, Omar Al Bashir, who challenged the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant against him. Although the warrant is not lawful yet, publicity made it look final. Al Bashir has received massive support, especially from the Latam leaders. They drew attention to the hypocrisy and double standards of the international criteria. They ignore the horrific crimes committed in Iraq, Palestine, Somalia, 
and Afghanistan.

These crimes were seen live on TV. It is obvious that what motivates the ICC and those behind it is not the human rights but the inhuman greed. They want to divide Sudan and lay their hands on its wealth and 
natural resources.

Although some Arab media tried to belittle the achievements of Doha summit, the summit distinguished itself by a new Arab awareness of the importance of joint action on the one hand, and the imminent dangers on the other.  Either the Arabs rise together or they fall together. The Latam-Arab summit, the next day, was the best comment on the weaknesses of the Arab summit. The two were held in the same hall but not with the same halo. Whatever the Latam leaders say or do bubbles over with commitment, motivation and enthusiasm. The presence of women was so outstanding. Similarly, the ideas and the opinions concerning Palestine and the Sudan were more courageous than anything articulated by some Arab leaders themselves. The Latam leaders demonstrated genuine feelings and authentic intimacy toward the 
Arab world.

The major difference between these two summits and the G20 is also an eye-catcher. Here the preparation is deeper and more detailed, which enabled the participants to take important economic decisions.

What the G20 achieved confirms the role of the dynamic and active institutions. These can fly over differences and reach resolutions.

The rise of China was visible. The warmth towards Russia was also tangible. USA and UK looked smaller than before. However, it seems that this is their real size in the world today. The European system looked less fragile than before.

The developing countries were the absent-present in these summits. They were promised some support through the financial crisis. However, they will never benefit if they do not learn how to manage their own wealth in a way beneficial to their own people. The three summits demonstrated that we are living in a changing world. We might be on the right track if we build on the results of the three summits.

The Arab journalists can learn a lot from the Western free media, which encourages the positive and empowers it to become better.

A great challenge faces the Arab world today. They do not have time to wait or to waste. They had better learnt from others’ approaches and styles, which proved practical and reliable. When duty calls, Arab leaders must not waste a strategic conference on the roll call.