The Arab Baath Socialist Party
Shibly Al-Aysami
Chapter Five
Recent events and projects aimed at unity
If we leave out certain specific events in the Arab world which express the will to resist and the rejection of the policy of surrender, such as the nationalization of the oil industry in Iraq and the operations of the Palestinian resistance against Israel, the general inference from other events during the last two years points out that official Arab policy has remained in a state of entanglement, confusion and deterioration and has not yet risen to the confrontation level and the ability to face up to the dangers threatening the Arab nation.
1. Arab reactionaries were able to exploit in the best possible manner the setback of 5 June 1967 and what it had revealed of the weaknesses of the progressive regimes, their need for material support and readiness to abandon their revolutionary pursuits and subsequently to meet the reactionaries in the middle of the road. This began when the reactionary regimes accepted the invitation for the Arab Summit Conference in Khartoum and decided to contribute money for the sake of «steadfastness and the elimination of the consequences of the aggression*, and finally concentrated on the slogan of Arab solidarity and unity of ranks as well as the suspension of Arab disputes so as to confront the greatest danger of all as represented by Zionism and Israel. In their adherence to these slogans they seemed to be as one who speaks the truth but intends falsehood. This is because these slogans did not protect the regimes from being exposed before the masses and at the same time they not only enabled them to destroy the progressive forces, but also placed them in a position of strength and gave them the ability to interfere and cause havoc within the progressive Arab regimes. Everyone knows the role of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf Emirates in activating the forces and pockets of reactionaries in Egypt and Syria with a view to enabling them to affect or even assume power, and in containing some other regimes, such as Jordan, Lebanon, North Yemen and the Sultanate of Oman and directing them to conform to their policies which are tied to world imperialism. Thus Arab reactionaries were able through their exploitation of the June defeat, their huge funds and cooperation with imperialism to cover up the distinctions between them and the progressive regimes with the resulting mix-up between the good and the bad in the eyes of the people. Moreover, those who contribute a small amount of their oil income became regarded as Arab nationalists full of sincerity to the Arab cause, even if they were involved up to their ears in cooperating with the worst of the enemies of the Arab nation, that is, America, which harms and challenges the Arabs no less than Israel.
2. As for King Hussein, he continued to resist and persecute the guerillas in a manner, which is no less vindictive, and brutal than what “Israel” itself is doing. He then submitted his plan for the establishment of the «Arab United Kingdom* as an open move towards surrender and the final liquidation of the Palestine problem. The project, as it seems, provides for the establishment of a federal union between the two banks —the East and West banks— and granting the Palestinians the right to self-determination through elected councils and to exercise self-rule. But, in fact, the project in its essence ignores the existence of the Palestinian revolution as well as its martyrs and real leaders. It also enables Israel to realize what it has been seeking —a recognition of its entity, gaining effective control of the West Bank and creating objective circumstances that permit it to strengthen its foothold and extend its economic influence over the Arab world.
Despite the violent negative reactions to this suspect project, King Hussein pursued a policy of «open bridges* with Israel and moved closer to America and to depend on it. He paid no attention to the future or the judgement of history, nor to the anger of the masses and the effects of Arab isolation with regard to his regime as long as it is an ineffective temporary isolation and he finds that his currying favour with America, Israel and the reactionary states is sufficient to strengthen and protect his regime. What is perhaps striking, is the fact that the Jordanian regime suspended hostilities with Israel and created a fence to protect it from guerilla attacks, and Israel on its part ceased to attack it and disturb it thereby creating circumstances which enabled Jordan to dispatch a considerable number of its army officers to Oman and the Gulf Emirates to offer their «technical experiences* in these areas. As for American imperialism it undertakes planning and coordination of roles between Israel and the reactionary regimes in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iran with a view to protect its interests and to confront the progressive regimes in the Arab homeland.
3. With regard to the Arabian Gulf area, it has become the focus of attention for American imperialism, which strives to maintain the sort of microscopic regimes there and to protect them and tighten its control over them to ensure the exploitation of the petroleum resources. It also made Iran a strong military power, to threaten the states in the area, particularly Iraq —which is a liberated progressive regime. It encouraged Iran to occupy the three Arab islands (Abu Musa, the Greater Tumb and Lesser Tumb) and shortly afterwards, Israel attempted to occupy, in collusion with American imperialism, other Arab islands at the entrance of the Red Sea. These events, despite their importance, did not push the Arab states to take any serious common move with the exception of Iraq, which was not able on its own to avert it and confront it. Meanwhile, the reactionary Arab states adopted a disinterested position as if the matter did not concern them, and even some of the, such as Saudi Arabia, did not hesitate to entice and cooperate with the aggressor states and to turn a blind eye to the immigration and illegal entry of Iranians and their control of the vital sectors in the Gulf Emirates. At the same time restrictions were imposed on Arab nationals seeking employment there —a situation which forecasts the creation of another Palestine in that Arab area, which is very important from the point of view of its huge petroleum resources and strategic position.
4. I do not think that I am exaggerating or being unfair if I say that evidence of the confusion and retrogression in Arab policies became clearer and clearer after the acceptance of the Rogers' initiative, the abandonment of the war of attrition, the adherence to the cease-fire and going along with the reactionary states in the name of Arab solidarity, the national character of the struggle and for the sake of securing some financial assistance. Also such evidence became clearer following the adoption of many stands and measures which revived the rightists and those elements favoring the peaceful settlement to such an extent that it created, at the same time, doubts with regards to the friendship of the USSR and the benefits derived from cooperating with it as well as calls to "neutralize" the US and to win its favour, in the hope of reaching that kind of settlement. In view of all this, we go on rightfully to ask: Was not this policy —and what accompanied it in the form of hesitation and improvisation as well as the resulting similar reactions— responsible to a large extent for the ousting of Soviet experts from Egypt at the most crucial moment and in the most erroneous way which undermined the confidence between Egypt and the Soviet Union at a time when such confidence should have been strengthened in view of the fierce battle the Arabs were waging against voracious strategic alliance between Zionism and imperialism under the leadership of the United States? And since this problem has important consequences and repercussions, not restricted to Egypt alone, but encompassing the very essence of the question of the liberation of Palestine and the other Arab territories, we are obliged to pause a little at this point to put forwards our views in a spirit of constructive criticism and out of our care for the national problem. From my own conclusions and beliefs, for which I am alone responsible, many of those who heard about the ousting of the Soviet experts, thought that in lieu of this step there would be an equitable price —at least involving the withdrawal of Israel from occupied Arab territories and the realization of the peaceful settlement— the dream of those who advocate it and who label it as the just and honorable solution. Regardless of the negative consequences in the Arab problem of the policy of peaceful coexistence between the major powers and regardless of the merits of the justification that led to the ousting of the Soviet experts, which we even appreciate, no one thought that such a major step would be undertaken without a price, and that friends are to be told either you give us everything that we ask of you or leave us. The simplest rules of political action, particularly in the present circumstances through which the Arabs are passing, require that actions be undertaken in accordance with the saying 'what may not be realized in full, must not be totally abandoned*, and as a well as with patience, making use of suitable circumstances, strengthening internal capabilities and continuously striving through dialogue and practical stands to convince friends of the need for giving and increasing their support to reach the level of American support to Israel. It is worthwhile noting, that the authorities in Egypt have recently begun to make statements which indicate that they are pursuing this path and have focused attention on the delusion of the peaceful settlement, the deception and procrastination of America, the need for depending on inherent Arab strength, the support of friendly countries and the inclination to use a weapon in the battle. We only hope that there will be more clarity and determination in the pursuit of this sound path.
5. If we turn to commando activity, we find that attempts at its isolation and liquidation by the defeatist reactionary forces as well as restrictions on its movements in the countries surrounding Israel are still continuing. However, some commando groups have escalated their violent and challenging operations, such as the operations of the Black September organization in Munich, Bangkok and Khartoum in an effort to move the world conscience and force it to question on the one hand the real reasons behind the tragedy which the Arab people of Palestine are living and to undermine the policy seeking the unjust peaceful settlements on the other. Thirdly these actions were also meant to affirm the capability of the Arab revolution to make additional sacrifices and heroic acts and to escalate and maintain the resistance movement until victory is achieved.
This is what angers Israel and makes it feel the dangers of the continuity of the Palestinian revolution and its ability to muster the potentialities of the Arab masses and convert them into a long-drawn popular war. For these reasons, Israel carried out its brutal and barbaric raids on the refugee camps in south and north Lebanon and all other places as well as on civilian and military targets in Syria all of which caused the death of hundreds of civilians in addition to considerable material losses. The last treacherous attack of Israeli elements, arranged with American intelligence services, was the one carried out against the leaders of the Palestinian resistance in Beirut.
If Israel aimed through these attacks, to display its strength, challenge the Arab states, terrorize the strugglers, spread despair with regard to the possibility of achieving a victory against it and subsequently to force the Arabs to accept the fait accompli —the history of our nation and of all living nations affirms that actions similar to those being carried out by the enemy are challenging and arousing to feelings for national vengeance and honour, and for the defense of freedom and just human values. They also constitute the strongest factors for stirring the revolutionary potential inherent in the masses.
Moreover, what happened in the center of Beirut has clearly exposed the collusion between the reactionary regimes and imperialism and Zionism against the Palestinian resistance in particular and the Arab revolutionary movement in general. When the Lebanese Government failed to liquidate the resistance movement in a manner similar to that undertaken by the Jordanian regime, it adopted the stand of the neutral bystander and some of its establishments provided the necessary facilities for Israeli elements and agents of American intelligence services to carry out this liquidation on its behalf without any regard to the fact that the operation itself violates Lebanese sovereignty and stabs national honour in addition to its being a threat to its destiny and the future of its citizens. However, it seems that the Lebanese authorities in coordination with American and Arab reactionaries and after realizing that the Israeli raid had exposed them and harmed them and at the same time had won for the resistance movement the overwhelming sympathy of the masses, resorted to inciting the commandos and provoking a clash with them with a view to justifying the deployment of the Lebanese Army to strike at them and liquidate them as what happened in Jordan. But what they gained from this was an affirmation of their adherence to American imperialist policy and the agent reactionary states as well as the death of hundreds of Palestinians and Lebanese nationals by the weapons, which should have been directed against the Israelis —the enemies of all Arabs. The national and progressive forces in Lebanon and the other Arab countries must realize that any leniency in permitting this new conspiracy against the commandos to pass in Lebanon would mean that imperialism and reaction would in the near future move on to liquidate the progressive forces wherever they may be found in the Arab homeland.
6. With regard to the tripartite federation, it is not very difficult to see that its progress during the last two years has been slow and hampered and did not fulfill the hopes of those who were enthusiastic for it when it was first announced, and it affirmed what we had expected despite the numerous committees, meetings and decisions that were taken and despite the sincerity and enthusiasm of Colonel Qadhafi for the establishment of a complete union between Libya and Egypt which would be an effective instrument of unity within the federation.
It is perhaps beneficial to add here a few comments as a constructive criticism and out of care for unity. In the first published edition of this chapter, I referred to the statement by President Numeiri in which he placed his conviction in Arab unity on a par with his conviction in African unity. In this reference I intended to give ample warning against the danger to which any step towards unity might be exposed as a result of the ambiguity in understanding its ideology basis and concepts. In fact, shortly after this statement was made, President Numeiri abandoned his enthusiasm for the federation of the four and pursued an opposite path, which indicates that his talk about unity stemmed from political and tactical considerations rather than from a deep-rooted belief and a fixed strategy. Despite the fact that the leaders of Egypt and Libya had played an effective role in his reinstatement to power, after the July 19, 1971 coup d'etat thus enabling him to strike at his adversaries from among the progressive forces in the Sudan, he consequently abandoned them and concentrated his attention on the south and his activities on his regional problems and other issues of the African Continent.
As for nowadays, it is worthwhile pointing to the statements of Colonel Qadhafi with regard to unity from which certain inferences can be make as to his understanding of it which show that his views are greatly ambiguous and incorporate traditional emotionalism which lacks a scientific basis and does not take into account developments in these modern times. During his visit to Tunisia towards the end of last year, Colonel Qadhafi made a speech in which he said: «Unity in these circumstances is taking vengeance for Arab honour more than anything else». He went on to praise Bourghiba and called on him to establish unity between Tunisia and Libya «because the political organizations in the two countries are similar and both regimes have adopted socialisms*. Bourghiba however rejected his proposal outright and even ridiculed and attacked it, when he replied: «The Presidency of the State did not come to me through a military coup, but as a result of a quarter of a century of struggle... and the new generation which claims leadership lacks the political and cultural thin-king and is moreover a generation which must undergo experiences to be able to govern and lead*.
Perhaps the insistence of Colonel Qadhafi on amalgamating religion with nationalism and his own particular understanding of socialism, unity, political, organization and state structure 17* in addition to his belief that partisanship is traitorous and his continuous attacks on Communism and Communists have forced him to pressure his partners —such as the Syrians— to adopt his ideas and concepts.
In the event of their refusal to comply, he would withhold his financial assistance to them or reduce it to the minimum and provide support to those groups that oppose them. Meanwhile, they continued in this policy of partisanship, joining with the Communists in government and in establishing the type of regime they wish, which conforms to their concepts and their interest in remaining in full control of authority. They did not hide their discontent with the stand of the Libyan regime and its attitude towards them. Their complaint is strongest when they notice that he is granting generously tens of millions of Dinars to distant non-Arab states, and at the same time he is niggardly in his assistance despite his enthusiasm for the national character of the battle and despite the fact that their state is a member of the tripartite federation, a front-line country and is in dire need for greater support and assistance.
Perhaps the most trying test which the tripartite federation had experienced and which exposed the extent of the weakness of its bonds of unity, lies in the extensive and heavy raid carried out by Israel on Syria a few months ago resulting in the killing of hundreds of people, the destruction of many utilities and installations as well as inflicting heavy material losses estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars. Despite the fact that these raids were carried out more than once, the two other states of the federation did not make a move to come to the assistance of their third partner. Their stand was in no way different from the stand of any other Arab state. Therefore, is there anything, which is clearer and more convincing to the masses with regard to a specific federal project than the practical stands and tangible undertakings made in its interests? In addition, aren't the final results alone, not the good intentions, indicative of the project's final evaluation? In fact the substance of the issue lies in the spontaneous and honest answer to this question: Has the enthusiasm and hope in the tripartite federation increased or has it lessened and why? We sincerely hope that full unity between' Egypt and Libya will be realized at the specified time and in the best possible manner, and that those Libyans who expressed the regional inclinations during the funeral of the martyrs of the Libyan airliner, which was shot down by the Israelis, are an ineffective minority. We also hope that the open policy of the members of the tripartite federation towards the progressive Arab states will help strengthen the federation and endow it with the ability to stand fast and resist.
7. The discussion of the present status of the tripartite federation leads us to mention other projects aimed at unity, which have been proposed as a means to overcome this situation and to establish a serious and effective federation capable of halting the deteriorating Arab conditions. At the end of March last year immediately after King Hussein had presented his proposal for the establishment of the «United Arab Kingdom*, the revolutionary government in Iraq put forward a project for unity which can be summarized as follows:
a) «The Federation of Arab Republics* will be established on a permanent basis providing for a united foreign policy and diplomatic representation; unity of the armed forces and all matters relating to military affairs and national defense, unity of financial, economic, information, planning and communications affairs in relation to national defense, the needs for steadfastness and liberation in the battle of destiny.
b) The Federation will be open to any other Arab state which wishes to join. Its constitution will ensure personal, political and public freedoms for all the masses and the progressive and national organizations.
c) The Federation's organizations will be the following: The people's Assembly in which representation will be proportional to the population; the Council of the Republics with equal representation of the member states; The Presidential Council of the Federation which exercises the executive powers; and a Federal Constitutional Court. Decisions will be taken by a majority and not by a unanimous vote. The project stipulated that it aims at satisfying the national needs, at moving forward towards the battle and at warding off the dangers that threaten the Arab nation.
Despite the fact that a high-level delegation, headed by the Vice President of the Iraqi Revolutionary Command Council had presented the project to the responsible authorities in Syria and Egypt and explained its implications and various aspects affirming that Libya and any other Arab progressive state would not be excluded, it was met with open ears, courteousness and pleasant talk but with no practical response or even a reply to the initiative. To justify such a negative response, there were those who said later that Iraq was not serious in its initiative, when in fact it would have been extremely easy to be able to distinguish between seriousness and test this matter by communicating to the Iraqi authorities approval of the initiative and requesting negotiations and discussion which will show the extent of the seriousness of the proposal. Perhaps the written reply from the President of the Iraqi Republic to the Syrian President on October 22, 1972 in answer to the verbal proposals carried by the Syrian Foreign Minister regarding the establishment of unity between Syria and Iraq —a reply which was objective and positive at the same time expressed an honest desire to strengthen the ability to resist and the will to achieve liberation— is the best proof of the serious care given to the question of unity.
In my view, the real reason behind the lack of response to the Iraqi proposal for unity lies in certain past misapprehensions and negative attitudes in addition to internal and regional considerations and a desire for not arousing the fears and doubts of certain Arab governments which provide material support to one state or the other.
Regardless of the reasons or justifications for this lack of response, all we are seeking is a matter of rising to the level of the dangers threatening our nation and a way out of the whirlpool of the present figurative federation as well as adopting effective and serious steps towards unity as quickly as possible as long as there is a dire need for national unity and in view of the fact that time does not wait for or have mercy upon us if we forget the appropriate opportunity.
8. As long as we are discussing projects aimed at unity, we might mention quickly a brief summary of the reasons and the status of the unity agreement between North and Southern Yemen which was announced towards the end of October last year. The most important provisions of the new united Yemeni state must amalgamate the international character of the two Yemens and the united constitution must ensure the personal and political public freedoms of the masses and for all their trade and labour union organizations as well as the gains of the September revolution in the north and the October revolution in the South. Joint technical committees will be established for constitutional and foreign affairs, economic and financial affairs, legislative and judicial affairs and education and information affairs with the proviso that these committees will complete their work for the unification of existing regulations and legislation within a period of one year. The agreement also stated: Total Yemeni unity, in addition to being the hope of every Yemeni, is a basic necessity for consolidating the pillars of independence and building an independent national economy. It is also a national necessity because it enables the Yemen to participate in the struggle of the Arab nation against the imperialist-Zionist alliance and moreover it constitutes a serious step towards the achievement of the unity of the whole Arab world.
Among the results of the signing of this agreement and the statement issued thereafter with regard to the methods for dealing with the existing problems between the two sides, was the reduction of the existing tension which threatened an outbreak of hostilities between them, to frustrate the reactionary forces, particularly Saudi Arabia and the tribes affiliated to it, and prevent them even for a short while, from escalating their conspiracy against the Popular Democratic Yemen. Despite the fact that the people of both Yemens in particular and the Arab states in general, were satisfied with the agreement and considered it to be a positive step forward wishing it every success, I believe that the reactionary forces —which were harmed by it in the Yemen as well as Saudi Arabia and imperialism and many other elements controlling the centres of power and authority who are apprehensive and unconvinced with the unity strategy either because of its restricted nature or out of fear for its revolutionary concepts*—, will cause matters to proceed in a manner that will hamper the realization of the unity. All I hope is that events will prove the error of my anticipations.
Having presented a brief resume of events and projects aimed at unity during the last two years we turn to the major question whose answer is the preoccupation and center of interest of every Arab, namely what is the way and what to do?
1. In this state at a time when the reactionary, imperialist and Zionist attack is escalating and the state of despair and deterioration is widening, concerted action to realize serious steps towards unity is the natural and most ideal solution to confront this attack and deal with the prevailing circumstances. Such action becomes vitally important if the following is taken into consideration:
The presentation of a large number of proposals for unity without implementation, and the establishment of ineffective federations which are incapable of overcoming regional and internal considerations and interests, are harmful to the aim of unity, and undermine its raison d'etre. For this reason, the Arab masses and their organized revolutionary vanguards are requested to look upon anyone who tampers with the aim of unity, regardless, as someone who tampers with the masses' most sacred aims and concepts, and consequently to expose, fight and remove such persons from office. The masses must also consider as their infallible yardstick for the evaluation of any step towards unity, the practical results of such a step and nothing else. Also, they should consider that any unity, which does not depend on the mobilization of potential and armed struggle for liberation, does not go beyond regional considerations as an artificial and fraudulent unity.
There is no doubt that overwhelming verbal pronouncements of the authorities vis-a-vis their activities and their continued disability to implement what they plan and decide, affirms the existence of a fundamental and dangerous malady requiring diagnosis and treatment, appears that there is a dire need to carry out an objective, scientific and comprehensive study of this malady and to search for it everywhere —in the nature of the regimes, in the mentality of the responsible leaderships, in their negative attitudes to the masses and their organized revolutionary vanguards, in their class structure, in their belief in unity and its strategy, in their method and work which lacks any revolutionary, scientific and moral bases, in the regional attitudes, in the shortcomings of education and backwardness in Arab society, in the negative activities of Zionist, imperialist and reactionary organizations which are hostile to the aims of the Arab revolution, and in other fields.
However, the situation cannot wait for this comprehensive study to be completed, and the masses and their organized leaderships must move towards the rejection of and insurrection against the prevailing conditions and to increase the struggle to replace those whose disability has been established and has proved, in practice, that they are exhausted and that the revolutionary spirit in them has been dissipated.
2. From experience, it has been established that any step aimed at unity will not be serious of fruitful if it is established from above and in isolation from the struggle of the masses and their organized vanguards, also if it does not stem from a firm belief in unity and an awareness of its necessity and the requirements for its success. From this, it may be concluded that the progressive popular organizations are urged to exercise the struggle for unity with all the strength they possess. Naturally, their struggle must also encompass fighting imperialism, divisions and backwardness and all kinds of injustice, despotism and exploitation on the basis that they constitute obstacles in the way of unity.
However, the positive results, which are expected from popular organizations, are connected to a number of factors of which the following are the most important:
a) A knowledge of the laws related to the development of the society within which they are struggling and realizing the status quo with a view to exploiting and making use of what may be available in the best possible way.
b) To operate on the basis of abiding by a scientific ideology, a clear strategy and a firm revolutionary organization.
c) To be able through its actual behaviour and its revolutionary and moral stands to win the confidence of the masses and to have the capacity to bring forth their potential and to direct it in the service of the national aims.
d) To rise to the level of the dangers threatening the Arab nation and to overcome partial disputes and secondary contradictions among themselves. Also to realize the aspirations and demands of the masses which include the unification of their efforts and the consolidation of their forces in a united and common front in each state and at the pan-Arab level.
In this context, we hope that the establishment of the «Arab Joint Front* which includes the Palestinian resistance movement and the progressive parties and organizations in the Arab world as a first step towards the creation of a «National Popular Front» which will be able to play an effective role in undermining the plans of the Zionist-imperialist reactionary alliance and to achieve many national gains and victories.
3. Up till last year, there were strong and visiting voices advocating the possibility of neutralizing America and winning its friendship and at the same time casting doubt on the friendship of the Soviet Union in the hope of reducing America's hostility towards the Arabs and in inducing it to exercise pressure on Israel to arrive at a just and honorable peaceful settlement! There was also a large number of Arabs who claimed that the basic fault in the Arabs lay in the weakness of their propaganda and because they have not clarified the justness of their cause to the people and countries of the world. In addition, there were a greater number of people who alleged that the application of Arab solidarity would provide an opportunity for cooperation with the Arab reactionary countries enabling them to play en effective role with regard to American policy as a consequence of reciprocal cooperation among those countries. However, despite the fact that the Arab countries had gone a long way in this direction, America retracted from the Rogers' proposal, undermined any international initiative and chose to impose the fait accompli. It went even further to deceive and misguide the Arabs, to widen its conspiracies against them and to increase its support to “Israel”. Thus as long as America does not wish to accord the Arabs justice but desires to continue exploiting their petroleum resources and countries' wealth and as long as Israel does not want peace with them but to expand at their expense and to destroy their unity; and since what has been taken by force cannot be restored except through the use of force and since the world community with is various institutions and positive attitude does not have the power to restrain the aggressor —it has become imperative for us to engage in the battle of destiny, the battle for life or death. Moreover, despite the importance of our paying attention to propaganda and diplomatic activities with a view to explain our just cause to international public opinion and win its support, we must not be allowed to cast shadows and doubts as to the priority and necessity for the battle. On the other hand this does not mean that we should enter the fray with emotional and improvised enthusiasm without an accurate calculation of its requirements and adequate preparations.
The battle is a long-draw battle of destiny, bitter and vicious, and there is no alternative for us but to depend on ourselves, to unify our forces, to persist in developing our fighting armies, to mobilize on a scientific basis the masses' potentials and to prepare them for a long-term popular war. In addition, we should strengthen our amicable relations and cooperation with our friends in the Third World and the socialist countries, headed by the Soviet Union, which, through its massive strength, can confront American imperialism at this stage and undermine its conspiracies against us.
4. The Arab nation possesses a huge potential and capacity which so far remains divided or inherent and it is adequate to ensure steadfastness and victory over imperialism and Israel in the event scientific means are utilized to bring forth, organize and benefit from such potential in the best possible manner.
Hence, while we are preparing for the battle, we must make use of all our forces and expect the worst. We must assume that the summit conferences of the leaders of the major powers will put an end to their disputes and the cold war and will result in peace and understanding between them allowing them to view the problems of other people only through their detente and interests. We must also assume that circumstances and interests of our friends do not permit them to offer more than what they have already provided us with, and that Israel, with American support, is able to deal a heavy blow to the Arab armies and that the whole world is unable to provide us with any assistance in times of difficulty and war.
Let us assume all this, and in my opinion it is imperative for us that we prepare ourselves for a kind of popular liberation war —and this does not mean that we should resort to a specific formula or particular experience of this kind of war. What happened in the past— in Spain, China, Yugoslavia, Korea, Algeria, Cuba and Vietnam —may not be useful in our circumstances and present conditions— but a study and knowledge of these conflicts is beneficial for us and throws light on important matters related to this kind of war. I must admit that in proposing these ideas, I feel a great deal of apprehension since it is related to the art of warfare, which requires experience and specialization. Therefore, while putting forward in this regard some opinions and suggestions, it does not mean that they are firm and decisive but merely as a form of query, urging those who are specialists and responsible to study them and perhaps they may find in them some benefit.
a) Why aren't tens of thousands of people in every Arab state trained, from an early date, in the use of arms so that they may become not only capable of using weapons but of engaging in guerilla warfare and forming effective vanguards in the popular war of liberation —vanguards who are determined to continue and escalate the fight and to destroy the interests of Israel and its imperialist allies even if it takes decades? Let Israel, in this event; destroy what it wishes as long as its existence on any Arab land will be turned into an unbearable hell and as long as the interests of its allies are in jeopardy.
b) The commandos of the Israeli Defense Army take part in striking at the guerillas and the refugee camps, as well as on military and civilian establishments in the Arab countries. Therefore, why don't members of the Sa'iqah and commando forces of the Arab armies take part in strengthening the Arab guerrillas, raising the standards of their training, improving their effectiveness and increasing their numbers so that they may become the vanguards of the liberation war who are capable of enduring the burdens of the fighting for long periods and of preventing Israel from carrying out its surprise attacks to which it has been used?
c) Why don't the Arabs, despite their present state of affairs, concentrate on developing a heavy armaments industry in any state which fulfils the required conditions to enable them to reduce their dependence on imports of arms and not be viable to various kinds of embargoes and rationing which may be possible under certain international circumstances?
d) Israel has gone a long way in building nuclear reactors for peaceful and military purposes. Why don't the Arabs similarly pay attention to this very important matter? And why don't they build large reactors for peaceful purposes, as India and other countries have done, and which might be used when the need arises, for military purposes? And does not this delay on the part of the Arabs in entering this important field constitute a serious danger to their progress and catching up with modern civilization and subsequently keeps them at the mercy of Zionism and imperialism?
5. From the fundamental concepts of understanding international relations, interests alone are what affect these relations, govern their level and determine their fate, while feelings of right; justice and other similar sentiments have no mentionable effect in this context. If this is the case, then those states, which support Israel, led by America, will not change their hostile policies towards the Arabs unless they realize that their interests are in danger as a result of their continuing in this policy.
At this point the following question comes to mind: What is America's interest in its bias towards Israel and in providing it with political support, as well as money and weapons? The answer is clear and simple and is not puzzling or complicated. It can be briefly said that America has found through experience that its strategic alliance with Zionism and Israel at a time when Arab policy remains unchanged will ensure its interests in the Arab world. No matter what is said about the effect of Zionism on American propaganda machinery and the role of the Jews and their effect on the Presidential elections, American policy will continue to be related to the interests of the state and people and will be drawn in the light of these interests. From all this, it can be surmised that the American government is of the opinion that the question of maintaining its influence in the Arab world, protecting its interests and ensuring its continued imports of Arab oil is of the utmost importance to it now, provided the Arabs continue to remain in their present state of backwardness, divisions and disunity and in finding an adequate way to strike at any popular revolutionary movement which has the capacity to liberate the potential of the masses and to direct them towards unity and freedom from all kinds of imperialist exploitation and control.
Previously, in the fifties, America sought to ensure its interests by involving the Arabs in military alliances, such as the Joint Defense Pact and the Baghdad Pact, as well as by relating the reactionary Arab governments to it politically and economically. But it failed in this when the masses forced their governments to pursue a non-aligned policy and not to become involved in any pacts in which the Arabs have no interest —and when the reactionary governments were unable to publicly declare their cooperation with the imperialist Western countries. Moreover, the increased flood of revolutionary and unity activity which followed the establishment of unity between Syria and Egypt in 1958 and the success of the July 14 Revolution in Iraq forced the United States and Britain to land their troops in Lebanon and Jordan and to interfere directly with a view to halting the revolutionary tide. America, however, quickly benefited from the errors of Arab policies and the divisions among progressive forces and their setbacks and did not have any need to rely on its military forces, which aroused the emotions and national feelings of the Arab masses. Thus America increased its dependence on Israel to play this necessary role since it considered it to be its fundamental base in the Middle East and the Mediterranean basin and a complement to the NATO pact and the Sixth Fleet, which is regarded as a reserve force for Israel as President Nixon put it. The interests of Israel and its expansionist ambitions coincided with the imperialist interests, and Israel, in fact, was able to prove its ability to sow dissension and divisions among the Arabs and to deal a major blow to the progressive forces during the June 5 War which somewhat paralyzed and exhausted them and led them to establish closer relations and to cooperate with the reactionary states. Thus the revolutionary tide was halted, and Israel wanted through its repeated aggression to prove to America that it is able to terrorize and restrain its adversaries and at the same time to protect those regimes which are allied to America, such as the Jordanian regime, and to strike at the extremist revolutionary movements, such as the Palestinian resistance movement, in any Arab state.
From this understanding of the aims of the Zionist-imperialist alliance and its strategy in the Arab world, we can formulate our own aims and strategy.
In addition to what we mentioned earlier with regard to the necessity of undertaking serious steps aimed at unity, supporting and improving commando activities, granting freedom to the masses and their revolutionary vanguards and mobilizing all potential for the battle —the Arabs possess a weapon which at this stage in the history of man has become the most powerful and effective weapon and we should use it to defend ourselves, our honour, our destiny and our future generations. It is the oil weapon— and we own 68 percent of the world's oil reserves. Also, if we realize that the future progress and prosperity of American industry depend on the security of oil supplies —as an irreplaceable basic source of energy and that America will need to import more than half of its oil requirements from the Arab world18 we would appreciate the extent of the anxiety and perhaps the panic which dominates the minds of American politicians in case the Arabs cut off or ration oil supplies to the U.S. or create a state of confusion and instability in the area which would prevent the flow of oil in a regular and uninterrupted manner. It is perhaps worthwhile mentioning in this connection the proposals submitted by Iraq to the Joint Arab Defence Council in Cairo on January 27, 1973 on the use of oil and Arab funds as a weapon in the battle. These proposals are as follows:
a) Notifying the imperialist states supporting Israel that oil supplies to them will be cut off or rationed if their support is not discontinued within a period of three months.
b) Nationalizing the oil interests of America and other foreign countries, which continue to provide support to Israel.
c) Withdrawing Arab funds from American banks and all countries cooperating with Israel'9.
d) Liquidating the U.S. military bases and those belonging to any other country cooperating with Israel.
e) In the event of the disapproval of Saudi Arabia and the Arabian Gulf Emirates, because of their political status, they will be requested to reduce oil exports to a level that will enable them to meet their financial obligations to the frontline states and their other commitments related to their development plans within the framework of the austerity policy dictated by the nature of the struggle.
f) The Iraqi government is not asking for unanimous Arab approval of these proposals, only that they should abide by them in case of their approval. Egypt, Syria, Libya and the resistance movement agreed to abide by the proposals. Iraq also expressed its full preparedness to mobilize its military power in any size, time or place decided by the parties engaged in the hostilities and in accordance with a decision taken by those countries regardless of the point of view of the Iraqi Republic.
g) The parties approving the proposals will draw up a plan for their implementation and will undertake the liquidation of the petroleum interests of the U.S. and those countries supporting Israel through all means available.
At the time Iraq submitted this proposal, those defeatists and doubters thought that Iraq's aim was to secure the requirements of success in its nationalization of its oil industry by asking the other Arab states to cut off or reduce oil production for the sake of the battle. But, in fact, the Iraqi government continued to urge the implementation of this proposal after succeeding in nationalizing the oil industry and its victory over the Western oil agencies on the first of last March. Regardless, certain Arab delegations were satisfied with expressing their support for the projects, in words only, so as not to anger Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Emirates. The projects was subsequently referred to the competent committees for study, and this means, from the practical aspect and from past experience, that the proposal has been shelved on top of other reports to be found someday by some scholar of history who would brush away the dust and read their contents.
Still, the interests of Zionism and imperialism in the Arab world are one and the same, and at the same time the continuity and prosperity of the industry of the U.S. and its allies more and more tied to Arab oil. Moreover, the continued Israeli aggression against and expansion in the Arab states is directly related to American support and arms supplies. The formula therefore is as follows: Arab oil for the U.S., U.S. arms for Israel, and continued weakness and backwardness for the Arabs. If situations in the political field are to be measured by actual results, the general outcome of Arab and Israeli policies has up till now provided evidence to the U.S. that increasing its support for Israel has not in any way affected its interests20. On the contrary, such support has protected it as well as its allies from among the Arab reactionary regimes.
Therefore, the Arab progressive forces must become aware of this truth: America will not cease to support Israel; the latter will not cease to expand and commit aggression; and the Arabs will not defend their honour and existence if they do not strive to destroy the interests of the U.S. and the states which support Israel and to cut off oil supplies to them in any possible way and to create effective revolutionary movements capable of realizing this aim despite the defeatist governments and no matter how long it takes and regardless of the sacrifices.
Finally all what has been mentioned as an answer to the question posed earlier, namely «what is the way and what to do», will remain far-removed from actual implementation unless we cease to raise deceptive and glittering slogans such as «Arab solidarity* which has led in practice to the removal of the distinction between progressive and reactionary forces, to the attenuation of the class struggle, to the fluidity of revolutionary stands and to the silence about those regimes in cohort with imperialism and Zionism against the aims of the struggling masses and their vanguards.
It is sufficient for us to read about the outcome of this «trap» slogan to realize the dangers inherent in it and its negative effects on the progress of the Arab revolution. Perhaps one particular outcome is sufficient to affirm the truth of what we have just said, namely that the rulers of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Emirates —who are extremely enthusiastic about Arab solidarity and most sincere about Arab brotherhood— are paying very little for the national struggle and a great deal for imperialism and their private petty affairs. Moreover their cordial relations with America, the backbone of imperialism, ate improving despite its escalating its conspiracies against the Arab nation and increasing its support to Israel in an unprecedented manner.
Having answered this aforementioned question it is worthwhile to put forward a resume with a view to summarize and digest the most important aspects:
1) The dangers and challenges that face the Arab nation in this historical phase have become so dangerous that it has become imperative for the progressive forces to take the initiative to overcome its secondary contradictions, unify its struggle in one front in each state and at the pan-Arab level. Also to carry out a radical and total revision of the techniques of activity and struggle in a manner that will make them more revolutionary and scientific and at the same time raise them to a level that conforms to the responsibilities they shoulder.
2) Giving the masses and their organized revolutionary vanguards freedom of movement and participation and subsequently exposing and resisting those regimes which abrogate the role of the masses, impose a guardianship over them and distort their will.
3) Supporting and developing guerilla activity with all available means because it represents the will to resist and constitutes the forefront of the vanguards of the Arab revolution who believe in the armed struggle as a way to liberation and victory.
4) Exercising the struggle for unity to achieve steps aimed at an effective fighting unity with the masses as its base, liberation its concepts and socialist democracy its essence.
5) Reactionaries and progressives are contradictory and cannot possibly meet under the slogan of Arab solidarity unless under a clear charter and the leadership of progressive forces. The Arab struggling masses and their progressive forces must start their struggle considering the reaction inimical to the aims of the Arab revolution is on the same side of imperialism and Zionism.
6) Establishing effective revolutionary organizations to strike at U.S. interests in any possible way and at any time and any place.
7) Paying special attention to create an awareness among the masses on the importance of using Arab funds and oil as a weapon in the struggle —so that this may become as soon as possible a slogan which can be implemented and cannot be ignored by the reactionary regimes and whereby the masses are not prevented from applying it at the appropriate time.
8) Expanding the framework of cooperation with the socialist countries, particularly the Soviet Union in order to implement the slogan «we befriend those who befriend us and we are inimical to our enemies*,
9) Strengthening and developing cooperation with the developing countries, the non-aligned states and all the progressive forces and liberation movements throughout the world.
16* This Chapter was written three months before the 1973 October war and was published in a book entitled “AI Wihdah al-'Arabiyah Min Khilal al-Tajribah” (Arab Unity as Viewed from the Experiment), 2nd Edition.
17* In mid-April 1973, on the occasion of the Prophet's Birthday, Colonel Qadhafi made a speech in which he enumerated four points for the establishment of the revolution and the state which can be summarized as follows:
1) The provision of all effective laws are to be blocked, and the masses shall establish popular committees which will take the necessary measures and penalties in accordance with the case involved. He said: “we shall not wrong anyone because we are Muslims and govern by Islamic Shari'ah (Law)”.
2) The country must be cleaned of those who are politically sick, and if we find anyone who talks about communism or Marxist ideology or apostasy we shall put him in jail and so with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Liberation Party if they exercise any clandestine activity.
3) Freedom is for the people and not for their enemies, and the minority must abide by the views of the majority. Arms will be distributed to the masses who believe in the September 1 Revolution and I shall not be concerned if all the masses are converted into a force that smashes and destroys and anyone who is not with us shall remain under our feet.
4) The September 1 Revolution stems from Islam and I shall tear and burn all the misleading books. “I shall wage a revolution on libraries, universities and educational curricula... and we must burn any misleading thoughts and leave the thoughts that stem from the Book of God... and if we implement this, the Libyan people will actually be the first people in the world to carry out a unique revolution in history*. He also said “what is available in the Arab homeland is not socialism at all, and socialism has not been presented in a serious scientific manner except after the September 1 Revolution whose bases are found in the Qoran. (The Libyan Newspaper AI-Fajral-Jadid, No. 192. 16 April 1973).
18* The Chairman of the Board of Continental Oil Company has said before a conference that the value of U.S. oil imports will reach $ 30 billion while its exports in the form of goods and services will not exceed $66 billion. Also, Senator Henry Jackson —who is a Zionist sympathizer— has said that the anticipated oil revenues of the oil producing countries will reach $ 40 billion in 1980 and that the American economy is liable to be destroyed when the deficit of the U.S. balance of payments reached $ 30,000 million. Reports of American financial experts, published in the American press state: «The deficit in the U.S. balance of payments will amount to between $ 20 - 40 billion between 1980 and 1985 in view of the requirements of the United States to import Arab oil. The energy crisis became so severe leading to the closure of some gas stations, a reduction in certain airline flights and the closure of some schools due to the lack of heating. American oil requirements in 1972 amounted to 500 million tons, of which it imported 230 million tons from the Arab world*.
19 The deposits of the Arab states in the U.S. and outside the Arab world amount to about {15,000 million, and the Arab countries lose an amount equivalent to $ 1,500 million every time the U.S. dollar is devalued by 10 percent.
20* Statistics compiled by the Secretariat General of the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions (ICATU) show that Arab imports from the U.S. amounted in 1970 to $ 997 million. In 1971 these imports increased by 18 percent while Arab exports to the U.S. decreased by 17 percent, and the balance of trade is in the U.S.'s favour.
A report of the Arab Ministers of Economy submitted by the Arab Economic Council states that the U.S. owns 60 percent of the capital of international companies operating in the Arab world, and that the profits of these companies amounted to $2,670 million in 1971.
Other articles by Arab oil experts (Sheikh Abdulla Tariki and Dr. Nicolas Sarkis) on the “participation agreement” between the Gulf countries and the Western oil companies show that this agreement aims at circumventing the nationalization of the oil industry after Iraq had taken this step, at reviving the Old concessionary system, at ensuring the foreign companies' control over exploration, drilling, production and transportation operations and at forcing the oil producing countries to sell their equity share to these companies for marketing. It is clear that the agreement was in fact a “Catholic marriage” according to one of the secret newsletters of France's Erap company.
If we add to all this the statements of the Saudi Minister of Petroleum, Sheikh Yamam, after the conclusion of the agreement indicating Saudi Arabia's desire to invest its capital funds in the U.S. (and not in the Arab homeland which is in dire need for funds) and also concerning the huge deposits of the Arab states in the banks of the imperialist countries, we would realize the extent of the security available to protect US interests. Also, perhaps the restoration by the U.S. of its diplomatic relations with some Arab countries, such as North Yemen and the Sudan will increase its reassurance for its interests in the Arab world.