Unity: present and future prospects

In contemporary Arab history, there were many trials and attempts at unity, the most important of which was the short-lived unity between Syria and Egypt in 1958, which brought to the Arab masses great hopes. Then there was the tripartite union between Syria, Egypt and Iraq in 1963 which, had it seen the light in the manner that those who believed had wanted, the Arabs would not have been in the state they are in nowadays, a state of humiliation because of the defeat of the June War, and the subsequent continuation of the aggression and challenge by Israel and imperialism. At the moment we are living the experiment of the tripartite federation between Egypt, Syria and Libya and the difficult process of the proposed comprehensive unity between Libya and Egypt. Since this federation came into being under the circumstances of defeat and deterioration it started as a hope, and despite the fact that two years have elapsed since its inception it has remained weak and regretfully it is on the way of becoming dormant* 22 because of the ruling petit bourgeoisie logic, the adherence to regional conditions and interests and the mentality of hesitation and fear with regard to the pursuit of serious steps aimed at unity. It is also worthwhile pointing out to the clumsy, if not paralytic, attempt at the establishment of a unity between North and South Yemen. Also we can mention the proposal made by Iraq in 1972 for the establishment of a union among Syria, Egypt and Iraq as well as any other progressive Arab state. This proposal did not receive the necessary response and remained shelved. As I have mentioned these proposals earlier and there is no scope at this point to go into the details of and to analyze their experiences and attempts. We will restrict ourselves to certain general opinions and observations with regard to the obstacles that stand in the way of unity, the prevailing circumstances and the basic conditions which are needed for its success, all from the progress and experiences of unity and what accompanied it whether success or retrogression, hopes or failure and end up by answering the following question: Where are we vis-a-vis unity at this stage and is it on the upward or downward or static trend?

However, it is appropriate before answering this question to point out that what we shall mention here as observations and results are derived from living these experiences and attempts and from practice and practical experience rather than deriving them from theoretical readings or mere mental analysis. This in our opinion makes these observations more important and beneficial.

1. The continuation of official Arab action by way of the Arab League —despite its immense failure to express the unity ambitions of the masses and its inability during the last 30 years to develop in a manner that would pave the way for and serve the interest of unity— is an indication of how much the Arab rulers can undertake. It is not expected that they should do more as long as the League's formats and the Arab summit and solidarity conferences, which are devoid of any progressive connotation, continue to command their respect and attention.

They are incapable of realizing any radical steps towards unity since actual events have affirmed that as a result of class composition, their activities are based on regional concepts and are carried out with a wavering middle-of-the-road mentality, far removed from the revolutionary spirit needed to achieve unity as a revolutionary aim. For this reason it is illogical for us to ask them for what they do not possess and to heap on them what they cannot endure. We must therefore look towards those forces with the revolutionary spirit and the ability to shoulder the burdens of unity. We will not be wrong or misled if we consider the struggling masses and their revolutionary vanguards as the forces, which are competent to wage the struggle for unity till the very end, considering that it is they who have the real interest in unity. We can also add that if Zionism, imperialism and the bourgeois affiliated to them as well as the opportunist and agent elements who are hostile to the aims of the Arab revolution are inimical to Arab unity out of an awareness and determination, the conditions of ignorance, illiteracy and political and ideological backwardness are an infertile ground for the growth and flourishing of unity. Meanwhile when the petit bourgeoisie are in power they constitute, because of their incompetence and mentality, a real obstacle in the way of unity although they may not necessarily be against it both emotionally and consciously.

2. The aforementioned statement leads us to explain what we mean by the dependence on the masses and benefiting from them so that such statements do not remain as mere glittering words without a definite meaning. When we decide that the masses are inclined towards unity we should carefully investigate the motives behind and realities of such inclinations —whether they are of a sustained permanent nature or merely emotional manifestations that come to the fore as a reaction to major national events. Also how to organize and develop such inclinations so that they become an effective force and a basic guarantee for protecting any step towards unity and to impart to them a certain immunity against the misleading and deceptive methods exercised by the propaganda and information machinery. It is true that the masses are an inexhaustible source of struggling power and revolutionary capacity except that such power and capacity could remain dormant and ineffective unless there are organized revolutionary leaderships.

The theoretical relationship between the masses and their organized revolutionary vanguards leads us to point out to the conditions that these vanguards must fulfill. To be able to win the support of the masses and utilize their capacity and leadership in a manner directed towards unity, these vanguards must have a clear vision —that is a revolutionary scientific ideology as well as a well-knit and specific organization— based on the toiling classes which are qualified to continue the struggle till the very end —and led by a leadership enjoying high-level mental and moral standards and an ability to understand realities and to find the best practical and scientific methods for change. In other words, the masses are an ineffective force without an aware and struggling leadership, that is, without an effective ideological revolutionary organization that is able to rise to the level of its aims, an organization in which both the leadership and the base are endowed with considerable feelings of responsibility, an awareness of the particular stage and its requirements, an absolute faith in the justice of their aims and an unswerving determination to continue the struggle for these aims.

Thus revolutionary and aware leaderships —from the point of view of political parties, and also political parties from the point of view of the masses, have a major and effective role in creating an awareness among the masses and developing and revolutionizing their potential. Therefore, we consider hostility towards progressive political parties as a grave error or stemming from suspicious objectives and to say the least such hostility is aimed at hampering the role of the masses and subsequently paving the way for bureaucratic and dictatorial practices in the affairs of government. As for the question of the faults and deficiencies in the activities of these parties these must not be considered as a justification for fighting them or abolishing them by decisions enacted from above as is the usual practice of the revolutionary military regimes. Only these faults and deficiencies must be fought and at the same time the positive aspects in the activities of the parties must be strengthened to enable them to fulfill their duties and play their role in creating awareness among and directing the masses.

To be fair in this context we must say that the majority of the existing popular leaderships are not in a position, which is equitable to the vastness of the aims and the requirements of the stage. We find that they are a set stage for repeated divisions and continued competition and which allows secondary contradictions to prevail over what is basic and fundamental, thereby weakening the confidence of the masses in them especially after reaching a stage of revolutionary exhaustion. Perhaps this points out to the need to surpass these leaderships and to find alternatives to them, which may be more capable in attracting the masses and their leaderships.

3. Since we discussed the necessity for revolutionary organization in the realization of unity it is perhaps useful to mention a certain concept which at times is publicized and finds support, namely, that the realization of unity requires the establishment of a single party for unity or one Arab movement encompassing the whole Arab nation and including all the struggling forces so as to avoid continued disputes and damaging party contradictions. There is no doubt that this concept may be theoretically correct and attractive and if it is possible to put it into practice will constitute the best possible instrument to achieve unity. However, by taking a closer look and analyzing it in detail it will be seen that it is in fact not practical and lies within the framework of an aspiration, which is far removed from realities and objectivity. The Arab Ba’ath Socialist Party has spent 30 years trying to win over the Arab masses and has not been able to realize this concept and to become the strongest party in the whole of the Arab states. Also, the repeated attempts undertaken by many through the encouragement of Abdel Nasser and his vast organizations, to realize a unified Arab movement ended up in failure. Not only this, but if we take a close look at the concept from the various attempts at its application within a narrower regional framework —which is the easier framework— we find that these have also failed since the Socialist Unions in each of Egypt, Libya and the Sudan have been unable to win over the masses and their leaderships because they were instituted by decisions from above, and they did not have in their formation, concepts, leadership and basis, the conditions necessary for the establishment of a struggling revolutionary organization along the lines we have mentioned earlier. This then poses the question: What are the best possible ways and means to achieve unity within the conditions of the present Arab realities? The answer briefly and within the limits of our conclusions and beliefs is in the establishment of a strong progressive front to include all the Arab organizations and parties which are progressive and inclined towards unity, work in accordance with a well-studied charter that defines the common objectives and unified action, struggle to remove the obstacles in the path of unity and strengthen the factors and positive potentials that lead to its realization.

While we appreciate the many difficulties and serious obstacles which stand in the way of implementing this proposal, such as sensitivities, differences of opinion among the progressive parties with varying degrees of responsibility and in view of the fact that most of them, because of the weakness of their composition and leadership, do not have the freedom of action and activity in isolation from the influence of the regime in the country where such action and activity are taking place. Again while appreciating these conditions as well as other negative factors we believe that they are positive factors that could induce the progressive forces to work together in a common front.

In the forefront of these positive factors is the escalating challenge to these forces by the Zionist-imperialist-reactionary alliance, the rising awareness and feeling of responsibility among the masses and their organized vanguards and the closing of the gap that separated the progressive forces in their political and strategic aims. Perhaps the meeting of these forces and their joint action in the «Arab Joint Front* for the support of the Palestinian movement —despite the fact that all this has its weaknesses and shortcomings— provides evidence of the possibility of joint action between these progressive forces. In addition there is the rise of national progressive fronts in certain Arab states and many other countries of the world, which had gone through circumstances and conditions similar to those prevailing in the Arab world at present.

4. After discussing the role of the masses and their revolutionary vanguards in the building up of unity and in protecting it we can now explain the need for understanding the existing realities in every state and not surpassing it because such understanding bears a direct relationship to the establishments of unity on a sound basis. What we mean is to recognize the forces that are for and against unity and to discover the obstacles that stand in its way which are inherent in the thinking of the rulers and their class composition, in the past historical contradictions —individual, tribal and mythological beliefs— and in the role of Zionism, Israel, imperialism and reaction together with a scientific knowledge of the laws of development as well as the positive and negative aspects of the political, social and economic realities. Such knowledge in itself is a source of strength as August Comte had said. Moreover, it is not possible to arrive at a sound position without such knowledge. For example, the unity between Syria and Egypt in 1958 was established mainly on the basis of enthusiasm, belief and emotional drive with little scientific planning and field study of the political, social and economic realities in each of the two countries. Thus, there was a lack of balance between the scientific knowledge of the existing realities and their effects and complications, and the national emotion towards unity and the need for its establishment. In other words, the enthusiasm for and belief in unity had overcome any objective thinking aimed at its protection and development. Perhaps our concern and benevolence for unity are the reasons that prevent us from going over its serious obstacles and make us defend our reason, objectivity and planning while avoiding, in urging its establishment, resort to emotional and rhetoric techniques. At this point we must go on to say: We must differentiate very clearly between the knowledge of realities, the need to understand them and the determination' to change them and the-question of pausing before such realities, fearing the difficulties and complications arising there from and subsequently surrendering to them. Anyone who is an advocate of unity will, because of his appreciation of the most difficult obstacles find a way to overcome them through persistence and struggle. On the other hand, those who do not believe in unity will make out of the simplest obstacle and excuse for retreat and neglect. In this context it must be pointed out that some of the enemies of unity —out of their cunning and deception— if they demand that studies should be undertaken and that unity should not be rushed, they are merely trying to postpone or avoid it: and if they demand additional reasoning and less emotionalism they are only trying to procrastinate and delay. Thus they are fighting it under the guise of showing concern to it and harming it by pretending to defend it.

When we criticize the emotional technique in striving to achieve unity we do not mean that the masses should work in this field without reaction or emotion since these latter manifestations express in one way or another the masses' enthusiasm and great attachment to unity. However, to ensure that the emotions and reactions of the masses are converted into an effective and constructive force in building and protecting unity, an explanation must be made of its difficulties, concepts, conditions for its success, the reasons for its setbacks in previous experiences and the scientific and practical formats necessary for its establishment within the present circumstances and realities.

One criticism that may be leveled against the Ba’ath Party lies in the fact that prior to the unity of Egypt and Syria in 1958 and the tripartite federation agree -men between Syria, Egypt and Iraq in 1963, it undertook a massive emotional mobilization of the masses without any explanation or classification —at the same level as that of the mobilization— of the requirements for unity, its factors and guarantees. Every time the Party participated in unity negotiations it did not have on hand any clear constitutional format or scientific study on the subject. Thus the living experience affirms that if determining and adopting worthwhile slogans that express the aims of any particular stage, it is yet more important that the concepts of these slogans are clarified in a scientific manner based on studies and serious research together with knowledge of the possibility of their implementation successfully.

5. These conclusions lead us to comment on the concept of unity and its importance in protecting it and safeguarding its continuity. If we review the unity experiments from the fifties up till the present time and arrive at conclusions with regard to the points of weakness and shortcomings of its constitution as well as the elements of failure in its progress, we will find that the lack of the concept of socialist democracy is in the forefront of these elements. To be more precise in what we have said we will briefly explain what we mean by the concept of socialist democracy as follows:

The required democracy within the framework of unity means giving the masses and their revolutionary vanguards freedom of action and activity and giving enough scope for the development of their inherent huge potential through practicing actual struggle and living experience. It also means refusing to follow any of the pursuits of the autocratic and dictatorial regimes, fighting the existing techniques based on suppression, terrorism and domination and at the same time preventing bureaucracy, the machinery of suppression and the police from controlling the affairs of state and the fate of the people.

Democracy, in view of its relation to socialism and the masses, does not mean granting economic freedom as it is understood by the capitalist Western regimes, but the realization of social justice in a manner that prohibits the exploitation of man by his brother man, or the economic and subsequent political control and domination of the rich minority over the poor majority in the name of freedom and democracy. In other words: There is no democracy with individualism, bureaucracy and the abrogation of the role of the masses.

As regards socialism, it means the abolishment of feudalism and capitalism as well as all forms of exploitation. It also involves comprehensive scientific planning, national ownership of the means of production and striving to provide equality and the elimination of class distinctions. Also realizing social and economic justice, ensuring the application of equal opportunities and the right to work under suitable conditions for every citizen, and considering work as the primary source of livelihood and finally freeing the individual from the problems of unemployment, poverty, ignorance and disease. However, in my opinion, this kind of desired socialism will not bear fruit in the best possible manner unless it is realized within the framework of Arab unity, at the pan-Arab level, and not at the regional level, where there is available a vast potential for the development of the economy, raw materials, science and technology, heavy industry, and large-scale market outlets in addition to extensive manpower and surplus capital. Also here is a great potential to confront the international monopolies, economic pressure of the major powers and to dispense with large loans that may well lead to a kind of economic dependence and subsequently to a political dependence of the lending states.

Thus we notice from the above and as we have mentioned in Chapter Three that there is a close relationship between unity, freedom and socialism and that the interrelation of these three aims is so strong that it is difficult to separate one from the other and all three appear to be three sides to the same aim, namely, the desired comprehensive renaissance of the Arab nation.

To summarize what we are trying to explain with regard to the concept of unity we can state the following:

a) Any step toward socialism at the regional level will remain limited and incomplete and will lose its importance if it becomes an alternative to unity or a justification to its non-fulfillment or a preoccupation in its stead.

b) Also, socialism without a popular democracy will be changed into a kind of Fascism or bureaucratic rule and thus detract the masses' enthusiasm and support both of which are the important pillars for its success and continuity.

c) As for political democracy, as it stands in certain Arab states, it will continue to be fraud and incapable of providing the suitable atmosphere to make use of the inherent talents and potentialities and to bring out the dormant drive of the masses for struggle and revolution, if it is unaccompanied by a social democracy, that is socialism.

Therefore we can deduce from the above that unity without its democratic and socialist concept can be likened to a dead tree whose sap —which gave it the elements of life and growth— has completely dried up.

6. In this paragraph we will deal with the danger arising from the establishment of various exemplary forms of unity whose outside appearance mask their inner substance and which subsequently aim at spreading despair, weariness and disappointment. In this respect, the responsibility falls in the first place on the rulers who have established it, implemented it and chosen its format. In this regard I recall a statement attributed to Alexander II of Russia about the peasants when he said: «We must liberate the peasants from above so that they may not be liberated from below*. Does not this kind of thinking apply to what most of the Arab rulers want and do when they undertake, or are forced to undertake, any step towards unity? In fact, if we set aside incentives and intentions and look at the practical results which are the best yardstick we will find that the past experiences of unity express the will of the rulers and their regional concepts and that they conform to their interests in maintaining their rule within the framework of their understanding and the limits of their ambitions. At the same time, we will find that these experiences do not embody the masses' demands and do not conform to their aspirations. It is from this that we insist, as we have said earlier, that any step towards unity is doomed to failure if it is dictated from above in artificial forms and if it is isolated from the masses and their revolutionary vanguards.

Perhaps the most dangerous negative effects on the concept of unity, its struggle and the possibility of its application are those stemming from repeated setbacks and failures in its experiments or from aborting it and converting it into a mere appearance, empty of its concepts and substance. It is thus that despair finds its way into the hearts of people and faith in the usefulness and possible application of unity is destroyed. There is nothing more difficult for a human being than to build up a hope for a particular aim and to rejoice at its achievement only to find it on its way to disappearing. It is at this point that he bemoans his luck and tries to comfort himself with patience and control. His enthusiasm will cool and he will become disinterested until the revolutionary vanguards move him to the struggle once more and instigate him to defend the aims that were falsified and which to him if seriously applied are a way to salvation. Thus the organized forces must persist in explaining the truth so that the masses will continue to be aware of the methods of falsification and deception and will be able to understand and undermine them. Subsequently, they will be prepared to resume the struggle in an effort to realize steps aimed at real unity regardless of the cost or of the sacrifice.

7. Discussing the affairs of unity has many aspects and we cannot go into the details of its principle problems in the few pages available in this book. However, it is perhaps beneficial to explain and discuss some of the wrong concepts about unity such as the statements that say that its success requires similar objective economic and social circumstances in every Arab state, or that its realization necessarily depends on the assumption of power by the ruling class, or that it is subject to the liberation of the Arabs from imperialist control and influence or that there should be appropriate Arab and international circumstances, or even the reverse, that it must be realized because of the unity of language and historical bonds and common interests as if that is all there is to achieve it —in isolation from the will for the struggle as well as planning and awareness.

Finally, we would like to answer the following question: What is the fate of unity and what is its future? Is it growing and on the upward trend or is it dormant and on the downward trend?

From all that appears on the surface, there are indications of pessimism and negativism. However, a careful examination of the situation and going beyond external appearances shows in my opinion scope for optimism. We can perhaps affirm this by pointing to a number of facts the most important of which are the following:

a) The rulers who set up figurative federations between their respective countries and subsequently fill the world with praise for the federation claiming that it is the hope that realizes for the nation the much-desired glory and strength. Such rulers, who aim at such action to pass the time and incite the masses, forget that through this, their method, they are destroying the faith of the masses in them and that they are leading the masses to opposition and to express their indignation whenever possible.

Despite the fact that such falsification and deception harm the cause of unity, and at the same time sow the seeds of indignation which are nursed by the people through struggle and sacrifice to enable them to overthrow the rulers who have falsified their aims. We are certain that the day is not far in which the rulers will be completely bared and they will not be able to pursue their falsification and their deception of the masses and subsequently will fall.

b) Since challenge as Toynbee has said, is the most important incentive for progress, what Zionism and imperialism have meted out to our Arab nation in the form of conspiracies and challenge has not been known in modem history. The establishment of Israel as an alien and artificial entity in the Arab homeland was aimed at expansion, aggression and the break up of Arab unity in addition to sowing the seeds of dissension among them, terrorizing and depleting their potential and maintaining them in a state of backwardness and weakness that will enable the Zionist-imperialist alliance to control them and exploit their resources. Despite the ugly military defeats, which the Arabs had sustained in their wars with the Zionist entity for the last thirty years, these wars of destiny, which involved failures and victories and were accompanied with setbacks and victories, were among the most important factors to kindle nationalist feelings among the Arabs and in deepening and expanding the struggle. The Arabs after the defeat of the June War and because of it, reached a stage of division, deterioration and retrogression which made many, inside and outside the Arab world, think that they will never rise again and that the much-desired unity among them had been transformed into a mirage and some kind of dream.

However, the October 1973 war has expelled these assumptions when it showed that the flames of the war had melted away the differences and instigated the disputant rulers to participate in the battle. The war also affirmed that the Arab masses —from the Gulf to the Atlantic— had loved Arab unity with all their feelings and emotions and expressed their great adherence to it.

c) If we assume that imperialism and the Arab reactionary regimes have been able to «tame» the Arab progressive regimes, which are exhausted, and to force them to go along with them either by pressure and threats or money and promises and subsequently to force them to accept a peaceful settlement with the Zionist entity. Such a settlement, if concluded, will nor erase the last thirty years which were full of the tragedies and disasters committed by the Zionist entity and it will not prevent the Zionists from practicing methods of aggression and challenge in the future. Moreover, any peaceful settlement will carry with it injustice and unfairness to the Arabs as long as such a settlement is based on the U.N. Security Council Resolution No. 242, which was the fruit of the June defeat, affirms the recognition of Israel and ignores the substance of the Palestinian problem by considering it a problem of refugees.

No matter what the circumstances and justifications for this settlement, it will only add further new complications to the historical struggle between Zionism and imperialism on the one side and the Arab nation on the other. In addition, the vagrant contradiction between the interests and aims of the Arab and Zionist existence will further inflame the factors of the struggle between them while at the same time it will be the most important incentive to pursue the path of Arab unity.

d) When we notice that many political forces at the popular and official levels have abandoned their hostility to unity willy-nilly and have expressed their interest in it; and when we notice that those rulers who are most attached to regional conditions do not dare these days to belittle unity but claim that they are concerned about it, we can understand from all that that unity has become a popular demand and an aim that will not be ignored. Any aim which reaches this level and becomes the center of interest of the masses and their emotions; and when it becomes a synonym to the meanings of strength and honour or will lead to them, then it will be achieved no matter how long it takes and regardless of the cost. In addition, the masses in time will acquire an increased awareness and resistance to believing slogans put forward by the rulers. The organized vanguards of the masses will also become capable of analyzing the truth of glittering slogans and the objectives of attractive statements made by the politicians and those who claim to advocate unity.

In this respect we must warn against statements which are full of assurances and attractions and at the same time we must strengthen the pursuit and double the efforts and the struggle, because unity will not be realized except at the hands of those who believe in it and struggle for it.

e) In this age —the age of the atom and vast technological progress— where great advances have been made in the means of communications and the exchange of influences among the people and countries of the world, and with the increased opportunities of competition among the advanced powerful states —the gap between these states and the weaker backward states becomes more evident each day. The road before the smaller nations is nearly closed in the event they desire to catch up with the strong civilized countries. Moreover, certain states as those in Europe, which were not long ago considered to be major powers— such as France, Britain and Federal Germany— are beginning to realize that they are unable to maintain their political, economic and military strength and to compete with and stand fast against the major forces of the world such as the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. at present and China in the future, unless they develop the European Common Market and realize some form of political unity among them. This state of affairs is no longer a subject of statements and ambitions but has evolved into the undertaking of concrete steps in this direction.

Moreover, the African nations with their different interests and origins have gone a long way in developing the Organization of African Unity in a manner that best serves their appreciation of developments aimed at the formation of strong federations of blocs among peoples with common interests.

From the aforementioned, we can say that the Arab struggle for Arab unity does not only conform to the concept of development in this age but is a vital and imperative necessity so long as they have no alternative to liberation, development and catching up with civilization and progress and there is no scope for them to rise to the standards of the civilized nations, except through the realization of their unity. In my opinion, this truth, which becomes clearer in the minds of the Arabs with the passage of time, will have a considerable effect in bringing unity closer to its realization.

f) It has often been said that the main purpose for the establishment of Israel in the heart of the Arab homeland is to ruin unity and prevent its realization, and that Israel, which is supported by Zionism and imperialism, possesses vast means and capabilities for this purpose. In this connection, we must mention the following:

1) Why should we assume that this state of division in the Arab world will last forever, and at the same time why should we assume that the state of harmony in Israel will last until the Day of Atonement? And who said that the presently cohesive Israeli society because of its fear on the one hand and the strength of Zionist propaganda on the other will continue to be cohesive in the future after its fears have been mostly defrayed and it will have new aims and needs which were previously kept away from it?

Such assumptions do not lend themselves to reason nor to the history of nations and peoples. Moreover, some results of the October war have proved the truth of what we have just said, where the Arabs were drawn towards unity and certain manifestations of divisions have appeared within Israel. Had the fighting continued for a while longer and had it not been aborted by some Arab rulers, there would have appeared graver and more far-reaching effects. If we go back to the expectations and anticipations of some of the world's leading politicians and thinkers, such as De Gaulle, Toynbee, Deutscher, Jacques Berc and others who have a far-reaching insight, we will find that there is a positive optimism for the Arabs and a black future for Israel.

2) Who said that the strength of the Zionist and imperialist propaganda machinery is able to hide the facts and realize its objectives in deceiving and misleading every age and until the end of time? Was not world public opinion, prior to June, on Israel's side and has it not changed these days and particularly after the October war to the side of the Arabs because the truth about the Zionist-imperialist aggressive existence had become clear? Doesn't this change in world public opinion have a weakening effect on Israel and strengthening effect on the Arabs?

Also, who said that America would continue forever to give massive support to Israel as a blind man who cannot see his way or a fool who doesn't realize his interest and does not care about the indignation and anger of the world?

Did not France and Britain, which played this role in the first half of this century subsequently withdraw from it when they realized their interest in such withdrawal?

3) The economic, human and scientific resources in Israel are being exploited to the full extent and the available opportunities for increasing them is very little except for the immigration and contributions, which also must cease. On the other hand the opposite is true with the Arabs where we notice that the vast economic and human resources are still inherent and unexploited, and that there is a great possibility of doubling them. The time element plays its role in increasing it as the sphere of these educated and specialized Arabs is expanded and as they progress in their planning and development, their exploitation of their huge resources and particularly their oil resources. Therefore, how can Israel be victorious over the Arabs and how can it play havoc with their unity and hamper their awakening?

In view of these facts we can say with great confidence and without being personally optimistic or having a divine belief that Arab unity is coming no doubt —sooner or later.

* End of series.

Notes Chapter Six

21.This chapter was written towards the end of 1973and was published in a book entitled (Hawl al-Wihdah al- Arabiyah) (On Arab Unity) - 2nd edition.

22 An editorial in the Libyan newspaper al-Fajr, al-Jadid.

Back to Main Page