Robert Fisk: A New Truth Dawns on the Arab World

January 26, 2011 "The Independent" - -The Palestine Papers are as damning as the Balfour Declaration. The Palestinian "Authority" - one has to put this word in quotation marks - was prepared, and is prepared to give up the "right of return" of perhaps seven million refugees to what is now Israel for a "state" that may be only 10 per cent (at most) of British mandate Palestine.

And as these dreadful papers are revealed, the Egyptian people are calling for the downfall of President Mubarak, and the Lebanese are appointing a prime minister who will supply the Hezbollah. Rarely has the Arab world seen anything like this.

To start with the Palestine Papers, it is clear that the representatives of the Palestinian people were ready to destroy any hope of the refugees going home.

It will be - and is - an outrage for the Palestinians to learn how their representatives have turned their backs on them. There is no way in which, in the light of the Palestine Papers, these people can believe in their own rights.

They have seen on film and on paper that they will not go back. But across the Arab world - and this does not mean the Muslim world - there is now an understanding of truth that there has not been before.

It is not possible any more, for the people of the Arab world to lie to each other. The lies are finished. The words of their leaders - which are, unfortunately, our own words - have finished. It is we who have led them into this demise. It is we who have told them these lies. And we cannot recreate them any more.

In Egypt, we British loved democracy. We encouraged democracy in Egypt - until the Egyptians decided that they wanted an end to the monarchy. Then we put them in prison. Then we wanted more democracy. It was the same old story. Just as we wanted Palestinians to enjoy democracy, providing they voted for the right people, we wanted the Egyptians to love our democratic life. Now, in Lebanon, it appears that Lebanese "democracy" must take its place. And we don't like it.

We want the Lebanese, of course, to support the people who we love, the Sunni Muslim supporters of Rafiq Hariri, whose assassination - we rightly believe - was orchestrated by the Syrians. And now we have, on the streets of Beirut, the burning of cars and the violence against government.

And so where are we going? Could it be, perhaps, that the Arab world is going to choose its own leaders? Could it be that we are going to see a new Arab world which is not controlled by the West? When Tunisia announced that it was free, Mrs Hillary Clinton was silent. It was the crackpot President of Iran who said that he was happy to see a free country. Why was this?

In Egypt, the future of Hosni Mubarak looks ever more distressing. His son, may well be his chosen successor. But there is only one Caliphate in the Muslim world, and that is Syria. Hosni's son is not the man who Egyptians want. He is a lightweight businessman who may - or may not - be able to rescue Egypt from its own corruption.

Hosni Mubarak's security commander, a certain Mr Suleiman who is very ill, may not be the man. And all the while, across the Middle East, we are waiting to see the downfall of America's friends. In Egypt, Mr Mubarak must be wondering where he flies to. In Lebanon, America's friends are collapsing. This is the end of the Democrats' world in the Arab Middle East. We do not know what comes next. Perhaps only history can answer this question.

Support for our Family in Egypt - One Ummah!!!! Down with the Tyrants - Queen Raynia may want to send that 1.5 tonnes of her Gold Jewelry to the Banks of Jewry Now!!!

Everyone knows, once the Arabs start they just don't stop - get 'em all out... this must continue across the region. Down with the enemies, up with Islam!  

LINK TO ARTICLE HERE

Arab rulers use handouts to ward off unrest

Wednesday, Jan 19, 2011

Arab governments have launched a wave of financial handouts since the start of the Tunisia crisis, in what analysts see as an effort to pre-empt opposition from restive publics. States across the region have announced a series of extra subsidies and tax breaks both before and after last week's departure of President Zein al-Abidine Ben Ali.

The rash of perks is viewed as a sign of concern among Middle Eastern autocrats about the potential for Tunisia's landmark uprising to embolden the peoples of other countries. Hisham Kassem, an Egyptian publisher and commentator, says repressive regimes, long dependent on pacifying their publics with largesse, were injecting "a big dose of the drug". "There is serious concern in countries with similar circumstances [to Tunisia]," says Mr Kassem. "The measures we have seen are buying time."

Yemen said on Tuesday that it was slashing taxes on businesses and individuals, while Jordan last week cut duties on petrol, kerosene and diesel. Libya has announced measures to help reduce the impact of rising food prices, while Egypt has signalled that it might increase subsidies to combat surging wheat, sugar and vegetable costs. The moves have focused attention on the precarious dependence of governments across the Middle East on handouts, either to try to quell public support for existing opposition or prevent the emergence of campaigns for greater political participation.

Analysts are questioning the durability of this approach, particularly in countries that have large populations and no, or relatively modest, revenues from oil. Sultan Al Qassemi, a prominent Emirati commentator, says: "As populations increase, many governments won't be able to subsidise all these goods. There will obviously be a tipping point when the subsidies cannot continue, as there is a difference between what the governments want to do, and what they can do." This is not the first time living costs have triggered demonstrations in the Arab world that have either promised or precipitated political change.

Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria and Jordan - exactly the countries most under scrutiny now - all saw protest and sometimes riots in the 1970s and 1980s over food prices, particularly for bread.

The Tunisian uprising against Mr Ben Ali this month - and more modest demonstrations elsewhere in the Arab world - have highlighted the important role that rising living costs continue to play in bringing people on to the streets.

Experts say some subsidy-reliant countries in both North Africa and the Levant are locked into a pattern of social control that could become increasingly tough to finance in the absence of either national resource windfalls or rapid economic growth.

Marios Maratheftis, regional head of research at Standard Chartered Bank, says: "From an economic point of view the sensible thing to do is to cut subsidies to reduce fiscal drains on the governments and economic distortions.

"But beyond the Gulf, countries in the Middle East have low gross domestic product per head ratios, and cutting subsidies at times when economic conditions are challenging carries risks of unrest."

Subsidies are becoming more contentious even in the oil-rich Gulf, where they have traditionally been seen as part of the price paid by unelected hereditary rulers for their continued authority. Kuwait this week said all citizens would receive a KD1,000 ($3,550) grant and free food staples for 13 months to celebrate the 50th anniversary of independence and also mark two other anniversaries. On energy, while Europeans often pay about $6 for a gallon of petrol, residents of the United Arab Emirates pay only $1.57 a gallon, Saudis $0.91 and Kuwaitis $0.78, according to a survey in June by AirInc, an expatriate packages consultancy. Water and electricity are similarly cheap.

The six main Gulf states have also kept a lid on prices of electricity, water and some foodstuffs, but some countries are now looking to scrap or peg back the subsidy regimes amid soaring demand for power and water.

The UAE has increased the price of petrol since AirInc's survey, while officials in several other countries have recently warned that current spending on subsidies - and the rampant, unrestrained usage it encourages - is unsustainable.

These cuts will be unpopular with Gulf nationals, experts warn, given the tacit compact between rulers and subjects in which patronage and government largesse are traded for curbs on political participation.

"Power is consolidated by distributing out jobs, rents and wealth," says one economist. "As long as the sheikhs control the oil wealth, people expect something in return."

By Michael Peel and Robin Wigglesworth

Ruling on Behalf of the “National Interest” - A Brief History of US influence in the Gulf

With the release of the recent Wikileaks cables, it is apparent indeed the utter loyalty Arab regimes hold for the American Imperialists. However, understanding these relationships requires an analysis that understands that the Anglo-Empire of our age, was split after World War II into the financialized institutions of the City of London and their Wall Street creations which control global finance through international institutions and the American military which polices the world militarily on behalf of that financialized domination.  In this paper we look at the history of US foreign policy in the Gulf Region generally and analyze how the US took over as imperialist in the region.

Of course, a necessary distinction must be made when discussing America's role in the world... the American system of political economy, the system that built the country is something that was so successful it had  Arab populations desiring US intervention in the region as the World Wars ended. Unfortunately, that system was only meant for Western nations and the US embarked on ushering in the neo-imperialist order we see today. The only platform for Muslims today must be, the absolute removal of all military personnel and bases from majority-Muslim nations, the end of support for Israel and the complete removal of support for the authoritarian regimes. Once this is established then Americans could actually contribute to the world by redeveloping original systems that, while not perfect, did contribute to the advancement of humankind.  This is a distinction between empire (Sykes-Picot versus King-Crane), an important distinction interestingly understood by this political action movement below.

Were Muslims able to rid themselves of the traitors, develop stable Islamic political, social and economic systems and return Americans to their non-interventionist attitudes of years gone by, we can make this planet sing and peace and order can be achieved. Unfortunately, it is apparent the wheels of empire have been thrust forth and the momentum is too fierce to contain. The only other option is to continue to fight therefore to make Allah's Word supreme.

Ruling on Behalf of the “National Interest”