A short reply to this question circulating in the social media.
I fundamentally disagree with the basics of the analysis and the appeal. As the question states there are Arab nations, not one. They have been divided for a long time. They do not have common interests. Nor do they have an 'Arab NATO' or form an 'Arab EU'. So any comparison with one nation like Canada or England, for example, and that the US would defend in the event of a foreign attack, is misplaced. The US in fact would hurry to defend the UAE or Saudi Arabia.
The Arab nations are divided and ruled by ruling classes (combrador bourgeoisies with different colours) that have more in common with the rulers in the West than with the Arab people in the respective countries. One has to link colonial division with the neocolonial studies as students at universities are doing. The UAE and Turkey, for example, have been expanding their strategic outreach for more capital accummulation. Saudi Arabia has made a security agreement with the US. Qatar has a lot of stakes abroad. Jordan is a US protectorate, Egypt's rulers are concerned with protecting the coup of 2013 and the economic military power of the generals and their hang-ons.
Normalisation process had already began with Israel. Israel is an aircraft carrier for the US. What is fundamental is 2011 and 2019 uprisings/revolutions and how the forces of counter-revolution regionally and internationally aborted popular regime overthrow. That is is the alternative that should be reignited, not appealing to 'abstract nations' riddled with divisions. The efforts have to be diverted to building and rebuilding movements for such a task rather than into caravans and flottias.
Comments