The Arab League rebelled – nay, rose once again - against the governments shooting at the people who are demanding freedom and democracy, instead of rewarding them with salutes and reform. The League discovered, tens of years late, that there is a “serious crisis between the people and the governments in the Arab world.” No one had detected it before the capitals started drowning in blood mires and before the youth were led toward war, and the guillotine of the confrontation with the “extremists”… or the street that still “loves the president.” The League is rebelling in a “tsunami” of rage, after decades during which it merely mirrored the will, loyalties, disputes and public and hidden conflicts of the governments. In the meantime, the societies were completely absent from the scene of events, with their youth, women and elderly. The League faithfully conveyed the state of turmoil in the region, as well as its wars over the border and the existence, while even when two brothers among the member states fought, it tried to avoid Israel's mockery and settled for showing patience and upholding silence while wagering on the time factor. Today, the League does not resemble itself, and whoever reads the recent statements in which it eluded any responsibility in the killings and the oppression, would think it was an organization that did not belong to the region and did not host on its seats ministers or envoys from the countries of the revolutions, the uprisings and the blood mires still expanding among the cities, villages and deserts. And while the Baghdad Arab summit seems to be one of the likely victims of the powerful winds of change – at a time when the question is “who's next?” – the League appears to be going through a caretaking stage until the selection of a successor to Secretary General Amr Moussa. Hence, based on this, some governments are saying that it is siding with the rebels and with disobedience to secure reforms, without which the Arab world has been living for tens of years. The Arab League is renewing its youth 66 years following its birth, and it cannot be accused of being an agent for having “collaborated” with the street and the demands of the youth and the poor. However, while it can detect the problems following the long period of hibernation, it is too weak to prevent a leader from killing his citizens with canons, or convince him to make up for the sins of the regime by liquidating the past instead of the bloody liquidation of scores with the youth of change. It might be said that the Arab League is making up for its impotence and fighting through statements, while the West is using force to defend the civilians, the rebels and its interests. This is now happening in Libya where the fighting is not about to end despite the internationalization of the crisis. In the meantime, the internationalization card is used to confront Syria, but is not deterring the bloodshed. Did French President Nicolas Sarkozy not say that there can be no interference in Syria without a Security Council resolution, while London is alluding to the elimination of any obstacles facing such a resolution if the “violent oppression” is not halted? Between the hell of oppression and the inferno of the internationalization wars, each individual killed is a martyr who is promised a medal and free education for his children! Chavez talked about the “insanity” of the West in Libya, seeing how he must remain loyal to his friend. As for Putin, he has not yet figured out the paradigm of Washington and its European allies – especially France and Britain – and why they believe they had the right to execute the Colonel. “Should we bomb all locations” around the world? British Defense Secretary Liam Fox responded when asked about the “duplicity” in dealing with Libya and Syria: “We cannot do everything at the same time.” Certainly he did not say that once he completed the mission in Libya he will turn toward another location, but the European eagerness to detect any sign pointing to an American intervention enhances the doubts regarding the internationalization of human rights in the Arab world, either through soft diplomacy or the fist of NATO. The other alternative would be the hell of the confrontations on the domestic arena. This is the scenario which took Turkey by surprise – at the level of its neighbor - thus translating its discontent toward the slowness of reform in Syria by hosting a conference for the oppositionists in Istanbul. Who said that Erdogan was not also seeking the renewal of the youth of Turkey's regional role? The time has not yet come for the border fires to erupt, while the internationalization race is at its peak and the security's grip is busy producing a medal for each Arab martyr.
