Azmi Bishara, a member of Israel’s Knesset representing the Arab Balad party, cheered Iraqi resistance to American “invaders” in Iraq and praised a revitalized pan-Arabism in the al-Ahram Weekly (of March 27 - April 2, 2003), published in Egypt.
Bishara’s al-Ahram article begins by describing the difficulties faced by the coalition forces in Iraq, saying: “The real Basra did not surrender. It refused to fall at the first sound of the bugle of advancing troops. The experts miscalculated.... They forgot that Basra is an Arab and Iraqi town, and that Iraq is a sovereign Arab state.” MK Bishara goes on to explain that “Irrespective of what the Americans may do after the end of this war, whoever cooperates with them will not be cooperating with benign victors but with wily invaders.”
Bishara goes on to praise the Iraqi resistance to the American “invaders”, noting that Iraq is “a cohesive Arab country, not Grenada or Panama, not Afghanistan or the Taliban. Iraq is a civil and orderly Arab country, with a secular regime.” The Iraqi resistance, according to Bishara, “is of great historic importance. This importance exceeds any losses the current regime and its supporters may endure.” The importance of the Iraqi resistance to American forces, for MK Bishara, is that it will remind Israelis and Americans of the policy of violence used by the Hizbullah - successfully, in his view - to remove the IDF and the South Lebanese Army from Lebanon. “Iraqi resistance would force the Americans to rethink their plans for Iraq and for the entire region,” Bishara writes, “The Iraqi resistance would also force the Israelis to rethink their regional schemes. Some Israelis have forgotten the Lebanon lesson. Now they may have to think again about Palestine.” In short, Iraqis taking up arms against the Americans and British is a sign that Arabs can, and will, fight.
Widespread Arab solidarity with Iraq and against America has been beneficial, and is a harbinger of a positive turn towards pan-Arabism, according to Azmi Bishara. In the short-term, “Solidarity has forced the Americans to be more selective with their combat tactics.... It sends a clear message to the United States: This region is not America's backyard, or Israel's for that matter.”
Taking a wider view of the phenomenon of Arab solidarity with Iraq, Bishara writes that “solidarity with the Iraqis once again proves this most vital fact: Pan-Arabism is alive. Arab masses in Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Lebanon, and Syria did not take to the streets to support the Taliban. But they did to support Palestine and Iraq. What matters is not the slogans they chanted but the evidence of vitality they provided. The momentum of Pan-Arabism may – if tapped – provide the alternative political vision, the legitimate and democratic programme, for which we have been waiting.”
Pan-Arabism is the philosophy, most famously advocated by Egypt’s Gamal ‘Abd el-Nasser, that calls for an Arab empire, or supra-state in the Middle East, at its most extreme, or a confederated ‘United States of Arabdom’, at its most mild. It is the philosophy underpinning the Baathist political program in both Iraq and Syria, and is often referred to as Arab National-Socialism.
In no versions of Baathism/pan-Arabism is there room for a Jewish state in the midst of the Arab supra-national homeland. As Syrian schoolbooks teach: Israel divides the “east of the Arab homeland from its west... preventing the establishment of Arab unity....” (National Socialist (Pan-Arab) Education for the Eighth Grade, Syria, 1998-1999, as reported by the Middle-East Media Research Institute, Washington DC)
With his recent al-Ahram Weekly article, Azmi Bishara makes it clear that while coalition forces are making every effort to destroy the Baathist infrastructure in Iraq, a representative of that same political world-view sits in the Israeli Knesset.
Bishara’s al-Ahram article begins by describing the difficulties faced by the coalition forces in Iraq, saying: “The real Basra did not surrender. It refused to fall at the first sound of the bugle of advancing troops. The experts miscalculated.... They forgot that Basra is an Arab and Iraqi town, and that Iraq is a sovereign Arab state.” MK Bishara goes on to explain that “Irrespective of what the Americans may do after the end of this war, whoever cooperates with them will not be cooperating with benign victors but with wily invaders.”
Bishara goes on to praise the Iraqi resistance to the American “invaders”, noting that Iraq is “a cohesive Arab country, not Grenada or Panama, not Afghanistan or the Taliban. Iraq is a civil and orderly Arab country, with a secular regime.” The Iraqi resistance, according to Bishara, “is of great historic importance. This importance exceeds any losses the current regime and its supporters may endure.” The importance of the Iraqi resistance to American forces, for MK Bishara, is that it will remind Israelis and Americans of the policy of violence used by the Hizbullah - successfully, in his view - to remove the IDF and the South Lebanese Army from Lebanon. “Iraqi resistance would force the Americans to rethink their plans for Iraq and for the entire region,” Bishara writes, “The Iraqi resistance would also force the Israelis to rethink their regional schemes. Some Israelis have forgotten the Lebanon lesson. Now they may have to think again about Palestine.” In short, Iraqis taking up arms against the Americans and British is a sign that Arabs can, and will, fight.
Widespread Arab solidarity with Iraq and against America has been beneficial, and is a harbinger of a positive turn towards pan-Arabism, according to Azmi Bishara. In the short-term, “Solidarity has forced the Americans to be more selective with their combat tactics.... It sends a clear message to the United States: This region is not America's backyard, or Israel's for that matter.”
Taking a wider view of the phenomenon of Arab solidarity with Iraq, Bishara writes that “solidarity with the Iraqis once again proves this most vital fact: Pan-Arabism is alive. Arab masses in Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Lebanon, and Syria did not take to the streets to support the Taliban. But they did to support Palestine and Iraq. What matters is not the slogans they chanted but the evidence of vitality they provided. The momentum of Pan-Arabism may – if tapped – provide the alternative political vision, the legitimate and democratic programme, for which we have been waiting.”
Pan-Arabism is the philosophy, most famously advocated by Egypt’s Gamal ‘Abd el-Nasser, that calls for an Arab empire, or supra-state in the Middle East, at its most extreme, or a confederated ‘United States of Arabdom’, at its most mild. It is the philosophy underpinning the Baathist political program in both Iraq and Syria, and is often referred to as Arab National-Socialism.
In no versions of Baathism/pan-Arabism is there room for a Jewish state in the midst of the Arab supra-national homeland. As Syrian schoolbooks teach: Israel divides the “east of the Arab homeland from its west... preventing the establishment of Arab unity....” (National Socialist (Pan-Arab) Education for the Eighth Grade, Syria, 1998-1999, as reported by the Middle-East Media Research Institute, Washington DC)
With his recent al-Ahram Weekly article, Azmi Bishara makes it clear that while coalition forces are making every effort to destroy the Baathist infrastructure in Iraq, a representative of that same political world-view sits in the Israeli Knesset.