How Arab Rulers Seek to 'Reform' Iraq

Arabia Deceptia: this terms was the title of a column written by the late Walter Lippmann after the Arab-Israeli Six-Day War of 1967. It is as relevant today as it was then.
With the political mood in Washington shifting away from pushing democracy and toward a return to the old cold-war era emphasis on 'stability', regional rulers feel 'off the hook'. There is still the messy business in Iraq which they would like to deal with, on their on terms, if they can swing it.
The Arab political system has convinced itself that events in Iraq must be the work of 'foreigners', part of some grand scheme. Some blame Iran, which is certainly involved in Iraq. Some blame a joint Israeli-Iranian plot: considered far-fetched anywhere in the world except in Arabia. Others see a secret American-Iranian plan to divide up the region- a sort of modern day Sykes-Picot deal, just like the Brits and the French did after World War I. Others throw in Israel as the third partner in this plot. Some old habits do not die: self-delusion and denial are alive and well, as ever, in Arabia. 'De Nile' is a river in Egypt, as they say.

President Mubarak of Egypt supports the new Bush plan for Iraq. But he demands that the "Iraqi" constitution be amended. To make the political process more inclusive. Mr. Mubarak, 79 years old and by now 26 years in absolute power, is planning to hand over the throne of Egypt to his son when he departs. Only once has he had to face an opponent in an election, a rigged sham election- even Jimmy Carter did not bother to show up to validate its results. That opponent in question, Ayman Nour, has been in prison on trumped up charges ever since. And Mr. Mubarak wants the "Iraqi" constitution amended to make it more inclusive.

The Saudis have also welcomed the new Bush plan, after some explanations and clarification by Secretary Rice. But they are also demanding, through their foreign minister and through the best-financed media in the third world, that the "Iraqi" constitution be amended to make it more inclusive. Saudi Arabia does not have a constitution, and 15% of its citizens who happen to be Shi'as (Shiites to some westerners) sit atop the vast petroleum fields of their ancestral lands, and these 15% aspire to be treated better, perhaps at least as third class citizens. They are not as ambitious as their counterparts, the 15% Sunnis of Iraq. You see, they are being realistic. And Saudi Arabia demands that Iraq's constitution be more inclusive.
Saudi women cannot drive a car, a motorcycle, or ride a bicycle or a mule at home. They cannot travel without being accompanied by an adult male relative. They can be divorced by a husband simply repeating "You are divorced" three times, and that divorce cannot be reversed until after the woman remarries someone else and the new marriage is 'consummated'. Not 'very nice' as Borat would say. Yet Saudi Arabia wants to improve the 'Iraqi' constitution and to reform the freely elected, albeit hapless, Iraqi government.
So do all Arab despots, kings, dictators, and presidents-for-life (the only kind of president in the Arab World, with one exception).

The problem with the Arab system is that it failed the Iraqi people time and again over 35 years. It ignored and denied the genocide against the Kurds even as the Anfal operations were at their peak. It sided with Saddam when he launched his war against Iran. Half of it sided with Saddam when he invaded Kuwait. Now they and their paid media are foolishly questioning the patriotic credentials of 85% of the Iraqi people, the Kurds and the Shi'as. Don't get me wrong: the other 15% of Iraqis, the Sunnis, have no love for the existing Arab system either. After all, this system and its governments either condoned or actively supported the war that ended their domination of Iraq.
Cheers
Mohammed