Arabs must unite to have a say in region

At the end of George W. Bush's second term, there was an underlying feeling in the Middle East that Arab states would wake up to the changes happening in their backyards - the rising powers of Iran and Turkey and the different forms of external interferences, ranging from full-on US-led occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan to the application of soft power and smart power, whether directly or through international bodies.

After all, in the past eight years, Arab leaders had become too comfortable with Bush setting an inflexible agenda.

It was hoped by many in the region at least that there would be a solid attempt by the Arab states to collectively work on the main issues facing them, including the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the occupation of Iraq and a rising Iran. They would also have to look at their own divisions (Egypt and Saudi Arabia versus Syria and, to a lesser extent, Qatar) and attempt to move beyond them.

Four months into Barack Obama's presidency, Arabs have done very little. In fact, the Israeli onslaught on Gaza in January showcased brilliantly the extent of their disunity and impotence. They were unable to even agree on a meeting or a word of condemnation, let alone seek action against Israel's indiscriminate killings. In this regard, it is far less challenging to recollect the failures of the Arab League, than the little they have achieved over the years.

The problem of Palestine has existed for over half a century and until today, Arab states have, by and large, failed to play an effective role in resolving it or bringing any form of justice to the Palestinians. In fact they seem bored of it, and recognise that to get involved is to get involved in failure.

Aside from the Palestine question, Arabs were challenged by the previous US administration with the 2003 US invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq. Other than agreeing to condemn the occupation, which actually came a few years later, little was done to try to stop the US and the allied forces from settling on Iraqi territory. The only measure of success, one could argue, was the Arab League's position, which came later than it should have, on the Iraqi refugees.

Yet, there was hope that with the change in US leadership, the Arab states could find a better partner for peace and a more flexible leader to address their concerns and needs. Thus far, Arab states have failed to mobilise all their political resources in order to get the attention they need from Obama and his team.

On the Arab-Israeli conflict, it seems the Arabs have finally got something right as they discussed during the recent Doha meet, dubbed the 'reconciliation summit', the urgent need to put a time frame on their Arab initiative offer. This has been on the table since 2002, but has never been accepted by Israel. How ironic though that as the Arab states insist on reviving the Arab peace initiative, Israel has just elected a far-right extremist government that does not appear interested in peace talks.

Egypt's decision to 'boycott' the Doha conference inevitably weakened the overall meeting and it remains to be seen whether or not it will impact the Palestinian reconciliation talks, which is an Egyptian initiative aimed at uniting all of the Palestinian factions. What's more, Obama's choice of Turkey and not Egypt as his first Muslim and Middle Eastern destination further puts things into perspective, in terms of Egypt's weakening position.

Unsurprisingly, there was no quarrel at the recent gathering when it came to condemning the International Criminal Court's decision to issue an arrest warrant against Sudanese President Omar Hassan Al Bashir over alleged human rights violations in Darfur. This was swift and effortless.

But there are pressing issues that must be addressed immediately in the coming period. One of these concerns is how the Arab states will define their relationship with Israel. We've already seen signs of Qatar pushing for possible direct relations. Also, is there agreement on how they would like to characterise their relationship with Washington, given the new leadership?

Defining relations with Iran is another urgent matter that would ideally require a united stance from the region's main players. Sharp differences of opinion and policy already exist amongst Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and Syria and Qatar.

There is a high level of anxiety in the region and Arab states are looking divided and even confused, with few collective standpoints amongst them. The good news is that it is never too late to sort out the main issues facing the region collectively. And hopefully, they will put their strategic tools to good use with the new US team. Their other option is for the strong players (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Syria) to go it alone, although from experience, this will prove harmful in the long run.

Put simply, it is far easier for the US to deal with 10 different voices coming out of the region, than to deal with a strong united one. It is time Arab states have a bigger say in how things are run in their own backyards.