<

The Prospects of Arab Cooperation for Counter-Terrorism
Wednesday, August 25, 1999
By Reuven Paz
ICT Academic Director

Introduction
The attempts to achieve tangible cooperation between Arab states in the field of counter-terrorism stretch back to the beginning of the 1990s. For most of the Arab states, the task would seem to involve major difficulties—mutual suspicion, differences in ideology and the regime. But above all other difficulties is the delicacy needed to deal with Islamic fundamentalist or radical movements, some of which are terrorist groups or give inspiration to such terrorism.

The Islamic opposition and terrorist groups have filled a vacuum in Arab society—a vacuum caused by the weakness of the Arab Left and Pan-Arabist ideology since the mid-1970s, the decline of Palestinian nationalistic terrorism in the 1990s and the changes in inter-Arab policies after the fall of the Soviet Union. The rise of Islamist terrorism as part of anti-Western warfare confronts the Arab states with yet another obstacle; the Islamist vs. modern context to the Jihad implies a definite cultural war against modernity.

Another problem facing the Arab states is the popularity of Islamist ideas among large portions of their public. This is not necessarily a support of the content of these ideas. Rather it is a mass protest against the Arab regimes based on a variety of reasons. Thus among the Arab regimes there are conflicting interests which stand in the way of better cooperation—or any cooperation at all—in the fight against the Islamists. In addition in some states the Islamic official establishment, or parts of it, support some of the Islamist groups. This leads to further erosion in the fight against them and can lead to a conflict of interest between various elements and forces in the same state.

But it seems that above all there is the problem of the definition of terrorism in the Arab world. In particular there is the need to reach a definition that includes religiously motivated terrorism, while at the same time does not contradict the support of some Arab states of terrorism against Israel. It seems also difficult to achieve one accepted definition of Islamist terrorism. This problem highlights the different ways in which some countries regard to such terror in their own states and the other Arab states. One state may oppress the Islamist terror groups and even the Islamic opposition in its own territory, while giving refuge and even support to other Islamic groups in other Arab states—primarily if these groups fight against Israel or the United States. The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood was cruelly oppressed by the Syrian regime. However their colleagues in Hamas, their sister movement, has an office in Damascus that directs terror activity against Israel. Various Gulf states support Islamist groups in the Arab world while oppressing their own Islamists at home. The Islamic regime in the Sudan has also been a source of support for various Islamist groups in other Arab states.

All these contradictions, plus the delicate issue of confronting Islamic religious ideas, make it difficult to reach an accepted and really implemented Arab accord of counter- terrorism.

* Progress thus far
* The April 1998 agreement
* Arab criticism of the Accord
* The Interpol Convention
* The anti-terrorist pact
* Conclusions
(More: ICT.org News Source)
2002 © Institute for Counter-Terrorism.

Somewhat dated, but still a decent read,
Dan