What Comes After the End of Old Arab Nationalism?

How easy it is today to look around at the world surrounding us and conclude that Arab nationalism has come to an end — reduced to an empty slogan devoid of meaning or value, even a source of mockery and ridicule.

Such a conclusion appears logical in light of the fragmentation, wars, occupations, and the political and economic decline that the Arab world has endured for many years, not merely because of the current war. Any objective and impartial observer would be justified in believing that the Arab nationalist project — if we consider its beginnings to date back to the early twentieth century and its peak to have been embodied in the Nasserist era — may now be approaching its final chapter. This would become especially evident if the Palestinian cause is ultimately liquidated, the divisions of Sudan, Yemen, and Libya are entrenched, the Gulf Cooperation Council becomes fractured, external debt continues to dominate the economies of non-oil-producing states, Israel consolidates control over the fate of the region, and the Arab League loses what remains of its role.

In truth, I do not rule out the possibility that our generation may witness the end of the Arab project — a project that once stirred emotions, inspired imaginations, and mobilized aspirations, yet never truly achieved its goals. At best, it managed to establish a loose framework for consensus among Arab ruling elites and to coordinate short-term interests, without ever laying a genuine and sustainable foundation for cooperation, integration, or development.

Traditional Arabism, with which we were raised — the rhetoric of shared history, language, religion, geography, civilization, and destiny — the songs we memorized and the celebrations we watched, did not collapse because of external challenges. Every nation and every homeland faces external pressures. Rather, it was defeated under the weight of internal conflicts and divisions among the people of the same homeland, and by the failure to fulfill the aspirations of ordinary citizens for a dignified life.

Does this mean that concepts such as “the Arabs,” “Arabism,” “brotherhood,” and “Arab cooperation” have become meaningless and irrelevant?

I do not think so. What we are witnessing, in my view, is the end of an era built upon outdated ideas and obsolete concepts that time has surpassed and that proved incapable of adapting to mounting pressures and transformations. There is no harm in letting that era end. In fact, the sooner it ends, the sooner space may open for thinking about a new understanding of what it means to be Arab and how cooperation can be pursued on the basis of the vital interests of each country.

The new framework required for joint Arab cooperation should not be based on political unity, unified military forces under a single command, the abolition of borders, or the denial of differences. Rather, it should be a framework that recognizes and respects diversity, prioritizes the interests of each state, builds upon common interests and shared ground, deals realistically with disagreements and rivalries, and adopts a humanistic rather than chauvinistic intellectual foundation.

This new framework should primarily be economic in nature, because economic cooperation is the element capable of uniting people. It is what societies can rally around; it raises living standards, can be measured and evaluated, and offers the possibility of achieving tangible progress. One only has to recall the well-known example of the European Union, which remains one of the most successful models of regional cooperation in the modern era. It did not begin with dreams of political fusion, the elimination of borders, or a unified army. It began as an economic alliance between Germany and France — the bitter enemies of the Second World War — before gradually and naturally evolving into what it is today. The same applies to East Asian cooperation, which is fundamentally economic and commercial in character, as well as cooperation among Latin American states.

The desired framework should not remain the exclusive property of governments that agree today only to disagree tomorrow, ally one day and go to war the next. Rather, it should belong to the Arab peoples themselves, whose enduring and genuine interest lies in integration and cooperation, and who are capable of regulating and safeguarding the rhythm of rapprochement.

I call upon you to abandon the old and exhausted notion of Arabism and nationalism, but not to despair of what the peoples of the Arab world may still achieve together if a new framework for cooperation is established — perhaps once the war ends and emotions begin to settle.