Joint fate and interests
When the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) was formed 36 years ago, the common dominator then was that the fate of member countries was the same at all levels, But since a few years ago, some issues became very complicated, then we got accustomed to some calm that was accompanied with caution. The dispute between GCC member states that we are witnessing today is not a political surprise, as the sides to the current dispute in the GCC saw political developments that must lead to a new vision locally and internationally. Fate is bringing member countries closer and not dividing them. Yet, today a difference came up on defining the joint fate and interests, to a point where fate became unknown under the current complications. There is a ‘list of demands,’ and there are reservations towards it too, and in all cases, demands should be negotiable to reach a pragmatic solution that makes the ceiling of demands not too high, so that the process of achievement does not become impossible. It should be realized that today’s complications are the result of political accumulations that were not dealt with from their roots, and the method of treatment was overcome with courtesy, not transparency and frankness. What we are seeing in the form of media exchanges confirm that the political environment was not right, as differences entered the stage of acceptance and not acceptance.
The terrorism’s heat has hit the Gulf countries such as what happened in the world, and there is no doubt that if there was not a cradle for terrorism in the Gulf and neighboring region, its heat would not spread to the point where we are today. Containing terrorism is a foregone conclusion, but it is important to set priorities according to their degrees, and discuss them without the consideration of winning and losing, as the loser and winner are the countries and people of the GCC. Meanwhile, the lack of a joint definition of terrorism maybe complicates reaching an agreement on the procedures to confront it.
Being strict with demands and presenting them as conditions isn’t the way to make agreements, nor decisive rejections and strict answers are a wise stand to solve crises that may become more complicated between brotherly countries who have the same fate. ‘The March of the GCC’ was not void of failures, and the best example is the clinical death of the council’s secretariat general, but this cannot be interpreted as the basis of the disputes, but rather should lead to reviewing obstacles, bringing views close and correcting the path of joint action. Complications like these cannot be solved by media forums, rather they are supposed to be made into windows of understanding and bringing stands closer, and not to deepen the differences.
Timing must be considered as well as the surrounding challenges as division is not in the interest of any party. Rather, sitting down behind closed doors should be preceded by wishes to agree, bearing in mind the need of each Gulf party to the other, especially under the increased alliances around the world contrary to what is going on between GCC countries.
The Kuwaiti mediation initiative is going on under charged skies and official and media exchanges, which should be done in preparation for negotiations that will end with agreements, as there are foreign parties that benefit from any Gulf dispute, and this is what must be realized to keep the joint fate and interests.—Translated by Kuwait Times