OIC confirms August 3 meet on Mideast crisis

[Owais]

Middle East crisis: Arab League meeting today in Beirut

BEIRUT: Foreign ministers of Arab countries will meet here today to discuss the Middle East crisis, while Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has told European leaders to stop preaching to him about civilian war casualties.

"European countries attacked Kosovo and killed 10,000 civilians. 10,000! And none of these countries had to suffer before that from a single rocket.

"I'm not saying it was wrong to intervene in Kosovo. But please, don't preach to us about the treatment of civilians," Olmert said.

In the meantime, Arab League chief Amr Mussa, on his arrival in Lebanese capital to attend the league meeting, accused the UN Security Council Monday of failing to halt hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah.

"We were surprised that some great powers were obstructing the ceasefire," Mussa told reporters after meeting Lebanese parliament speaker Nabih Berri, a key ally of Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

Mussa, who was in Beirut to participate in an Arab foreign ministers' meeting on Israel's 26-day-old offensive, criticised the "UN Security Council for failing to carry out its duties ... a matter which has stalled the ceasefire."

Mussa said the Arab ministerial meeting would back a seven-point peace plan put forward by Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora.

The plan calls for an Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon, the expansion of a UN peacekeeping force in the area, the deployment of the Lebanese army to the border and the disarming of Hezbollah guerrillas.

Meanwhile, French President Jacques Chirac called Monday on those involved in the conflict in Lebanon to live up to their obligations to end the fighting.

"Our aim is to arrive as soon as possible at a sustainable ceasefire through a political agreement which takes into account the worries of all the parties," Chirac said in a statement released by the Elysee Palace.

"Everyone should accept their responsibilities," he said, as Lebanon rejected a draft UN resolution calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities and Syria warned it was ready for war.

 

[Neo]

In its emergency meeting held in Malaysia on August 3, the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) demanded of the United Nations to implement an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon, warning that Israel's continued aggression may lead to increase of Muslim hatred against the West. It also called for a UN-led investigation into the human rights violations committed by Israelis in Lebanon and Palestine. Some Muslim counties, including Pakistan, proposed to contribute troops but only under the UN umbrella and if the Lebanese government approves of the idea.

Pakistan Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz unfurled an eight-point plan of action at the summit, to deal with the crisis and bring an immediate end to hostilities in the Middle East. The plan of action which appeared to have been crafted by the Foreign Office said that the UN's demand for ceasefire should be honoured by all; that members should consider contributing to a UN force; that the OIC should extend the much-needed humanitarian and other assistance to people of Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

The Pakistan prime minister however rightly observed that failure of the international community to end the violence was fuelling popular anger in the Middle East and around the world, adding this 'paralysis' could have incalculable consequences for long-term peace in the region. The rest of the leaders present expressed almost the same views except the Iranian president who chose to hang on to his traditional stand that Israel must be wiped off from the world map. The vows and pledges made by Muslim leaders failed to cause any stir as they lacked unanimity and popular support from ordinary people, rendering the show a repeat of previous conferences and a complete exercise in futility.

Taking a lead from the Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, Muslim countries such as Turkey, that enjoy close relations with Israel could have announced recalling their envoy, just to reinforce their anti-Israel stand. The step would have won applause and soothed the sentiments of the people at home besides building immense pressure on Israel. But living up to past traditions, Muslim countries preferred to keep silent, letting popular opinion gain ground that the OIC had failed to pose any threats to invaders and aggressors.

The organisation is actually under fire since its inception back in 1969 for not paying heed to the community it pretends to have been representing all along, thus giving origin to calls for an immediate wrap up of the outfit. Unlike, the moderate voices among the member countries, opposed to the outright disbandment, plead for complete overhaul and restructuring of the Organisation, with a view to making it a meaningful, relevant and a truly representative entity. The current set up of the OIC does not provide for a mechanism that enables ordinary people to take part in the decision-making processes, chiefly because of certain lacuna in its charter.

If one simply compares the preamble of the UN charter with that of OIC, it becomes evident that the latter serves only the interests of the governments. The preamble of the OIC reads: "We, the representatives of the following states" and it should read: "We, the representatives of people".

The motivation behind the OIC formation was an arson attack on the Al Aqsa mosque and how to stymie Israel's adventures against the Muslim world. The world has changed a lot since then, making it incumbent upon the body to reshape its future strategies and a thorough review of its existing policies, in order to match the modern day challenges. Regrettably, no serious effort seem to be on the cards to take on this important challenge.

The OIC's current composition is too complex and full of administrative flaws making it difficult to reach a consensus or decision to manage its affairs. Its inability to convene on time in the wake of the Lebanon crisis was mainly because of this problem. Member countries need to establish a special wing, responsible for carrying out and even execution of decisions taken by the heads of state and government.

A new body called the 'OIC commission' should be formed with the task of acting as its executive arm. The commission may initially comprise 15 members and each member country should be entitled to propose one candidate; then out of 57 candidates 15 can be picked up through a draw. The most important feature of this entire exercise is the selection of candidates by respective governments, for this arrangement could only work provided highly competent persons of impeccable repute are nominated to become the commissioners. This is of course a basic idea that can be refined by those currently in charge of reforming the organisation.

The change of name will be another daunting task for the OIC's leaders and the sooner it is done the better. Many leaders including Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf emphasised the need for a change in name at last year's Makkah summit but unfortunately there has been no follow up of that call. The foreign ministers' conference may be asked to do some brainstorming sessions on this issue and come up with a few names which can be discussed at the conference of kings and heads of states and governments. This is of course not an impossible enterprise and can be accomplished if member states show a little interest.

All said and done, existing OIC institutions may be geared up at least till the time of some alternate arrangement. Currently, most of the official business is performed by the standing committees, contact groups and specialised bodies, but the problem with these entities is their handicap in dealing with different issues in an independent manner. Besides, their recommendations are not binding and final decision still rests with either the foreign ministers' or kings conference.

 

[Thunder]

The OIC is nothing but a name, i have yet to see it do something usefull for the ummah, like said above, our leaders go there for a cup of tea and nothing else. My question is that in what ways can the OIC be more like the european union?