Arab World Unity Challenges

The countries of the Arab world always represented the mysterious and controversial part of the planet. The states occupy a considerable piece of the Earth and play a significant part in the establishment of the humanity’s welfare and wellbeing. Thus, Arab countries are considered politically illegitimate, as long as the leaders and governments organize the confusing and bemusing political game playing. Throughout the decades, the issue of the Arab world unity has been the foremost problematic case at the international level. A great number of European politicians and leaders are trying to reassure the world audience that political unity among Arab states is a possible or even necessary measure. Unfortunately, the claim is far from everyone, who clearly realizes, what united and altogether means. Unity requires the common mindset, objectives, cultural and social understanding and cooperation.

It has been claimed that Arab countries are identified are totally secular and autocratic, which generally denotes the impossibility for the governments to take the same step towards peacefulness and solidarity. The Middle Eastern countries have similar religious views. At the same time, they constantly are in war state, which is the fact that prohibits and disqualifies any other suggestions beneficial for the majority of countries. However, the world can hardly imagine the existent collaboration of Arab states that currently execute their citizens, who, according to the government’s ideology, manage to deceive the sacred beliefs and principles. Ideology is the perfect word to employ in the Arab state context. It goes beyond question that the countries have Islamic governments and the major parts of the citizens are Muslims. Muslims possess an extremely strong and invincible assumption about their belief; some of them may even have a dangerous and hostile attitude towards other world religions. Though the government does everything to separate religion from politics, the two notions intertwine. The crucial question lies in discovering why it happens.

First, it would be relevant to highlight the endless interference of Western countries into the affairs of Arab World. Thus, Arab countries developed the kind of nationalist ideological movement called nasserism. The stream had the aim to unite Islamic countries and Muslim community to stand together with the entire world as the one group. Nevertheless, it was not successful enough to carry out its mission, because there were many people, who supported another movement of Ba’athism. The ideology is more radically directed, dangerous and centered to support the Islamic world. It is the part of the culture and history, but the aforementioned features identify Arab countries’ goals and incentives. It is an age-old truth that one cannot foster power and authority, using the tools of fear, violence and cruelty. Many modern politicians dwell on the topic of nation-state model, which is so popular and widespread among European Union states.

It is easy to speak about the notion of nation-state model, but it is extremely difficult to reach perfection. In accordance with politicians and historians, a nation-state model demands the countries to live in a social and geographical independence. It is understandable that everyone refers to the given model of functioning. One of the first examples is the creation and establishment of the European Union. Western countries created a Union, where 28 countries managed to be one state that lives with regard to the same rules, regulations, and laws.

As an analytical ideal type, the nation state is a model of political, social, and cultural organization; as a normative ideal type, it is a model for political, social and cultural organization. In the former sense, nation-sate is a category of analysis, used to make sense of the social world. In the latter, it is the category of practice, a constitutive part of social world, a core term in the modern political lexicon, deployed in struggles to make and remake the social world. In both guises – as part of the analytical idiom of social science and as part of the practical idiom of modern politics – “the” nation state is often understood and represented in a highly idealized manner  – idealized that is, first and foremost, in a logical sense, not necessarily in a normative sense. (Brubaker, 2010, 62).

Generally, the nation-state seemed to have been an entangled issue to discuss; however, the only primary requirement to meet is the unity of all the spheres of the nation’s life. Correspondingly, having been aware of the current state of Arab countries, many researchers doubt their possibility to join the major forces and create the Arab unification in the world. The first problem is the lack of political legitimacy. Legitimacy is the core principle, which defines the ability to establish strong and powerful government, which will function for the sake of its citizens. The authoritative political legitimacy is a key feature to the nation’s prosperity and success; otherwise, any country is suspected to be dangerous, unpredictable, and threatening.

The world fears the actions of the following country, because, in case, there are boundaries in the mutual understanding between the neighborhood states, the worldwide wide unity cannot exist. The second condition for world unity is political superiority of bigger countries, who dominate over the smaller territory, population, weaker government. The countries cannot find consensus in dealing with the serious world issues. Mostly it happens because dominant military societies try to diminish the importance and significance of other smaller countries. It is nearly impossible to reach compromise between the nations, and properly estimate the value of each existing state.

The next reason is understandable and, at the same time, unreasonable. The French society represented the modern nation-state model was firstly represented in early years of its development. The Arab world countries never favored the actions and policies, which were brought forward by Western governance bodies and leaders. The Western attempts to express its capability to value freedom, liberty, human life and solidarity form the basic concepts of democracy. Indisputably, if the Arab countries, like Algeria, Syria, United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and others strive for the worldwide recognition, respect, and authority, it is unquestionably irrelevant to perceive the West as their enemy and counterpart.

Being the modern nation-state model of a country requires a clear, unprecedented and homogeneous cultural identity, and the extremely influential unity of all peoples. The corruption, unfairness and illegal policy are not acceptable by any means. The phenomena are the core principles that always lead the country to being an authoritative figure at the international political and economic arena. The current position of the Arab countries motivates the world to acquire the wrong perception and understanding of religious doctrine, which can drastically change the mindset and outlook of entire nations. Moreover, the current state of affairs does not merely change the perception, but aids as a weapon of mass destruction and human regression (Core Ethics, 325).

Correspondingly, there are also possible acquired variations, where the modern nation-state model can be omitted and abandoned, in case of its disability to provide the nation with justice, sustainable progress, and economic growth. Foremost, the model directs toward the refinement of human rights and opportunities of citizens within the political environment of their country. If there is no positive feedback and impact on a nation, the model is not acceptable for any type of government. The modern nation-state model aims to create the equal opportunities and possibilities to discover the potential political power regardless of the race, religion and financial support.

The country has to take care of every single citizen. The reason is that the true treasure of the state is not the economy or political status, but the people. The citizenry is the force of progress, which propels advancement and national growth. Thus, the Arabic countries have to select another path to bring their economies and nations to the next level of development. Today, such countries as Syria are the major threat that the world must face. It presents extremely intolerable, hostile and inappropriate actions in terms of world politics, terrorism and world safety. Thus, the country does not only destroy the relations between its brothers and sisters, but it also puts at risk the safety and life of the world community, which now lives in fear and terror.

A great number of sociologists and politicians speak about the Arabic world, where some dominant societies unite based on the national and religious identity and other sub-states intensify the relations among all the countries. Thus, Westphalian nation-state model is not the right example of governance for Arabic world. Generally, there is no clear model or pattern that can be used unconditionally. Thinkers like Charles Taylor underline the necessity for Middle East countries to create “literal and figurative open space”, where citizens can speak to each other and share one civic identity. There is an opinion that active citizenship is the only possible development way, which replaces nation-state model. The recommendations of the Western countries and America result in controversial reactions. People from Middle East would rather compromise than solve their divergences that always are opposed to solid and all-round unification (Wender).

Thus, there is no definitive national governance model suggested for the Arabic countries. The world is under the control of serious terrorist groups that launch unreasonable attacks and damage sacred ties and bonds of love, respect, tolerance, forgiveness and solidarity. The Arab world should take some measures to improve the current conditions, because their position and the situation in the world community closely correlate with one another. However, if a country cannot take preventive steps to stop violence and cruelty, which are distributing with the speed of light, the governance approach has to change. All countries of the Middle East have valuable resources, including their human resources,, which is why the government has to pay a considerable attention to the motivational aspect rather than the conquering and fighting back with the neighboring countries and taking the place of a dominant society.