failure of the arab league
Failure of the Arab League
In the wake of any great conflict, states will try and assemble a system that is based on unity and prevention of further conflict, there are several aspects usually addressed, including the economy and the international relations. In the wake of World War 2 the UN assembled to form the new world order (Pinfari, 1.) In the Middle East, 6 founding members (Egypt, Transjordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq) formed the Arab League, an organization founded upon a common sense of Arabism with a goal of Arab unity (Pinfari, 2.) In the wake of the Cold War, Africa found itself at a political disadvantage because of the fragmented politics of the continent, they were at a geographical advantage and wanted to make use of that, so they formed the African Union to address inner-conflicts and the mayhem caused by the remains of colonialism after the Cold War (Dersso, 13-14.) On the other side of things the European Union formed in the late 1990’s with a different mission in mind when compared to the two aforeabmentioned organizations. The Arab League and the African Union’s missions were more ambitious than those of other political organizations such as the EU and the UN, due to many reasons why this paper will focus on discussing their economy, their judiciary and the effect of pan-Arpabism and a pan-African perspective. When nations group under one banner as is the case in the examples mentioned, the issue of their individual political sovereignty is brought into the foreground as countries value their autonomy. The European Union is more of a “union” in the judiciary sense than the Arab League: while the Arab League clearly states in its charter that the League has no right to intervene in the internal affairs of a member country unless their overall safety is compromised, this then makes way for dictators like Qaddafi to rule for years in what certain scholars would view as a tyrannical manner. The judiciary of each country is
In the wake of any great conflict, states will try and assemble a system that is based on unity and prevention of further conflict, there are several aspects usually addressed, including the economy and the international relations. In the wake of World War 2 the UN assembled to form the new world order (Pinfari, 1.) In the Middle East, 6 founding members (Egypt, Transjordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq) formed the Arab League, an organization founded upon a common sense of Arabism with a goal of Arab unity (Pinfari, 2.) In the wake of the Cold War, Africa found itself at a political disadvantage because of the fragmented politics of the continent, they were at a geographical advantage and wanted to make use of that, so they formed the African Union to address inner-conflicts and the mayhem caused by the remains of colonialism after the Cold War (Dersso, 13-14.) On the other side of things the European Union formed in the late 1990’s with a different mission in mind when compared to the two aforeabmentioned organizations. The Arab League and the African Union’s missions were more ambitious than those of other political organizations such as the EU and the UN, due to many reasons why this paper will focus on discussing their economy, their judiciary and the effect of pan-Arpabism and a pan-African perspective. When nations group under one banner as is the case in the examples mentioned, the issue of their individual political sovereignty is brought into the foreground as countries value their autonomy. The European Union is more of a “union” in the judiciary sense than the Arab League: while the Arab League clearly states in its charter that the League has no right to intervene in the internal affairs of a member country unless their overall safety is compromised, this then makes way for dictators like Qaddafi to rule for years in what certain scholars would view as a tyrannical manner. The judiciary of each country is