Interview: Amre Moussa, Arab League

Q. It seems that the West wants the Arab world to change. What do you think of this?

A. My opinion is that all countries and all regions need to change. The notion of change is not a dirty notion or a rejected notion. We in the Middle East and the Arab world know that we need to move ahead to change a lot of things we have in our societies and our systems. We need to do that in order to be better, and not to serve the interests of others.

To take this from a suspicious point of view would be to say that part of this change is simply to force the Arab world to accept Israel as it is. The change has to change the attitude of Israel and to stop the hegemonistic, aggressive attitude vis-à-vis the Palestinians.

In other words, we are pro-change, but we are not going to be pushed around by imposed changes. At the same, as those who want to change the Middle East must understand that Israel has to change if they want the Middle East to change.

Q. Do you feel that those imposed changes from the West will work or do you think that Arab society needs to take a totally different path?

A. Unfortunately, the term 'change' has been tarnished by the fact that certain circles have confused everything with everything else. For example, the relationship with Israel has been confused with the war against Baghdad.

The credibility of the term 'change' has been adversely affected by bundling everything together in one package. There is nothing wrong with the US, for example, calling for change in any region of the world - had there been no strings attached to Israel or Iraq.

Q. Do you believe in the clash of civilizations?

A. There is a clash of civilizations, and there is a maltreatment of Muslims in many capitals and cities around the world. This is not a matter of thought or opinion, but a matter of fact.

Muslims are being maltreated in many airports, cities, universities and companies. The international newspapers are full of stories of that nature. Therefore, the Arab world is not reading about a clash of civilizations, it is suffering from a clash of civilizations.

There is a clash of civilizations, but this is not between us and the West, but certain circles in the West - between us and certain lobby groups. That's why I want to avoid the word 'West' versus the Arab world. It is not so. There are certain circles and lobby groups that have certain vested interests in confusing and adversely affecting the relations between the West in general and the Arab world.

Q. If you look at any country in the West, then you find some kind of maltreatment of Muslims. So why not say the entire West?

A. Because it would be misleading if we refer to the whole West.

Q. But do you feel that Western governments have been acting badly?

A. Not all of them, I must say. At least I like to think that way.

Q. Do you feel that the Arab world has changed over the last 40 years? Would it benefit from adopting a Western model?

A. There is a lot of stagnation in the Arab world. There is a need to change and a need to move ahead. This need is apparent, and it will happen. It is already happening, but we need a new Middle East to emerge.

Q. What would this new Middle East look like five or 10 years from now?

A. You have to think in terms of social development, education, knowledge, economic cooperation and coordination, and democracy. There is process that is going on that also has to take hold of the political systems.

Q. Do you feel that war in Iraq will destabilize regimes within the Arab world?

A. It would affect the region as a whole - not regimes but the region in general. It would affect and destabilize the region.

Q. Why do you think the United States wants to go to war with Iraq?

A. I don't believe that it is simply a question of oil. The oil situation is under control. American companies are benefiting a lot, and there are deals with governments in the Gulf. And Iraqi oil is underground. So the oil itself cannot explain the rush to war.

If it were simply a question of oil, then a war could take place at any time. There is a combination of elements surrounding this potential decision to go to war. North Korea, for example, has already declared that they are a nuclear power and that the outside world must negotiate with them.

The global reaction to this was so lenient. Iraq has not made such a statement, and the UN inspectors haven't yet found a smoking gun, and yet we are discussing going to war. I am just making a superficial interpretation.

Q. What is the difference then between North Korea and Iraq?

A. Israel is the difference. Had Israel been the neighbor of North Korea, the attitude towards North Korea would have certainly changed.

Q. What if the United States attacked another Arab regime after a war with Iraq?

A. The war against Iraq itself would cause a lot of negative repercussions.

Q. What repercussions?

A. Destabilization, instability, agitation, anger. If another Arab country is on the line, the situation will compound. You can accept one thing. You can grudgingly accept two things, but the third would not be accepted. And the fourth would be resisted.

Q. When America attacked Iraq in 1991, all Arab states advised that such an attack would destabilize the region. In fact, nothing happened.

A. No, that was not the case. There were some views along those lines, but in fact the Arab world was with America against the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq. There was a justification for the public opinion that there something wrong occurred and that it had to be redressed. What is the justification now?

Q. Colin Powell said that most Arab countries support regime change in Iraq.

A. Regime change is one thing - and attacking Iraq is another thing. We are not talking about a regime. I'm the secretary-general of the Arab League, and I'm talking about attacking Iraq. I have nothing to do with any regime. I'm talking about Iraq as an Arab country. If somebody is talking about regime change, it's a different story.

Q. Do you think that the Arab League has let down the people in the Arab world?

A. There is a sense of this, of course. There is a feeling that the Arab League has not done its job properly. We are trying to revive the Arab League, to coordinate policies, to bring people together and to speak forcibly on behalf of the Arabs. There remains a lot to be desired when it comes to the Arab League after more than 50 years of inaction.

Q. Arabs have mostly failed to project a strong image of their society and beliefs. Why?

A. Arabs have failed to project themselves, their ideas, the progress that they have achieved. Arabs have failed to project their progress properly. To date, we have not succeeded in doing so.

Q. Do you think they will ever succeed?

A. Yes. But it is a question of science and money.

Q. Lots of countries have money, but have so far been unable to communicate properly.

A. This is due to a lack of coordination and a lack of appreciation of the importance of the media and how to project themselves.

Q. How do you plan to make the Arab League relevant to the people on the Arab street?

A. By working on the social, economic and technological issues. By working on education, health and other issues, rather than cornering yourself only in politics.