The neighborhood piper is not entertaining

The emergency Arab summit was held in Cairo last Tuesday amidst tense atmosphere and complex political and security conditions in the region. Despite the extensive media coverage and statements issued by Arab leaders, the results seemed, as usual, far from popular expectations, which brings to mind the old Arab proverb, "The piper of the neighborhood does not entertain."

The summit witnessed “strong” speeches and affirmations of Arab unity in the face of challenges, especially with regard to the Palestinian issue, recent developments in the region, and the war on Gaza. However, the outcomes did not go beyond condemnation and denunciation, without being accompanied by practical steps that could make a difference, even once, on the ground. This made many people view the summit as an extension of its predecessors, sharing the same opportunities for success as well as failure, as the same phrases are repeated without any apparent or substantive change.

The Arab League has been suffering for decades from a crisis of influence, as it appears as if it is unable to make binding decisions or adopt unified positions that translate into effective policies, which is the spirit of the League and the basic purpose of its existence. On the contrary, while crises in the region intensify, Arab positions remain different and varied, if not contradictory, which weakens any joint effort and prevents it from having a tangible impact.

As is known, one of the topics of the Cairo summit was the Israeli war in the region, especially on Gaza, the escalation in the West Bank and the consequences of this war, specifically Trump’s plan to displace the Palestinian residents of the Strip. As expected, known and always recognized, the Arab leaders affirmed their support for the Palestinians and their right to establish their independent state with Jerusalem as its capital, but this time another condition was added, which is to guarantee the security of the occupying countries. However, questions remain about how to translate this support into practical steps, especially in light of Israel’s rejection of the Arab Peace Initiative and what followed it, the latest of which is the Arab plan, as well as the continuation of some Arab countries’ policies of normalization and bilateral relations that do not necessarily reflect a unified Arab position.

During the summit, Egypt put forward an initiative aimed at stopping the fire in Gaza and preparing the conditions for resuming negotiations. However, this plan was rejected by Israel and the United States, which considered that the conditions were not yet ready for any comprehensive cessation of military operations, which reflects the extent of the complexities surrounding the Palestinian file, where the Arab will clashes with regional and international interests, which makes any Arab move unable to impose itself as a practical solution in the absence of significant international support.

In a related context, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas announced a series of internal reforms aimed at strengthening governance in Palestinian institutions and restructuring some government agencies. It is no secret that these steps come in response to external and internal pressures demanding improved performance of the Palestinian Authority and ensuring broader representation of Palestinians in the political process. However, questions remain about the effectiveness of these reforms in bringing about fundamental change in light of the continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, in addition to the internal division.

The question remains: Can Arab summits transform from a platform for exchanging data and speeches into an actual mechanism for making decisive decisions? It seems that the answer is known in the foreseeable future, but as for the future, the answer depends on the ability of Arab leaders to overcome their differences and develop policies that are consistent with the aspirations of their peoples.

Finally, it must be remembered that, as every time, the Arab leaders left the summit hall after their closing statements, while the challenges remained the same, without radical solutions or decisions that would bring about tangible change. It seems that the “pipe flute” will continue to play, but who will hear him?