The Arab League, actually the “League of Arab States” (LAS), was established in 1945 in the light of an emancipation process regarding the Arab States and the former colonialist powers, especially France and Great Britain. The functional structure is comparable to other international organisations involving a Council, a Commission and a General Secretariat. To the present day, the LAS has grown to 22 members and witnessed a major institutional evolution having established specialised agencies for purposes such as education, health or science.
Table of Contents
1. The Arab League
2. The Arab Spring
3. The Arab League's behaviour in light of the Arab Spring
Research Objectives and Topics
This document examines the shifting role and diplomatic responsiveness of the League of Arab States (LAS) during the regional upheavals known as the Arab Spring. It analyzes how the organization moved away from its long-standing premise of non-interference to address conflicts in member states like Libya and Syria, while simultaneously assessing the institutional limitations and geopolitical constraints that influence its collective decision-making capacity.
- Historical evolution and functional structure of the Arab League.
- The impact of the Arab Spring on regional stability and regime legitimacy.
- Transformation of LAS diplomatic interventions and crisis management.
- Realist and liberal perspectives on institutional weaknesses and decision-making.
- The influence of Gulf state dominance and international powers on regional conflict resolution.
Excerpt from the Book
The Arab League's behaviour in light of the Arab Spring
The previous record of the LAS reacting to regional conflicts is a list of non-interference and remaining neutral. From 1948 on the LAS's answer to territorial disputes was mainly calling for negotiations, fact-finding and mediating whereby the operation of security forces was more of an exceptional case (Hassouna 1975: 28pp.). Various internal disputes such as the oppression of Shiite muslims in Iraq and major civil and inter-state wars were not addressed at all (Bröning 2014: 3). The sobering balance until 2011 has been summarised as ineffective and the role described as observing rather than acting (Tokmajyan 2013: 2). The LAS as an agent of an “Arab consensus” suffered from its vague founding texts exacerbating coercive measures and the member state's inability to reach a consensus on specific terms summarised in the quote “Arab states agree to disagree” (Kröning 2013: 72).
In that light the Arab Spring marked a “breakthrough” regarding the behaviour of the LAS unexpectedly breaking with its premise of non-interference (Kröning 2013: 7). The initial reaction to the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt was restraint and distinction. By contrast, Libya and Syria were different insofar that specific characteristics made the conflicts substantially more violent (Al-Absi 2013: 235). No noticeable reaction was achieved by calling on states to respect freedom of speech, resort to dialogue and refrain from use of excessive force, provoking a more firm approach on behalf of the LAS (Rishmawi 2013: 7). After Libya's right to participate in the LAS was suspended, a resolution of the Council condemned the violence against civilians and the rebels were officially recognised as legitimate representatives, ten days afterwards the UN Security Council was included by asking to impose a no fly zone. Despite rejecting foreign interventions a UN resolution paved the way for a joint operation of NATO and Arab forces that helped putting an end to the regime's power (Rishmawi 2013: 8; Buera 2015: 111).
Summary of Chapters
The Arab League: This chapter provides an overview of the organization's historical background, emphasizing its establishment in 1945 and its foundational challenge of balancing regional cooperation with the sovereignty of member states.
The Arab Spring: This section details the social, economic, and political drivers of the 2010 regional uprisings, contrasting the initial stability of autocratic regimes with the subsequent revolutionary momentum.
The Arab League's behaviour in light of the Arab Spring: This chapter analyzes the shift in the organization's diplomatic approach from neutral observation to active intervention in crises, particularly focusing on the cases of Libya and Syria.
Keywords
Arab League, Arab Spring, non-interference, regional security, diplomacy, Libya, Syria, consensus, institutional reform, Middle East, political stability, sovereignty, conflict resolution, international relations, Gulf countries.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary subject of this document?
The document focuses on the League of Arab States (LAS) and its evolving role in regional politics, specifically analyzing how the organization adapted its response to conflicts during the Arab Spring.
What are the central thematic fields discussed?
The text covers regional cooperation, institutional history, crisis management, political transformation, and the impact of geopolitical power shifts within the Middle East.
What is the core research objective of the work?
The work aims to explain how and why the LAS broke its historical norm of non-interference during the Arab Spring and whether this change signifies a more robust and reliable role for the organization.
Which scientific perspective is applied to the analysis?
The author utilizes a mix of theoretical lenses, including a realist perspective to explain the influence of national interests and a liberal perspective to address institutional weaknesses.
What content is addressed in the main body?
The main body examines the historical limitations of the LAS, the specific reactions to uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Syria, and the role of international organizations like the UN and NATO.
Which keywords best define this work?
Key terms include the Arab League, Arab Spring, regional security, non-interference, political reform, and collective security.
How did the Arab League's reaction to Libya differ from its historical precedents?
Unlike previous conflicts where the LAS remained neutral or called only for mediation, in Libya, it suspended the member state's participation and supported international intervention to curb violence against civilians.
Why is the intervention in Syria described as more complex than in Libya?
Syria presented higher levels of societal polarization, and the regime successfully utilized regional tensions and lacked the same lack of international support that isolated the Libyan leadership.
What role do the Gulf monarchies play in the modern Arab League?
The document notes a shift of power toward the Gulf countries, which allows them to exert more influence and set the agenda for the LAS in current regional disputes.
- Citar trabajo
- Mirko Kruse (Autor), 2015, Case Study on the Role of the Arab League in the Arab Spring, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/375616
