Abidjan, Cote D'Ivoire – When the war came to Cote D'Ivoire, Ivorians went dancing. They hid from their fears in the bass and treble of a busy-beats, crisis-bred club movement called Coupe-Decale, and the genre became a huge source of national pride.

But now there is peace, and some senior music professionals are already eulogising the style, saying its relevance has expired and its death is imminent.

Put that scenario to DJ Debordinio, and he looks a little insulted.

"It's not possible," he says simply, with a slight shake of his head.

The style was born in 2003, not long after Cote D'Ivoire's ethnic and political tensions erupted into nine years of off and on warfare. It was a child of guns, bombs, and fear. Normal people needed a way out of all the violence, at least emotionally, if not physically, too.

Coupe-Decale was the escape hatch.

The name is French slang for cheat and run, and the culture is all about lavish debauchery. Its originators were a group of DJs called La Jet Set, and their stylish, charismatic frontman was Stephan Doukoure, known to fans as Douk-Saga, or the President. In 2007, while seeking health treatment in Burkina Faso, he died, leaving behind a trove of classic tracks, not least of which is Sagacite.

His legacy is all about cigars and girls, hot tubs and nightclubs. The beats are fast and frenetic, mixing traditional sensibilities with Western techno. The lyrics are simple and anthemic, satirising crisis and promoting boozy bashes.  

It was desperately needed during the war, and it became an international youth movement, one headquartered in the West African lagoon city of Abidjan.

"They are songs to make you move," says the barrel-chested Debordinio, whose real name is Yves Roland N'Guesson "For us, it's joy. We don't talk about war. We're far from politics."

But politics exist, and talking about them is becoming easier. A reconciliation committee was recently announced to come to terms with the war's final chapter, when former president Laurent Gbagbo refused to hand over power after he lost last November's election. Fighting raged throughout the winter and into the spring.

It's still a central topic of conversation in bars and cafes. An investigation announced a few weeks ago by the International Criminal Court could reach as far back as 2002, when the first war broke out. Some observers say its findings could cause the country still more unrest, but, in Abidjan, the mood seems one of reflection and optimism.

Because of this, some people are saying Coupe-Decale is no longer necessary, that it's lost its relevance in the national imagination, and Zouglou, a lynchpin genre in Ivorian music, will once again reign supreme. Call it a feedback system, a lockstep evolution between culture and war.

"Right now, Coupe-Decale is losing ground," says Zie Coulibay, who is a professor, project director, and performance industry developer. "The reasons of its birth make it a movement that will come to a close.

"They are not singers for real. They don't know how to make live music, only play it back."

Waiting in the wings is Zouglou, which is often compared to reggae, but has its own francophone and Ivorian flavours and hues. The instrumentation is real, not electronic, and the lyrics are generally pensive and positive, promoting peace and human rights. It started in the 70s as a student protest movement, and it's been around ever since, with many of its practitioners finding international success.

"It's music for the soul of the country," says Ibrahim Diencky, a 24-year music producer and sound engineer. "It's how our people express themselves."

During the war, the people wanted to express themselves differently. They were surrounded by the fundamental, often incomprehensible challenges of life and death, and reflecting on them was often too hard.

According to a recently released Human Rights Watch report, 3,000 civilians were killed in the violence triggered by last November's elections. More than 150 women were raped, often as punishment for organizing rallies. Supporters of Alassane Ouattara, who won the election in the eyes of the international community, were dragged from restaurants, only to turn up later in morgues. Perceived supporters of Ouattara were stopped at checkpoints and beaten to death with bricks, or lit on fire. Ouattara forces then responded with similar tactics. And all this in just the six months after November 2010, never mind the previous years of war, intermittent fighting, and division.

'People of the night'

"Zouglou could not serve the needs of the people," says Coulibay. "The people needed to enjoy themselves."

N'Draman Desire Carlos is known in Africa and Europe as DJ Bonano. He's a tall, stringy, soft-spoken man who launched his Coupe-Decale career by dressing up as a cowboy. He has one album out, is promoting a forthcoming effort, and performed during the fighting.

At that time, government imposed an 8 pm curfew in Abidjan. It fundamentally altered the soul of the city, which runs at high fever pretty much all night.

"We are a people of the night," he says. "Artists, DJs, club mangers. We are les homes de la nuit. It's at night we get money to eat."

The men of the night adapted and became creatures of the morning. They started throwing their events at 9 am, even as fighting was underway in another corner of the city, and they kept at it for ten hours.

"At first," he says, "we were afraid. In our minds, we weren't free. We were stressed."

But they went with it, losing themselves in the dozens of absurdist, rubbery dance moves that help define the genre. Reality would settle in around 7 pm, when everyone realised they were far from home and pressed for time. The music was over. The war was back.

The Zouglou war experience was different. In the presidential campaign that led up to the fighting, a group called Les Galliets played pro-Gbagbo events and rallies. They had known him since he launched his successful presidential bid in the 2000 elections, when they met him at a political function.

"As we were singing, he got up and started dancing," says band member Diabate Moussa. "After the show, he approached us and asked if we could sing at his events."

They maintain they weren't a political message machine, that they were just traditional Zouglou entertainment. Every party had their favourite bands, they say. This was just more of the same – and all in the promotion of peace.

But that wasn't the popular perception during the most recent outburst of violence.

"We were afraid of reprisals," says Diabate Allydjou, another member of the group. "Really, we were in a bad position. We had to move."

They watched from France as the country tore itself apart and the genre fell out of favour. But the band is nestled deep in the Ivorian cultural milieu. They've been around since 1990, starting out with funeral gigs and building to their first, second, and third albums. Now back in Abidjan, they freely admit that Coupe-Decale muscled in on Zouglou success, but they think a new wave is rolling ashore, and they have a single planned to promote national reconciliation.

"The Zouglou can come back now because it's the right moment," Diencky says. "Coupe-Decale will die."

Perhaps the most significant blow to the genre is the recent destruction of its Rue Princesses headquarters. The place was once a hectic chaos of food hawkers and nightclubs, and everything poured off the sidewalks and into the streets. Ouattara wants the world to see a cleaner, more Westernised Abidjan, and the government razed the area. All that's left is rubble.

But DJ Debordinio is not the least bit phased by all this. He's got a new album coming out soon, and the video promo is full of the usual scenes of undulating women and fuming cigars. He doesn't need a war to throw a party.

"If there are clubs and DJs, it will exist," he says. "We will find another place. They can't break all the clubs and bars in Abidjan."

Paul Carlucci is a freelance journalist living in Accra, Ghana. His work has appeared in the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Review, and Al Jazeera English.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily represent Al Jazeera's editorial policy



...تابع القراءة

Abidjan, Cote D'Ivoire – When the war came to Cote D'Ivoire, Ivorians went dancing. They hid from their fears in the bass and treble of a busy-beats, crisis-bred club movement called Coupe-Decale, and the genre became a huge source of national pride.

But now there is peace, and some senior music professionals are already eulogising the style, saying its relevance has expired and its death is imminent.

Put that scenario to DJ Debordinio, and he looks a little insulted.

"It's not possible," he says simply, with a slight shake of his head.

The style was born in 2003, not long after Cote D'Ivoire's ethnic and political tensions erupted into nine years of off and on warfare. It was a child of guns, bombs, and fear. Normal people needed a way out of all the violence, at least emotionally, if not physically, too.

Coupe-Decale was the escape hatch.

The name is French slang for cheat and run, and the culture is all about lavish debauchery. Its originators were a group of DJs called La Jet Set, and their stylish, charismatic frontman was Stephan Doukoure, known to fans as Douk-Saga, or the President. In 2007, while seeking health treatment in Burkina Faso, he died, leaving behind a trove of classic tracks, not least of which is Sagacite.

His legacy is all about cigars and girls, hot tubs and nightclubs. The beats are fast and frenetic, mixing traditional sensibilities with Western techno. The lyrics are simple and anthemic, satirising crisis and promoting boozy bashes.  

It was desperately needed during the war, and it became an international youth movement, one headquartered in the West African lagoon city of Abidjan.

"They are songs to make you move," says the barrel-chested Debordinio, whose real name is Yves Roland N'Guesson "For us, it's joy. We don't talk about war. We're far from politics."

But politics exist, and talking about them is becoming easier. A reconciliation committee was recently announced to come to terms with the war's final chapter, when former president Laurent Gbagbo refused to hand over power after he lost last November's election. Fighting raged throughout the winter and into the spring.

It's still a central topic of conversation in bars and cafes. An investigation announced a few weeks ago by the International Criminal Court could reach as far back as 2002, when the first war broke out. Some observers say its findings could cause the country still more unrest, but, in Abidjan, the mood seems one of reflection and optimism.

Because of this, some people are saying Coupe-Decale is no longer necessary, that it's lost its relevance in the national imagination, and Zouglou, a lynchpin genre in Ivorian music, will once again reign supreme. Call it a feedback system, a lockstep evolution between culture and war.

"Right now, Coupe-Decale is losing ground," says Zie Coulibay, who is a professor, project director, and performance industry developer. "The reasons of its birth make it a movement that will come to a close.

"They are not singers for real. They don't know how to make live music, only play it back."

Waiting in the wings is Zouglou, which is often compared to reggae, but has its own francophone and Ivorian flavours and hues. The instrumentation is real, not electronic, and the lyrics are generally pensive and positive, promoting peace and human rights. It started in the 70s as a student protest movement, and it's been around ever since, with many of its practitioners finding international success.

"It's music for the soul of the country," says Ibrahim Diencky, a 24-year music producer and sound engineer. "It's how our people express themselves."

During the war, the people wanted to express themselves differently. They were surrounded by the fundamental, often incomprehensible challenges of life and death, and reflecting on them was often too hard.

According to a recently released Human Rights Watch report, 3,000 civilians were killed in the violence triggered by last November's elections. More than 150 women were raped, often as punishment for organizing rallies. Supporters of Alassane Ouattara, who won the election in the eyes of the international community, were dragged from restaurants, only to turn up later in morgues. Perceived supporters of Ouattara were stopped at checkpoints and beaten to death with bricks, or lit on fire. Ouattara forces then responded with similar tactics. And all this in just the six months after November 2010, never mind the previous years of war, intermittent fighting, and division.

'People of the night'

"Zouglou could not serve the needs of the people," says Coulibay. "The people needed to enjoy themselves."

N'Draman Desire Carlos is known in Africa and Europe as DJ Bonano. He's a tall, stringy, soft-spoken man who launched his Coupe-Decale career by dressing up as a cowboy. He has one album out, is promoting a forthcoming effort, and performed during the fighting.

At that time, government imposed an 8 pm curfew in Abidjan. It fundamentally altered the soul of the city, which runs at high fever pretty much all night.

"We are a people of the night," he says. "Artists, DJs, club mangers. We are les homes de la nuit. It's at night we get money to eat."

The men of the night adapted and became creatures of the morning. They started throwing their events at 9 am, even as fighting was underway in another corner of the city, and they kept at it for ten hours.

"At first," he says, "we were afraid. In our minds, we weren't free. We were stressed."

But they went with it, losing themselves in the dozens of absurdist, rubbery dance moves that help define the genre. Reality would settle in around 7 pm, when everyone realised they were far from home and pressed for time. The music was over. The war was back.

The Zouglou war experience was different. In the presidential campaign that led up to the fighting, a group called Les Galliets played pro-Gbagbo events and rallies. They had known him since he launched his successful presidential bid in the 2000 elections, when they met him at a political function.

"As we were singing, he got up and started dancing," says band member Diabate Moussa. "After the show, he approached us and asked if we could sing at his events."

They maintain they weren't a political message machine, that they were just traditional Zouglou entertainment. Every party had their favourite bands, they say. This was just more of the same – and all in the promotion of peace.

But that wasn't the popular perception during the most recent outburst of violence.

"We were afraid of reprisals," says Diabate Allydjou, another member of the group. "Really, we were in a bad position. We had to move."

They watched from France as the country tore itself apart and the genre fell out of favour. But the band is nestled deep in the Ivorian cultural milieu. They've been around since 1990, starting out with funeral gigs and building to their first, second, and third albums. Now back in Abidjan, they freely admit that Coupe-Decale muscled in on Zouglou success, but they think a new wave is rolling ashore, and they have a single planned to promote national reconciliation.

"The Zouglou can come back now because it's the right moment," Diencky says. "Coupe-Decale will die."

Perhaps the most significant blow to the genre is the recent destruction of its Rue Princesses headquarters. The place was once a hectic chaos of food hawkers and nightclubs, and everything poured off the sidewalks and into the streets. Ouattara wants the world to see a cleaner, more Westernised Abidjan, and the government razed the area. All that's left is rubble.

But DJ Debordinio is not the least bit phased by all this. He's got a new album coming out soon, and the video promo is full of the usual scenes of undulating women and fuming cigars. He doesn't need a war to throw a party.

"If there are clubs and DJs, it will exist," he says. "We will find another place. They can't break all the clubs and bars in Abidjan."

Paul Carlucci is a freelance journalist living in Accra, Ghana. His work has appeared in the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Vancouver Review, and Al Jazeera English.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily represent Al Jazeera's editorial policy



...تابع القراءة

New York, New York - The current popular challenges to the Western-sponsored Arab dictatorships are hardly a new occurrence in modern Arab history. We have seen such uprisings against European colonialism in the region since its advent in Algeria in 1830 and in Egypt in 1882. Revolts in Syria in the 1920s against French rule and especially in Palestine from 1936 to 1939 against British colonial rule and Zionist settler-colonialism were massive by global standards. Indeed the Palestinian Revolt would inspire others in the colonised world and would remain an inspiration to Arabs for the rest of the century and beyond. Anti-colonial resistance which also opposed the colonially-installed Arab regimes continued in Jordan, in Egypt, in Bahrain, Iraq, North and South Yemen, Oman, Morocco, and Sudan. The massive anti-colonial revolt in Algeria would finally bring about independence in 1962 from French settler colonialism. The liberation of Algeria meant that one of the two European settler-colonies in the Arab world was down, and only one remained: Palestine. On the territorial colonial front, much of the Arabian Gulf remained occupied by the British until the 1960s and early 1970s, and awaited liberation.   

After the 1967 War

Amidst the dominant melancholia that struck the Arab world following the 1967 defeat by Israel's simultaneous invasions of three Arab countries and the occupation of their territories and the entirety of Palestine, the Palestinian revolutionary guerrillas' challenge to Israel's colonial power at the Battle of Karamah in March 1968 brought renewed hope to tens of millions of Arabs and renewed concern for the Arab neo-colonial dictatorships (Arafat's much exaggerated role of his exploits during the battle notwithstanding). The Palestinian revolution was inspirational to many but it also coincided with revolutionary efforts not only around the Third World generally but also in Arab countries as well, which in turn, had inspired the Palestinians.

The best revolutionary anti-colonial news in the Arab world after the June 1967 defeat would come from the Arabian Peninsula. It was in November 1967 that the South Yemeni revolutionaries delivered an ignominious defeat to the British and liberated their country from the yoke of colonial Britain, which had ruled Aden since 1838. The South Yemenis would soon found the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen, which would last for 22 years before its ultimate dissolution by North Yemen and its Saudi allies.

In neighbouring Oman, the on-going struggle to liberate the country entered a new stage of guerrilla warfare under the leadership of the People's Front for the Liberation of Oman and the Arabian Gulf (PFLOAG), which came together in September 1968 as a result of the unification of a number of Omani guerrilla groups fighting the British-supported Sultan Said bin Taymur. The PFLOAG had liberated territory in Dhofar from which it continued to launch its attacks to liberate the rest of the country. Indeed national liberation movements were active across the Gulf, and not least in Bahrain where an on-going national liberation struggle, a workers' movement, students and women's activism, all coalesced against British colonial rule and their local servants.

Repression

But the US-British-Saudi-Israeli alliance was determined to crush all the revolutionary groups that it could defeat and co-opt those that it could not crush. The effort started in the Gulf. Bahrain, which had been the hotbed of workers and anti-colonial unrest for decades, continued its struggle against British domination and the Bahraini ruling family allied with British colonialism. But as the British were forced out of South Yemen and the threat to their Omani client continued afoot, they transferred their military command to Bahrain, a step that was followed  by massive British capital investment in the country (as well as in Dubai). These developments expectedly brought more repression against the Bahraini people and their national liberation movement. Indeed, it was in this context that the Shah of Iran laid territorial claims to Bahrain and threatened to annex it to Iran as its "fourteenth province." His territorial ambitions would only be tempered by his Western allies and the United Nations in 1970, after which the Shah would give up on his claims in return for massive Iranian capital investment in the emerging small Arab states of the Gulf, including the United Arab Emirates. The West thanked the Shah for his magnanimity and continued to reward him diplomatically and politically.

On the Jordanian front, King Hussein's army would reverse the Palestinian guerrillas' triumphs and defeat them in a massive onslaught in September 1970. The PLO guerrillas would finally be expelled from the country completely in July 1971. However, the PLO guerrillas continued to have a strong base in Lebanon from which they continued to operate against Israel and the Arab dictatorships.

In Sudan, the communist party continued to get stronger in the late 1960s, until the 1969 coup by Ja'far al-Numeiri, who initially could not fully marginalise the communists and waited until he strengthened his regime in 1971 to do so. An attempted coup against his authoritarian rule failed. In its wake, he rounded up thousands of communists and executed all the party's major leaders, destroying the largest communist party in the Arab world. The Numeiri dictatorship would continue until 1985 and soon the democratic struggle against him would fail bringing in the Saudi-supported candidate Omar al-Bashir who seized power in 1989 continuing in Numeiri's footsteps.

Only the PFLOAG kept advancing in the early seventies, which required a massive effort on the part of the US-British-Saudi-Israeli alliance to defeat it. The Shah of Iran and the Jordanian King were subcontracted for the effort. They dispatched military contingents to Oman, and, abetted by British advisors, were finally able to defeat the guerrillas and safeguard the throne for Sultan Qabus, the son of Sultan Said, who overthrew his father in a palace coup in 1970 organised by the British.  With the final defeat of the Omani revolutionaries in 1976, the PLO remained the only revolutionary group that survived the onslaught alongside a poor and weak South Yemen, which would finally be swallowed up by the Saudi-supported North Yemen in 1990.

Co-Optation

Saudi and other Gulf money poured into the coffers of the PLO to make sure that Palestinian revolutionism, which was partially crushed in Jordan, would never turn its guns against another Arab regime again. Indeed, Gulf money would transform the PLO into a liberation group that was funded by the most reactionary regimes in the Third World. Arafat's road to Oslo began after the 1973 war and the massive funding he would begin to receive from all oil-rich Arab dictatorships, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein and all the Gulf monarchies. It was this domestication of the PLO that impelled Arab regimes to recognise it in 1974 as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and the main reason why they supported its recognition by the UN that same year. Indeed, Arafat's reactionary alliance with Arab dictators was such that some PLO intelligence apparatuses began to share intelligence on Arab dissidents with Arab dictators, including the PLO intelligence apparatus led by Abu Za'im who surrendered Saudi dissident Nasir Sa'id in December 1979 to Saudi intelligence based on the request of the Saudi ambassador to Lebanon. Said was never heard from again and is believed to have been killed by the Saudi authorities. On the diplomatic and solidarity front, while the Polisario front declared the independence of the Western Sahara in 1976, Arafat refused to recognise the state out of respect for his alliance with King Hassan II.

The New Uprisings

As the Palestinian revolutionary groups were the only ones not fully domesticated, as far as the US and other imperial powers were concerned, though they had become sufficiently domesticated from the perspective of the Arab regimes, the new challenge would come from the Palestinian people themselves who revolted in 1987 against their Israeli occupiers. It was this second Palestinian major revolt in half a century, which many now see as inspirational to the present uprisings across the Arab world, which had to be crushed. The Israelis tried their best to crush it but failed. The PLO took it over quickly lest a new Palestinian leadership supplant the PLO's own authority to represent the Palestinians. As the PLO took over the intifada, efforts were made by the Israelis and the Americans to finally co-opt the PLO and neutralise its potential as a spoiler of US and Israeli policy in the region. It was in this context that Oslo was signed and the PLO was fully transformed from a threat to Arab dictatorships, their US imperial sponsor, and the Israeli occupation, into an agent of all three, under the guise of the Palestinian Authority, which would help enforce the Israeli occupation in an unholy alliance with Gulf dictators and the United States. From then on, PLO/PA guns will only target the Palestinian people.

The US-British-Saudi-Israeli alliance in the region today is following the same strategies they followed in late 1960s and early 1970s and continuing the strategy they followed with the PLO in the early 1990s. They are crushing those uprisings they can crush and are co-opting those they cannot. The efforts to fully co-opt the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings have made great strides over the last few months, though they have not been successful in silencing or demobilising the populations. On the other side, Bahrain's uprising was the first to be crushed with the efforts to crush the Yemenis continuing afoot without respite. It was in Libya and in Syria where the axis fully hijacked the revolts and took them over completely. While Syrians, like Libyans before them, continue their valiant uprising against their brutal regime demanding democracy and social justice, their quest is already doomed unless they are able to dislodge the US-British-Saudi-Qatari axis that has fully taken over their struggle - which is very unlikely.

The Palestinians

This brings us to the Palestinian scene. The Palestinian uprising or intifada of 1987 was the first unarmed massive civilian revolt to take place in decades. It was in the wake of the fall of the Soviet Union and the first US invasion of the Gulf that the United States decided to co-opt the Palestinian uprising by giving political and financial benefits to a PLO class of bureaucrats who would proceed to sell out the Palestinian struggle. Thus Arafat neutralised the uprising at Oslo in 1993 and went on to wine and dine with Israel's and America's leaders while his people remained under occupation.

But If the Palestinians were a source of concern to the Arab regimes after 1968 lest they help other Arabs revolt against their dictatorships, today, it is the Palestinian Authority (PA) that is worried that the Arab uprisings may influence West Bank Palestinians to revolt against the PA, which continues its intensive security collaboration with the Israeli occupation and its US sponsor. Indeed, while the Israelis failed in the late 1970s in their effort to create a political body of Palestinian collaborators through their infamous Village Leagues, the PA became, not the new "Urban Leagues" that many Palestinians dubbed it, but a veritable National League of collaborators serving the Israeli occupation. The PA's recent bid for statehood and recognition at the UN and at UNESCO is an attempt to resolve the current stasis of its non-existent "peace process" and the dogged negotiations with the Israelis before the Palestinians revolt against it, especially given the dwindling dividends to the beneficiaries of the Oslo arrangement. 

The PA indeed has two routes before it in the face of the collapse of the so-called "peace process": dissolve itself and cease to play the role of enforcer of the occupation; or continue to collaborate by entrenching itself further through recognition by international institutions to preserve its power and the benefits to its members. It has chosen the second option under the guise of supporting Palestinian national independence. How successful it is going to be in its entrenchment bid remains to be seen, though its success or failure will be calamitous for the Palestinian people who will not get any independence from Israeli settler colonialism as long as the PA is at the helm.

As I have argued before, the Israeli-PA-US disagreement is about the terms and territorial size of the disconnected Bantustans that the PA will be given and the nature and amount of repressive power and weapons its police force would have to use against the Palestinian people, while ascertaining that such weapons would never have a chance of being used against Israel.  If Israel shows some flexibility on those, then the disconnected Bantustans will be quickly recognised as a "sovereign Palestinian state" and not a single illegal Jewish colonial settler will have to give up the stolen lands of the Palestinians and return to Brooklyn, to name a common place of origin for many Jewish colonial settlers. It is this arrangement that the PA is trying to sell to Israel and the US. Without it, the PA is threatening that West Bankers may very well revolt against it, which would be bad for Israel and the US. So far, neither the US nor Israel is buying it.

The Struggle Continues

As for the larger Arab context, those who call what has unfolded in the last year in the Arab World as an Arab "awakening" are not only ignorant of the history of the last century, but also deploy Orientalist arguments in their depiction of Arabs as a quiescent people who put up with dictatorship for decades and are finally waking up from their torpor. Across the Arab world, Arabs have revolted against colonial and local tyranny every decade since World War I. It has been the European colonial powers and their American heir who have stood in their way every step of the way and allied themselves with local dictators and their families (and in many cases handpicking such dictators and putting them on the throne).

The US-European sponsorship of the on-going counterrevolutions across the Arab world today is a continuation of a time-honoured imperial tradition, but so is continued Arab resistance to imperialism and domestic tyranny. The uprisings that started in Tunisia in December 2010 continue afoot despite major setbacks to all of them. This is not to say that things have not changed and are not changing significantly, it is to say, however, that many of the changes are reversible and that the counterrevolution has already reversed a significant amount and is working hard to reverse more. Vigilance is mandatory on the part of those struggling for democratic change and social justice, especially in these times of upheaval and massive imperial mobilisation. Some of the battles may have been lost but the Arab peoples' war against imperialism and for democracy and social justice continues across the Arab world.

Joseph Massad is Associate Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University. He is author of several books including: The Persistence of the Palestinian Question (Routledge, 2006) and Desiring Arabs (Chicago University Press, 2007), and Colonial Effects (Colomibia University Press, 2011).

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

...تابع القراءة

New York, New York - The current popular challenges to the Western-sponsored Arab dictatorships are hardly a new occurrence in modern Arab history. We have seen such uprisings against European colonialism in the region since its advent in Algeria in 1830 and in Egypt in 1882. Revolts in Syria in the 1920s against French rule and especially in Palestine from 1936 to 1939 against British colonial rule and Zionist settler-colonialism were massive by global standards. Indeed the Palestinian Revolt would inspire others in the colonised world and would remain an inspiration to Arabs for the rest of the century and beyond. Anti-colonial resistance which also opposed the colonially-installed Arab regimes continued in Jordan, in Egypt, in Bahrain, Iraq, North and South Yemen, Oman, Morocco, and Sudan. The massive anti-colonial revolt in Algeria would finally bring about independence in 1962 from French settler colonialism. The liberation of Algeria meant that one of the two European settler-colonies in the Arab world was down, and only one remained: Palestine. On the territorial colonial front, much of the Arabian Gulf remained occupied by the British until the 1960s and early 1970s, and awaited liberation.   

After the 1967 War

Amidst the dominant melancholia that struck the Arab world following the 1967 defeat by Israel's simultaneous invasions of three Arab countries and the occupation of their territories and the entirety of Palestine, the Palestinian revolutionary guerrillas' challenge to Israel's colonial power at the Battle of Karamah in March 1968 brought renewed hope to tens of millions of Arabs and renewed concern for the Arab neo-colonial dictatorships (Arafat's much exaggerated role of his exploits during the battle notwithstanding). The Palestinian revolution was inspirational to many but it also coincided with revolutionary efforts not only around the Third World generally but also in Arab countries as well, which in turn, had inspired the Palestinians.

The best revolutionary anti-colonial news in the Arab world after the June 1967 defeat would come from the Arabian Peninsula. It was in November 1967 that the South Yemeni revolutionaries delivered an ignominious defeat to the British and liberated their country from the yoke of colonial Britain, which had ruled Aden since 1838. The South Yemenis would soon found the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen, which would last for 22 years before its ultimate dissolution by North Yemen and its Saudi allies.

In neighbouring Oman, the on-going struggle to liberate the country entered a new stage of guerrilla warfare under the leadership of the People's Front for the Liberation of Oman and the Arabian Gulf (PFLOAG), which came together in September 1968 as a result of the unification of a number of Omani guerrilla groups fighting the British-supported Sultan Said bin Taymur. The PFLOAG had liberated territory in Dhofar from which it continued to launch its attacks to liberate the rest of the country. Indeed national liberation movements were active across the Gulf, and not least in Bahrain where an on-going national liberation struggle, a workers' movement, students and women's activism, all coalesced against British colonial rule and their local servants.

Repression

But the US-British-Saudi-Israeli alliance was determined to crush all the revolutionary groups that it could defeat and co-opt those that it could not crush. The effort started in the Gulf. Bahrain, which had been the hotbed of workers and anti-colonial unrest for decades, continued its struggle against British domination and the Bahraini ruling family allied with British colonialism. But as the British were forced out of South Yemen and the threat to their Omani client continued afoot, they transferred their military command to Bahrain, a step that was followed  by massive British capital investment in the country (as well as in Dubai). These developments expectedly brought more repression against the Bahraini people and their national liberation movement. Indeed, it was in this context that the Shah of Iran laid territorial claims to Bahrain and threatened to annex it to Iran as its "fourteenth province." His territorial ambitions would only be tempered by his Western allies and the United Nations in 1970, after which the Shah would give up on his claims in return for massive Iranian capital investment in the emerging small Arab states of the Gulf, including the United Arab Emirates. The West thanked the Shah for his magnanimity and continued to reward him diplomatically and politically.

On the Jordanian front, King Hussein's army would reverse the Palestinian guerrillas' triumphs and defeat them in a massive onslaught in September 1970. The PLO guerrillas would finally be expelled from the country completely in July 1971. However, the PLO guerrillas continued to have a strong base in Lebanon from which they continued to operate against Israel and the Arab dictatorships.

In Sudan, the communist party continued to get stronger in the late 1960s, until the 1969 coup by Ja'far al-Numeiri, who initially could not fully marginalise the communists and waited until he strengthened his regime in 1971 to do so. An attempted coup against his authoritarian rule failed. In its wake, he rounded up thousands of communists and executed all the party's major leaders, destroying the largest communist party in the Arab world. The Numeiri dictatorship would continue until 1985 and soon the democratic struggle against him would fail bringing in the Saudi-supported candidate Omar al-Bashir who seized power in 1989 continuing in Numeiri's footsteps.

Only the PFLOAG kept advancing in the early seventies, which required a massive effort on the part of the US-British-Saudi-Israeli alliance to defeat it. The Shah of Iran and the Jordanian King were subcontracted for the effort. They dispatched military contingents to Oman, and, abetted by British advisors, were finally able to defeat the guerrillas and safeguard the throne for Sultan Qabus, the son of Sultan Said, who overthrew his father in a palace coup in 1970 organised by the British.  With the final defeat of the Omani revolutionaries in 1976, the PLO remained the only revolutionary group that survived the onslaught alongside a poor and weak South Yemen, which would finally be swallowed up by the Saudi-supported North Yemen in 1990.

Co-Optation

Saudi and other Gulf money poured into the coffers of the PLO to make sure that Palestinian revolutionism, which was partially crushed in Jordan, would never turn its guns against another Arab regime again. Indeed, Gulf money would transform the PLO into a liberation group that was funded by the most reactionary regimes in the Third World. Arafat's road to Oslo began after the 1973 war and the massive funding he would begin to receive from all oil-rich Arab dictatorships, from Gaddafi to Saddam Hussein and all the Gulf monarchies. It was this domestication of the PLO that impelled Arab regimes to recognise it in 1974 as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and the main reason why they supported its recognition by the UN that same year. Indeed, Arafat's reactionary alliance with Arab dictators was such that some PLO intelligence apparatuses began to share intelligence on Arab dissidents with Arab dictators, including the PLO intelligence apparatus led by Abu Za'im who surrendered Saudi dissident Nasir Sa'id in December 1979 to Saudi intelligence based on the request of the Saudi ambassador to Lebanon. Said was never heard from again and is believed to have been killed by the Saudi authorities. On the diplomatic and solidarity front, while the Polisario front declared the independence of the Western Sahara in 1976, Arafat refused to recognise the state out of respect for his alliance with King Hassan II.

The New Uprisings

As the Palestinian revolutionary groups were the only ones not fully domesticated, as far as the US and other imperial powers were concerned, though they had become sufficiently domesticated from the perspective of the Arab regimes, the new challenge would come from the Palestinian people themselves who revolted in 1987 against their Israeli occupiers. It was this second Palestinian major revolt in half a century, which many now see as inspirational to the present uprisings across the Arab world, which had to be crushed. The Israelis tried their best to crush it but failed. The PLO took it over quickly lest a new Palestinian leadership supplant the PLO's own authority to represent the Palestinians. As the PLO took over the intifada, efforts were made by the Israelis and the Americans to finally co-opt the PLO and neutralise its potential as a spoiler of US and Israeli policy in the region. It was in this context that Oslo was signed and the PLO was fully transformed from a threat to Arab dictatorships, their US imperial sponsor, and the Israeli occupation, into an agent of all three, under the guise of the Palestinian Authority, which would help enforce the Israeli occupation in an unholy alliance with Gulf dictators and the United States. From then on, PLO/PA guns will only target the Palestinian people.

The US-British-Saudi-Israeli alliance in the region today is following the same strategies they followed in late 1960s and early 1970s and continuing the strategy they followed with the PLO in the early 1990s. They are crushing those uprisings they can crush and are co-opting those they cannot. The efforts to fully co-opt the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings have made great strides over the last few months, though they have not been successful in silencing or demobilising the populations. On the other side, Bahrain's uprising was the first to be crushed with the efforts to crush the Yemenis continuing afoot without respite. It was in Libya and in Syria where the axis fully hijacked the revolts and took them over completely. While Syrians, like Libyans before them, continue their valiant uprising against their brutal regime demanding democracy and social justice, their quest is already doomed unless they are able to dislodge the US-British-Saudi-Qatari axis that has fully taken over their struggle - which is very unlikely.

The Palestinians

This brings us to the Palestinian scene. The Palestinian uprising or intifada of 1987 was the first unarmed massive civilian revolt to take place in decades. It was in the wake of the fall of the Soviet Union and the first US invasion of the Gulf that the United States decided to co-opt the Palestinian uprising by giving political and financial benefits to a PLO class of bureaucrats who would proceed to sell out the Palestinian struggle. Thus Arafat neutralised the uprising at Oslo in 1993 and went on to wine and dine with Israel's and America's leaders while his people remained under occupation.

But If the Palestinians were a source of concern to the Arab regimes after 1968 lest they help other Arabs revolt against their dictatorships, today, it is the Palestinian Authority (PA) that is worried that the Arab uprisings may influence West Bank Palestinians to revolt against the PA, which continues its intensive security collaboration with the Israeli occupation and its US sponsor. Indeed, while the Israelis failed in the late 1970s in their effort to create a political body of Palestinian collaborators through their infamous Village Leagues, the PA became, not the new "Urban Leagues" that many Palestinians dubbed it, but a veritable National League of collaborators serving the Israeli occupation. The PA's recent bid for statehood and recognition at the UN and at UNESCO is an attempt to resolve the current stasis of its non-existent "peace process" and the dogged negotiations with the Israelis before the Palestinians revolt against it, especially given the dwindling dividends to the beneficiaries of the Oslo arrangement. 

The PA indeed has two routes before it in the face of the collapse of the so-called "peace process": dissolve itself and cease to play the role of enforcer of the occupation; or continue to collaborate by entrenching itself further through recognition by international institutions to preserve its power and the benefits to its members. It has chosen the second option under the guise of supporting Palestinian national independence. How successful it is going to be in its entrenchment bid remains to be seen, though its success or failure will be calamitous for the Palestinian people who will not get any independence from Israeli settler colonialism as long as the PA is at the helm.

As I have argued before, the Israeli-PA-US disagreement is about the terms and territorial size of the disconnected Bantustans that the PA will be given and the nature and amount of repressive power and weapons its police force would have to use against the Palestinian people, while ascertaining that such weapons would never have a chance of being used against Israel.  If Israel shows some flexibility on those, then the disconnected Bantustans will be quickly recognised as a "sovereign Palestinian state" and not a single illegal Jewish colonial settler will have to give up the stolen lands of the Palestinians and return to Brooklyn, to name a common place of origin for many Jewish colonial settlers. It is this arrangement that the PA is trying to sell to Israel and the US. Without it, the PA is threatening that West Bankers may very well revolt against it, which would be bad for Israel and the US. So far, neither the US nor Israel is buying it.

The Struggle Continues

As for the larger Arab context, those who call what has unfolded in the last year in the Arab World as an Arab "awakening" are not only ignorant of the history of the last century, but also deploy Orientalist arguments in their depiction of Arabs as a quiescent people who put up with dictatorship for decades and are finally waking up from their torpor. Across the Arab world, Arabs have revolted against colonial and local tyranny every decade since World War I. It has been the European colonial powers and their American heir who have stood in their way every step of the way and allied themselves with local dictators and their families (and in many cases handpicking such dictators and putting them on the throne).

The US-European sponsorship of the on-going counterrevolutions across the Arab world today is a continuation of a time-honoured imperial tradition, but so is continued Arab resistance to imperialism and domestic tyranny. The uprisings that started in Tunisia in December 2010 continue afoot despite major setbacks to all of them. This is not to say that things have not changed and are not changing significantly, it is to say, however, that many of the changes are reversible and that the counterrevolution has already reversed a significant amount and is working hard to reverse more. Vigilance is mandatory on the part of those struggling for democratic change and social justice, especially in these times of upheaval and massive imperial mobilisation. Some of the battles may have been lost but the Arab peoples' war against imperialism and for democracy and social justice continues across the Arab world.

Joseph Massad is Associate Professor of Modern Arab Politics and Intellectual History at Columbia University. He is author of several books including: The Persistence of the Palestinian Question (Routledge, 2006) and Desiring Arabs (Chicago University Press, 2007), and Colonial Effects (Colomibia University Press, 2011).

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

...تابع القراءة

Government monitors have reached seven camps spread across Nepal to begin asking 19,000 former fighters whether they will join the army or leave with cash to start new lives, five years after ending their armed operations to join a peace process.

Balananda Sharma, the chief monitor, said on Friday that the long-stalled process will start on Saturday.

Maoists wanted all their former fighters integrated into the army, which military leaders and other political parties resisted.

Nepal's main political parties finally reached agreement on a deal this month.

Since ending their bloody revolt in 2006, the former Maoist fighters have lived in huts in the camps surrounded by barbed wire.

The UN supervised the fighters, whose weapons stayed locked in metal containers inside the camps.

Some fighters married and have children living with them, though child soldiers left the camps last year.

Decisions on who will enter the army and who will leave the camps are expected to be finished within 10 days.

The agreement allows for 6,500 former fighters to be taken in the national army in non-combat roles. The rest will get a rehabilitation package with up to $11,500.

After the UN peace mission left Nepal in January, the fighters were closely monitored by a special government committee.

The agreement on the fighters' future now puts pressure on the coalition government to overcome political paralysis and finish a constitution that will determine how Nepal develops after years of civil war and upheaval.

...تابع القراءة

Government monitors have reached seven camps spread across Nepal to begin asking 19,000 former fighters whether they will join the army or leave with cash to start new lives, five years after ending their armed operations to join a peace process.

Balananda Sharma, the chief monitor, said on Friday that the long-stalled process will start on Saturday.

Maoists wanted all their former fighters integrated into the army, which military leaders and other political parties resisted.

Nepal's main political parties finally reached agreement on a deal this month.

Since ending their bloody revolt in 2006, the former Maoist fighters have lived in huts in the camps surrounded by barbed wire.

The UN supervised the fighters, whose weapons stayed locked in metal containers inside the camps.

Some fighters married and have children living with them, though child soldiers left the camps last year.

Decisions on who will enter the army and who will leave the camps are expected to be finished within 10 days.

The agreement allows for 6,500 former fighters to be taken in the national army in non-combat roles. The rest will get a rehabilitation package with up to $11,500.

After the UN peace mission left Nepal in January, the fighters were closely monitored by a special government committee.

The agreement on the fighters' future now puts pressure on the coalition government to overcome political paralysis and finish a constitution that will determine how Nepal develops after years of civil war and upheaval.

...تابع القراءة

Barack Obama has held previously unscheduled talks with China's premier, Wen Jiabao, after a week of sharp exchanges between the two nations.

Obama and Wen met on Saturday on the sidelines of the East Asia Summit on the Indonesian resort island of Bali, following public quarrels over currency, trade and a territorial dispute in the South China Sea.

The meeting came after spats between Beijing and Washington over trade, currency and territorial rights in the South China Sea.

A White House official said president Obama discussed the value of China's currency as well America's
interests in the South China Sea.

"The principal focus of the meeting was on economics," Tom Donilon, Obama's top national security adviser, had told reporters.

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, Donilon, joined Obama for the talks, an AFP photographer present at the start of the meeting saw.

Obama announced on Friday the "transfer" of 24 used F-16 fighter jets to Indonesia to bolster its poor air defence.

The aircraft will be updated with advanced computers, improved radar and avionics, and the capability to carry and field more advanced weaponry and sensors, the US defence department said.

Ties with Australia

In Australia on Thursday, Obama said the US was switching focus to Asia and the Pacific as he announced an increase in US military presence in the region.

"We will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace," he said.

Obama also said he stood for an international order in which "commerce and freedom of navigation are not impeded", in an apparent reference to China and its dispute with Taiwan and four ASEAN countries over the South China Sea.

China lays an all-encompassing claim to the sea and other claimants have complained it has grown more assertive by harassing ships travelling in the area.

Wen said in Bali on Friday that "outside powers" should not meddle in the dispute "under any pretext", in a veiled warning to the US.

"The disputes over the South China Sea between the relevant countries in the region have existed for many years," he said.

"They should be settled through friendly consultation and negotiation between the sovereign states directly concerned."

The US insists it is not taking sides in the dispute, but said it has a national interest in the area as a Pacific nation.

'Premiere arena'

China has said it is opposed to a discussion on the maritime disputes at the summit, but Obama said on Friday the gathering was "the premiere arena" to discuss issues such as maritime security.

"The East Asian leaders' meetings are occasions for regional economic co-operation, not a tribunal for quarrels over complex security or maritime issues," an opinion piece in China's official Xinhua news agency said.

"However, certain countries are complicating the issues by attempting to bring them to the meetings.

"And disappointingly ... Clinton signed a declaration with her Philippines counterpart on Wednesday to call for multilateral talks to resolve maritime disputes, such as those over the South China Sea."

The East Asia summit was expected to result in a document to be called the Bali Principles, which calls for countries to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states, renounce the use of force and settle disputes through peaceful means, officials said.

...تابع القراءة

David Cameron, the British prime minister, has said that he and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have agreed on the need for "decisive action" to resolve the eurozone debt crisis, following talks in Berlin.

Merkel and Cameron downplayed differences between Germany, the eurozone's biggest economy, and non-eurozone member Britain, in a news conference after Friday's discussions.

Cameron said the two leaders agreed that "we need to take decisive action to help stabilize the eurozone". He acknowledged that the two countries have differences but said that they can "deal with" them.

Merkel highlighted the two countries' common interest in getting public finances in order and ensuring that a European Union budget increase is kept in check.

But there was no sign of progress on differences over Germany's wish for a financial transaction tax in Europe.

Merkel and Cameron have clashed recently on the way forward for Europe as it suffers what the chancellor has called perhaps its most difficult hour since World War II.

While Merkel sees "more Europe" as the solution, with member states agreeing to cede more sovereignty on issues such as fiscal policy, Cameron has taken a hard Euro-sceptic line of late in response to domestic pressure.

The opposing views were threatening to put the two camps on a collision course ahead of a December 9 EU summit to hammer out changes to the fiscal rule book for the 27-member bloc.

Euro tension

Berlin has accused London of being selfish about Europe as the UK are against an idea of a financial transactions tax, described by one UK minister as a "tax on Britain".

Cameron restated his opposition to a Franco-German proposal for the so-called Tobin tax on financial transactions,
which Britain believes would have a withering effect on its financial sector.

The idea, also backed by France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, has caused alarm in the UK amid concerns that the US, China and other major economies may not come on board, and the City of London would be seriously damaged if the tax is only applied across Europe.

Prior to the talks in Berlin, The Financial Times reported that Cameron would be prepared to back Merkel's plans to strengthen economic union in the eurozone, on condition he wins safeguards to protect the UK from any European legislation.

In the wake over the eurozone crisis, Merkel is prescribing altering the EU treaty to impose German-style budget discipline, preferably on all 27 members of the EU, rather than just the 17 countries in the eurozone.

Peter Altmaier, chief whip of Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in the Bundestag, told the Reuters news agency that "plans for a possible treaty change are now at a very interesting point and we expect to exchange views with our British partners".

'Big bazooka'

However, treaty change talk seems to irritate Cameron's conservative-led coalition for two reasons: it falls far short
of the "big bazooka" response he urges; and it touches a raw nerve about ceding more sovereignty to the European Commission in Brussels.

Britain is already worried that Germany's proposals for a tax on financial transactions - which it still wants introduced in Europe despite rejection by the Group of 20 leading economies would hurt London's competitiveness as a financial hub.

This prompted Merkel's parliamentary leader, Volker Kauder, to tell the CDU at a conference in Leipzig that Germany would not accept Britain "only defending its own interests" and especially those of the City of London's financiers.

Speaking earlier this week, Merkel said the EU needed more powers to ensure budget discipline among member states and Germany was willing to give up sovereignty in some areas to facilitate this.

In contrast, Cameron is pushing for the UK to take powers back from Brussels in pursuit of what he says is his goal of a more flexible and diverse Europe.

In the event of eurozone members moving closer together, the UK has said it wants safeguards that those outside the single currency area will not be disadvantaged in terms of access to the single market and regulations on key sectors like finance.

...تابع القراءة

David Cameron, the British prime minister, has said that he and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have agreed on the need for "decisive action" to resolve the eurozone debt crisis, following talks in Berlin.

Merkel and Cameron downplayed differences between Germany, the eurozone's biggest economy, and non-eurozone member Britain, in a news conference after Friday's discussions.

Cameron said the two leaders agreed that "we need to take decisive action to help stabilize the eurozone". He acknowledged that the two countries have differences but said that they can "deal with" them.

Merkel highlighted the two countries' common interest in getting public finances in order and ensuring that a European Union budget increase is kept in check.

But there was no sign of progress on differences over Germany's wish for a financial transaction tax in Europe.

Merkel and Cameron have clashed recently on the way forward for Europe as it suffers what the chancellor has called perhaps its most difficult hour since World War II.

While Merkel sees "more Europe" as the solution, with member states agreeing to cede more sovereignty on issues such as fiscal policy, Cameron has taken a hard Euro-sceptic line of late in response to domestic pressure.

The opposing views were threatening to put the two camps on a collision course ahead of a December 9 EU summit to hammer out changes to the fiscal rule book for the 27-member bloc.

Euro tension

Berlin has accused London of being selfish about Europe as the UK are against an idea of a financial transactions tax, described by one UK minister as a "tax on Britain".

Cameron restated his opposition to a Franco-German proposal for the so-called Tobin tax on financial transactions,
which Britain believes would have a withering effect on its financial sector.

The idea, also backed by France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, has caused alarm in the UK amid concerns that the US, China and other major economies may not come on board, and the City of London would be seriously damaged if the tax is only applied across Europe.

Prior to the talks in Berlin, The Financial Times reported that Cameron would be prepared to back Merkel's plans to strengthen economic union in the eurozone, on condition he wins safeguards to protect the UK from any European legislation.

In the wake over the eurozone crisis, Merkel is prescribing altering the EU treaty to impose German-style budget discipline, preferably on all 27 members of the EU, rather than just the 17 countries in the eurozone.

Peter Altmaier, chief whip of Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in the Bundestag, told the Reuters news agency that "plans for a possible treaty change are now at a very interesting point and we expect to exchange views with our British partners".

'Big bazooka'

However, treaty change talk seems to irritate Cameron's conservative-led coalition for two reasons: it falls far short
of the "big bazooka" response he urges; and it touches a raw nerve about ceding more sovereignty to the European Commission in Brussels.

Britain is already worried that Germany's proposals for a tax on financial transactions - which it still wants introduced in Europe despite rejection by the Group of 20 leading economies would hurt London's competitiveness as a financial hub.

This prompted Merkel's parliamentary leader, Volker Kauder, to tell the CDU at a conference in Leipzig that Germany would not accept Britain "only defending its own interests" and especially those of the City of London's financiers.

Speaking earlier this week, Merkel said the EU needed more powers to ensure budget discipline among member states and Germany was willing to give up sovereignty in some areas to facilitate this.

In contrast, Cameron is pushing for the UK to take powers back from Brussels in pursuit of what he says is his goal of a more flexible and diverse Europe.

In the event of eurozone members moving closer together, the UK has said it wants safeguards that those outside the single currency area will not be disadvantaged in terms of access to the single market and regulations on key sectors like finance.

...تابع القراءة

Barack Obama has held previously unscheduled talks with China's premier, Wen Jiabao, after a week of sharp exchanges between the two nations.

Obama and Wen met on Saturday on the sidelines of the East Asia Summit on the Indonesian resort island of Bali, following public quarrels over currency, trade and a territorial dispute in the South China Sea.

The meeting came after spats between Beijing and Washington over trade, currency and territorial rights in the South China Sea.

A White House official said president Obama discussed the value of China's currency as well America's
interests in the South China Sea.

"The principal focus of the meeting was on economics," Tom Donilon, Obama's top national security adviser, had told reporters.

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, Donilon, joined Obama for the talks, an AFP photographer present at the start of the meeting saw.

Obama announced on Friday the "transfer" of 24 used F-16 fighter jets to Indonesia to bolster its poor air defence.

The aircraft will be updated with advanced computers, improved radar and avionics, and the capability to carry and field more advanced weaponry and sensors, the US defence department said.

Ties with Australia

In Australia on Thursday, Obama said the US was switching focus to Asia and the Pacific as he announced an increase in US military presence in the region.

"We will preserve our unique ability to project power and deter threats to peace," he said.

Obama also said he stood for an international order in which "commerce and freedom of navigation are not impeded", in an apparent reference to China and its dispute with Taiwan and four ASEAN countries over the South China Sea.

China lays an all-encompassing claim to the sea and other claimants have complained it has grown more assertive by harassing ships travelling in the area.

Wen said in Bali on Friday that "outside powers" should not meddle in the dispute "under any pretext", in a veiled warning to the US.

"The disputes over the South China Sea between the relevant countries in the region have existed for many years," he said.

"They should be settled through friendly consultation and negotiation between the sovereign states directly concerned."

The US insists it is not taking sides in the dispute, but said it has a national interest in the area as a Pacific nation.

'Premiere arena'

China has said it is opposed to a discussion on the maritime disputes at the summit, but Obama said on Friday the gathering was "the premiere arena" to discuss issues such as maritime security.

"The East Asian leaders' meetings are occasions for regional economic co-operation, not a tribunal for quarrels over complex security or maritime issues," an opinion piece in China's official Xinhua news agency said.

"However, certain countries are complicating the issues by attempting to bring them to the meetings.

"And disappointingly ... Clinton signed a declaration with her Philippines counterpart on Wednesday to call for multilateral talks to resolve maritime disputes, such as those over the South China Sea."

The East Asia summit was expected to result in a document to be called the Bali Principles, which calls for countries to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other states, renounce the use of force and settle disputes through peaceful means, officials said.

...تابع القراءة

Tunisia's Islamist Ennahda party and its two coalition partners have reached agreement in principle to share the top three government posts between them, senior sources from two coalition parties told Reuters news agency.

Under the deal, the most powerful post of prime minister will go to Hamadi Jbeli, secretary-general of the Islamist Ennahda party which won last month's election, sources said on Friday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Moncef Marzouki, leader of the secularist Congress for the Republic, a junior coalition partner, is to be named Tunisian president, and Mustafa Ben Jaafar, leader of third coalition partner Ettakatol, will be speaker of the constitutional assembly, the sources said.

The three parties have "an agreement in principle but it is not official yet," said one of the sources. The other source said an announcement would be made in the next few days.

Tunisia became the birth-place of the "Arab Spring" uprisings earlier this year after vegetable seller Mohamed Bouazizi set fire to himself in an act of protest that swelled into a revolution and ousted the president.

In its first democratic election last month, Tunisia handed victory to the moderate Ennahda party, the first time Islamists had won power in the Arab world since the Hamas faction won an election in the Palestinian Territories in 2006.

Tunisia's transition to democracy is being watched closely by Egypt and Libya, where "Arab Spring" revolts pushed out entrenched leaders and where once-outlawed Islamists are also challenging for power.

Ghannouchi's pledge

Last month's election was for an assembly which will sit for a year to draft a new constitution.

Once that is done, it will be dissolved and new elections will be called for a legislature and possibly a president, depending on what new system of government the assembly chooses.

In depth coverage of first Arab Spring vote

There is no formal role for Ennahda leader Rachid Ghannouchi. Some observers say he may have his eye on the president's job when new elections come around.

Ennahda emerged from last month's election as the biggest party but short of a majority in the assembly, forcing it to form a coalition.

Ennahda coming to power has worried many Tunisian secularists who believe their liberal lifestyles are under threat.

Ghannouchi has offered assurances that he will not impose a Muslim moral code, that he will respect women's rights and not ban the sale of alcohol or try to stop women wearing bikinis on the country's Mediterranean beaches.

Some secularists said Ennahda's hidden agenda had been unmasked this week when footage emerged of Jbeli at a meeting with supporters invoking an Islamic state.

But Ennahda said their opponents were deliberately distorting Jbeli's words.

...تابع القراءة