From: ccav38@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ("I.Ballouz")
Subject: Re: Hariri and Saudi arabia
Organization: University of Strathclyde
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:47:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov04.225152.15934@eng.umd.edu> ziad@eng.umd.edu (Ziad K. Cheiban) writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov3.103903.22745@ccsun.strath.ac.uk> ccav38@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ("I.Ballouz") writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Nov02.235225.29988@eng.umd.edu> ziad@eng.umd.edu (Ziad K. Cheiban) writes:
>>>
>[stuff deleted]

>Read the quote carefully it says that:
>1- Saudi Arabia did give food aid to the Lebanese .
>(I've seen those so I "know" they did.)
>2- They P O S S I B L Y provide the funding for Hariri's educational
>projects. And I asked about that and I still don't know.

Read my reply carefully, I said you seem  F A I R L Y certain. Does fairly 
mean "absolutely" in your dictionary?

>>[........]
>>
>I have a couple of answers for that.
>Answer #1 
>In case you see a contradiction in that I complain about Saudi support for
>the PLO.
>  The PLO does not represent pan-Arabism neither does Syria or
>Iraq's Ba'ath parties for that matter. The PLO is palestinian nationalism
>in essence (nothing wrong with that) and its name shows it.
>After all they didn't call it the Arab Organization for the Liberation
>of Palestinian Territories.
>While we're on the subject pan-Arabism has to provide for equal and fair
>treatment to all Arabs not to one particular group (e.g. the Palestinians)
>at the expense of another (e.g. the Lebanese).

>Answer #2
>In case you see a contradiction in that I complain about the interference
>of any Arab country in Lebanon.
>  There is a difference between pan-Arabism and the meddling of an Arab
>country in Lebanon.
>1-Interference could be a one way street where the more powerful country imposes
>its will on the weaker one. In pan-Arabism both countries have an influence
>on each other regardless of who is weaker.(e.g. we don't have a say in Saudi
>affairs why should they have a say in ours? It's not fair!)
>2-Interference is mostly covert, while one would hope that in a pan-Arab
>entity there would be official institutions through which policy common to
>member states would be made. (sort of like the European parliament)
>3-If it is to be successful, a pan-Arab entity should come about by a 
>referendum in member states, and hence have the approval of the people.
>I can't remember anybody ever asking the Lebanese to vote on whether it was
>OK to interfere in their affairs. 
>>

Oh excuse me, stick to what you said please. You were complaining about the PLO
actions in Lebanon and you were complaining that Saudi is the party that have
financed them. 

I said to you, in whatever form, whatever mechanism you are going to implement
this ideology, Lebanon as a country which has a front line with Israel has to
let the PLO to operate. Saudi being a rich country they have to pay for them.

In this case, you have to prepare yourself that the PlO needs some secrecy,they
need some land, Israel would retaliate, ..etc.
This is interferrence in our country, and this is inevitable result of the 
ideology you proposed whether you implement it by democratic means or not.

You want Pan-Arabism, yoy have to bear the consequences  and then you have to
live with the reactions of the israelis and you have to accept that Saudis have
tp provide the financial support.

>>Another point, is it not true that ALL ARABS without any exception have turned
>>a blind eye to the PLO and its actions in Lebanon? If the saudis were wrong,
>>what about the rest of the arabs? What about the kuwaitis you mentioned? Did
>>they not contribute to the PLO?
>
>You're right but my subject was Saudi Arabia, besides the Saudis did
>contribute a much higher portion than anybody else.

They are among the richest, and if we are to implement the ideology you want,
then you should pay more, don't they? And in any case, although you were
talking about Saudi and you blamed them for every thing in Lebanon, perhaps
you would care to give us about you opinions about all the countries which
support factions in the PLO, lebanese militias.

If supporting students and providing food subsedies, providing some support
for the bankrupt government is bad, what about the other countries that have
these militias ? I suppose they are less dangerous, they support democracy in
Kuwait, they interferred heavily to defend the shia in Iraq, they don't have
any huge armies, they are not autocratic systems ...All this is Ok in your 
opinion is not?

[.....]

I. Ballouz

-- 
*******************************************************************************
* IBRAHIM BALLOUZ            **           DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE          *
* ccav38@uk.ac.strath.ccsun  **  STRATHCLYDE UNIVERSITY GLASGOW SCOTLAND U.K. *
*******************************************************************************