Mamdouh alMuhaini: Could a unified Arab security force ever work?

It is natural, during major crises like the one we are experiencing now, for new ideas to emerge or for old ones to be revived. One of the most frequently discussed ideas these days is the call to establish a unified Arab national security force.
But the best thing proponents of this idea could do is stop promoting it. In reality, it is not a viable concept, neither in theory nor in practice. This is why Gulf states have not adopted it, despite facing direct Iranian attacks. The problem is that its advocates are placing unrealistic expectations on the Arab system, asking it to do what it was never designed to do. The Arab League is useful for coordinating political positions and providing legitimacy, but not for building military strategies, managing wars, or forming unified armies.

So why does the idea of Arab national security appear unworkable?

Across large segments of the Arab public, there is sympathy for Iran simply because it is seen as opposing the United States and Israel, while the damage suffered by Gulf states is overlooked.

 

The first reason is the absence of agreement on a common enemy.

During World War II, the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union united against a clear and defined enemy: Nazism. After the war, NATO was established to counter the Soviet Union. In other words, alliances are built on a shared and clearly defined threat. In the Arab world, this condition does not exist. During the liberation of Kuwait, Arab states were divided between supporters and opponents. Today, despite Gulf countries facing one of the most significant attacks in their history, there are still those who do not view Iran as an adversary. So how can a joint force be built without agreement on who it is meant to confront?

The second reason is the fragility of several Arab states.

Some are engulfed in civil wars, others suffer from internal divisions or external interference, while others face legitimacy disputes or deep economic crises. Military alliances are not built on theory alone, but on the strength of the states that compose them. Looking at NATO’s experience, its success lies not only in military capability, but also in political cohesion and a strong economic foundation. The alliance’s annual defense spending exceeds one trillion dollars, giving it sustained deterrence and a clear advantage over its rivals.

The third reason is the public factor.

READ: Nadim Houry: US approach on Lebanon is fundamentally flawed

Through their political discourse and media, many governments in the region have mobilized their populations with a concentrated mix of ideological rhetoric against the United States and the West. When crises arise, these same governments often fear public backlash. Across large segments of the Arab public, there is sympathy for Iran simply because it is seen as opposing the United States and Israel, while the damage suffered by Gulf states is overlooked. At times, this sentiment runs counter to official government positions, which may express solidarity with Gulf countries but are either unable or unwilling to reshape a narrative that has been built over decades. The question then becomes: How can an Arab national security framework be formed if the public does not recognize the common enemy it is meant to confront? Instead of rallying to support fellow Arab states, governments may find themselves facing domestic anger.
For these reasons and others, the concept of Arab national security remains unrealistic. Its advocates are doing little more than attempting to revive a dead idea, like applying makeup to a lifeless body.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Maghrebi.org. Mamdouh AlMuhaini is the General Manager of Al Arabiya and Al Hadath. The article was originally published by Al Arabiya.

If you wish to pitch an opinion piece, please send your article to opinion@maghrebi.org.