European Union is a reality based on Historical Knowledge. African Union is impossibility because of the prevailing ignorance and the lack of Humanities. ‘Arab’ League is the result of a provocative falsification of History. Actually, there are no Arabs, except in Hedjaz.
European Union, African Union, and the fictitious ‘Arab’ League
Considerations on the basic reasons of Third World’s obscurantism and totalitarianism
By Prof. Dr. Muhammad Shamsadin Megalommatis
Referring to the European and the African Unions, we easily notice that the only thing they have in common is the word ‘union’, which means of course different things under different circumstances.
European Union is based on Knowledge.
European Union is a state-under-formation, a unique procedure in the History of Mankind in which political willingness came after correct historical knowledge attained in leading universities. When it comes to European History, not a single case of historical misunderstanding – let alone falsification of history – can be detected in today’s European universities; either European or World history is concerned.
Simply, the academic research and scholarship proceeds through successive readjustments, reconsiderations and modifications of the truth; conclusions are drawn by eliminating previous inaccuracies ‘mutatis mutandis’.
Furthermore, in these universities, the history of all the other countries and civilizations has been investigated in a pioneering and definitely unmatched way, so that still today an Indian undergraduate learns about Asoka better in London rather than in Calcutta, an Iranian researcher studies Cuneiform Achaemenid texts in Berlin rather in Ispahan, an Egyptian student scrutinizes the Inscriptions of Ramses III in Torino rather in Assiut, a Yemeni apprentice focuses on Qatabanic texts in Aix-la-Chapelle rather than in Mukalla, and an Algerian carries out a research on Ibn Hazem in Paris rather in Oran, and so on.
It is wrong to think that politicians, statesmen and administrators matter more than professors and researchers in Europe (and in America). The Western political will – viewed as expressed at a global level – relies on a colossal amount of work in education and culture, and 3-century long research in history, art, philosophy and literature.
Only uneducated and uncivilized people assume today that Engineering and Technology can be a more important a sector than Humanities. All modern European and American political establishments are founded on Humanities. This knowledge is missing in Africa, Asia (with the exception of Japan, a country that mobilized great resources in Humanities since the 60’ies) and Latin America. And as long as it is missing, these parts of the world will never have the power to go ahead. This is so, because this is all knowledge is about: power. The aforementioned conclusion is valid even if at times the political willingness is there – as in the present case of an ‘African’ ‘Parliament’. If such an institution comes ever to existence, it will be the most ridiculous element of the international society.
Ignorance prevails in Africa
No Union will ever come to Africa, before as many Egyptians learn Afaan Oromo as French speak German, before as many Hausa native speakers learn Somali as Italians speak French, and so on. Knowing your next in depth is the beginning; political willingness without that deep knowledge is just worthless rubbish.
In Africa, ignorance reigns everywhere. Can you compare an average Greek’s knowledge (obtained in education, through books and mass media, and due to several trips) of – let’s say – France with the level of knowledge an average Tunisian has of Eritrea or Zimbabwe?
What is worse is that a centripetal force does not exist in Africa, as it does in Europe; ‘union’ is not just an improved relationship among neighbors. Can one estimate for how long how many millions of Turks, Greeks, Yugoslavians and Italians have lived in Germany, Belgium and France?
One has reasons to believe that it would be more feasible for Algeria to unite with the European Union than for Morocco to become a partner with Somalia, under the auspices of a ‘real’ African Union, which would function in the same way the European Union does, thus making of Italy a real partner with Finland.
On the contrary, one finds rather centrifugal forces in the African continent.
The Arab League is the result of a perverse falsification of History
Now, if the situation is like this in Africa, it is even worse in the case of the so-called ‘Arab’ League. And it would be wise to expect the situation to turn even worse, because in most of these dysfunctional, anachronistic and tyrannical regimes, one does not only face a great part of missing knowledge and total ignorance of the ‘other’ (as it happens in the case of Africa) but also encounters a terrible distortion and a provocative falsification of the History of Middle East; even worse, an extra layer of flagrant educational – academic misinformation and mass media disinformation was added to the enduring distortion and ignorance.
The basic falsehood is to be found at the origin of the iniquitous body. Even before it was established, the fallacy of Pan-Arabism and Arab Nationalism was widely diffused among the populations of the states that worked together – under discreet Anglo-French colonial guidance – to set up the ‘Arab’ League. The original point of distortion is the idea that there is an Arab nation or the assumption that the populations of all the member states are … “Arabs”!
There are no Arabs, except in Hedjaz, the western part of the Arabian Peninsula.
The only historical truth in this respect is that there are no Arabs at all; there are only Arabic-speaking peoples of non-Arab ethnic, linguistic and cultural background; all these peoples are characterized by striking dissimilarities that guarantee only failures in any effort of union among them. The reason is simple; there are so many, so deep, and so grave differences among them that they appear at every point of discussion, deliberation or negotiation among their representatives. But then, these fake states’ representatives, being all confused with the idea that they are all the same (: ‘Arabs’), whereas they are not, clash, oppose one another, and split (as it happened many times in the past and with extreme ferocity).
Quite contrarily, if all these fake states had had the opportunity to undergo a true nation-building process and if all these populations knew their real, historical identities, which in and by themselves testify to their profound differences and considerable dissimilarities, their representatives would have been aware of these down-to-earth realities and would have faced them duly and properly, establishing among themselves proper and sound state relationships, such as the present relations between Germany and Russia, Germany and China or Russia and China.
If this absolute and fundamental historical reality is not widely assessed and understood first, only Islamic Terrorism will emanate from the Arab League’s quasi-barbaric realm.
‘Arabs’: a fabricated bogus-nation that proliferates ignorance, barbarism and terrorism
In reality, the Lebanese are Phoenicians, who got Aramaized in Late Antiquity.
Arabic-speaking Syrians and Iraqis are all, irrespective of their religion, Aramaeans. So are the Palestinians and the Kuwaitis, as well as the Emiratis and the Qataris, who have certainly been intermixed with Persians. The same concerns the entire populations of today’s SE Turkey and SW Iran. Known since the times of Tiglathpileser I, due to Assyrian-Babylonian cuneiform inscriptions, the Aramaeans have been the main historical nation across the land-, desert-, and sea routes of silk-, spice-, and incense trade between the East and the West.
The quasi-totality of the historical populations of Southeastern Anatolia (in today’s Turkey), Mesopotamia, Syria, Palestine, SW Iran, and the Persian Gulf’s coastal lands were Arameans from the Achaemenid times (550-330 BCE) down to early Islamic times, when the bulk of the Aramaeans accepted Islam and contributed – more than any other nation – to the establishment of the Islamic Civilization.
Egyptians are Copts, native Egyptians, i.e. the descendants of the people of Ancient Egypt, which has been known as Kemet, not ‘Egypt’, for more than three millennia, as all the Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic texts testify. As the Valley of the Nile and Mesopotamia were the world civilization’s main cradles and centers for many long millennia, many populations of different backgrounds settled in Egypt in different moments of the past. The Egyptians intermingled therefore with Cushitic and Meroitic Sudanese (known as ‘Ethiopians’ in the Antiquity), with other Africans, and also with Canaanites, Phoenicians, Aramaeans, Hebrews, Yemenites, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, and Turks; however, one must always bear in mind that the newcomers were never numerous, comparatively speaking, and they were consequently ethnically assimilated among the Egyptians.
Sudanese are the descendants of the Ancient Cushites and Meroites, who were known as ‘Ethiopians’ – in contrast with Abyssinia, which was fallaciously renamed ‘Ethiopia’ in the middle of the 20th c. under colonial guidance.
The Libyans and the people of the Maghreb are the descendants of the Hamitic nations of Sahara and the Atlas region; they entered in extensive intermarriages with the Phoenicians and the Carthaginians, and to lesser extent with the Romans. Today, either they speak Berber, Tuareg, Arabic or are bilingual, they are all ethnically Berbers,
Last but not least, the Yemenites are not Arabs, but genuine Yemenites, i.e. descendants of the ancient Yemenite states of Saba (Sheba), Qataban, Himyar, Awsan, and Hadhramaut; they are closer to Abyssinians (Axumites) than to the Arabs of Hedjaz. To understand that the Yemenites are not Arab, suffice it that one reads the existing pre-Islamic epigraphic evidence, which exists in sufficient numbers of deciphered texts in Sabaean, Himyarite, Awsani, Qatabani and Hadhrami, There have also been found bilingual inscriptions in Sabaean and pre-Islamic Arabic, which shows that the Yemenites have nothing in common with ‘Arabs’.
Linguistic Arabization due to Islamization does not mean Ethnic, Cultural and Social Arabization
All these nations, by accepting Islam, sooner or later, started becoming gradually arabized, but this happened only at the linguistic level – not at a racial, ethnic level; and not at the cultural level. And we know only too well that the Arabs of the times of the Prophet were not numerous at all. One generation later, when let us say Islamic armies were reaching faraway places, such as Carthage in today’s Tunisia, Central Asia, and the Indus valley, the Muslim fighters were speaking Arabic (religious language for all Muslims), but among them the Arabs were already a tiny, insignificant minority.
Aramaeans from Damascus and Ctesiphon, Egyptians from Alexandria, Yemenis from Aden and Marib, and Iranians from Bishapur/Qazerun were already the outright majority among the soldiers of these armies! They learnt the language of Quran, but they did not and could change neither their racial and ethnic origin nor their cultural identity.
In addition, one should never forget that, speaking of racial-ethnic mixtures and intermarriages, at the times of Prophet Muhammad, all the Arabs were not exceeding in number the population of just one major Aramaean, Egyptian or Persian city (namely Tadmor, Alexandria, or Istakhr).
The Copts (Christians) of Egypt and the Christian Aramaeans of Iraq and Iran show very well what happened: only those who remained Christians preserved their language (Coptic and Aramaic – Syriac). Among those who accepted Islam in the early period, only Persians preserved their language.
This is not strange and can be easily explained; the great cultural phenomenon of Ferdowsi gives us an insightful view and a deep understanding. If the Egyptian Copts and the Aranaeans had not been Christianized, and if they had kept a national traditional historical record of their glorious past, they would have resulted into a different perception of Islam, thus preserving their original languages and developing epics similar to Shahnameh.
Because this did not happen, we encounter the current situation; but this does not mean that these peoples are ‘Arab’ in any sense. One has therefore to conclude at the political, diplomatic and international level that any type of interstate relationship and any kind of union of states cannot be based on falsely perceived history and on a large amount of misinformation and disinformation, which is mostly due to colonial powers, mainly France and England, and to their subtle war tactics against Islam and the Ottoman Empire.
It is from Western Europe that nationalism emanated. And as such, it caused serious problems to nations of the East and the West, irrespective of religion (Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others). The confusion spread throughout the territories of the Ottoman Empire finds its equivalent in the disaster of the Irish, the Scots, the Corsicans, the Occitans, and the Celts of Brittany. Actually, it leads to nowhere.
Earlier one understands this, sooner one escapes from the Orientalist, colonial traps that led millions of people to wars and disasters.