'FROM THE OCEAN TO THE SEA, ALL ARABIA SHALL BE FREE!' is the slogan of choice among the young Arabs who gather in their thousands every week to cheer on the uprisings in North Africa and the Middle East.
Their voices reflect the feeling that prevails across the whole Arab world, of a people united in revolt and aspiration.
"There's a formula," joked Ayman, a young Palestinian demonstrating in London. "First every country has its Youm Al Ghadab (Day of Rage) and then the slogan 'The people want the regime to fall' is passed, like the Olympic torch, from Tunisia, where it originated, to Egypt to Libya and ... who knows where next?"
The level of mutual support and cooperation across the region is unprecedented. Internet-based fundraising campaigns, volunteer forums and Facebook news pages have been organised with lightning efficiency in response to events on the ground.
When the current uprising began in Libya, protestors in Tunisia and Egypt, weary from their own battles, were the first to organise convoys of food and medical aid to their common neighbours. Some even crossed the border to fight.
Are we witnessing a resurgence of the pan-Arabism which enjoyed its heyday in the 1960s? Certainly images of the movement's champion, General Gamal Abdel Nasser, have been brandished by protestors across the Arab world - protestors who were not even born when Nasser died in 1970.
Many of the national borders across North Africa and the Middle East are not real frontiers reflecting ethnicity or even social cohesion, but artificial boundaries imposed by the Europeans, first in the interests of colonialism and later in the interests of security.
The secret 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement carved up the Mashriq (Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine) into areas of British and French control and influence. Until then the region had few borders, as the rusting remains of the Hejaz railway testify: it ran all the way from Damascus to Medina with a branch line to Haifa.
The Mashriq's Arab rulers had an altogether different project in mind: they intended to form what was essentially a United Arab state across the area and had fought the occupying Ottoman forces for this reward. They were betrayed by the French and British and thus, perhaps, the first pan-Arab dream fell victim to the well-tried European formula 'divide and rule*.
Opposed to both the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 and increasing western domination across the Arab world, Egypt's second President, Gamal Abdel Nasser, not only revived pan-Arab nationalism but made it state policy. In 1958 the United Arab Republic was formed by Egypt and Syria but lasted only three years.
Since the '60s - and particularly since the 1967 Six Day War in which the combined Arab armies were so badly humiliated - the region has travelled in the opposite direction, characterised by everwidening divisions between nation-states, divisions based on oil wealth, governance, foreign policy, sectarianism ... divisions which disempowered the Arabs as a people and enabled the US and Europe pursue their own interests - oil and the security of Israel - unhindered. As the independent identity of each Arab state became more entrenched, increasingly autocratic and tyrannical regimes emerged.
Revolutionary movement
The kind of pan-Arabism today's protestors envisage differs from the Nasserite agenda in several fundamental ways. Nasser was opposed to foreign interference and western domination - the youth on the streets today want freedom from internal repression by regimes that are subservient to the West, Nasser envisaged a socialist and secular state. The protestors have no single political or religious manifesto, they are simply demanding reform and democracy.
The revolutionary movement in the Arab worid is led by young people - 50% of the region's population is now under 25 - many of them middle class and well-educated. They are young people who have witnessed the painful contrast between their own lives and those lived in more democratic societies, either by travelling abroad or watching satellite television or surfing the internet.
A framework of shared grievances has developed over the past few years. Youth unemployment across the region is around 30% and corruption and nepotism are rife - even graduates find it hard to get a job. Low standards of living among the masses jar against the ostentatious lifestyles of the ruling elite - lifestyles that appear to be funded by the nation's natural resources or foreign aid. Elections, when there are any, are not to be trusted and dissent is met with murderous brutality in regimes where torture is endemic.
Nor do the current regimes represent their people in external affairs. Palestine is dear to the hearts of all Arabs yet it seems their leaders only pay lip service to the Palestinian cause. Western hegemony in the region has been facilitated, rather than resisted, by most Arab leaders.
Many of the protestors' grievances are mirrored by those of militant Islamist groups such as Al Qaeda and it is possible some aspects of jihadi rhetoric and ideology resonate with even the most secular among them. Al Qaeda champions the idea of a united, global community of Moslems, the Umma, which is not, at first sight, far removed from the ideal of a united Arabia.
The notion of martyrdom has gained currency across the region since the suicide bomber became the resistance weapon of choice in Palestine and Iraq. The revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya have been characterised by a willingness to die; as one Egyptian protestor tweeted, 'Better to die for something than live for nothing'. It is this sentiment that enables those facing tanks, guns and tear gas on the Arab streets to, as they put it, overcome the 'fear barrier'.
The self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi, the Tunisian vegetable seller, is generally acknowledged as the tipping point between anger and action; news of this one iconic act of martyrdom spread within minutes through the uncensored, digital, independent media. The internet has provided the recruitment point, strategy forum, newsroom and rallying cry for the region's revolution.
Sixty five million Arabs have the internet at home and millions more access it in cyber cafes. The internet has no borders and the nation-state is irrelevant in cyberspace. Here, unity is achieved through the grievances millions of Arabs are discovering they have in common and the hopes and dreams they will use to construct a future.
Social networks
Twitter and mobile phone messaging enabled the demonstrators in Tunisia and Egypt to synchronise action on the street and warn each other of danger. Every regime facing protests has resorted to blocking the internet and mobile phone networks but, ironically, governments and businesses rely just as heavily on technology to conduct their own affairs and cannot afford to be offline for long.
In the digital age, the region's rulers are unable to effectively censor the media. Technological expertise and innovation is very much the domain of the young, who also recognise the crucial importance of an independent media in forging the kind of society they long to inhabit. The first action of the newly formed governing committee in Benghazi was to establish an online newspaper, radio station and live TV stream.
The desire for a reformed and liberalised pan-Arabism is strong among the region's youthful majority and will continue to put pressure on autocratic, inward-looking leaders whose strength depends on the divisions between nation-states. It seems inevitable the changes sweeping the region will continue and that the future will be shaped by the young.
What might that future look like? Several Arab commentators have suggested that a federation of independently governed democracies along the Unes of the European Union might be a suitable model. Whilst there are no borders between its 27 member states, the constituent peoples maintain their own identity and institutions. With shared economic, security, judicial, diplomatic and development policies, such a body might also construct an apparatus for more evenly distributing the wealth accruing from the region's abundant natural resources. Internal sources of conflict, from disgruntled minorities to sectarian tensions, could be settled in a more objective, region-wide forum.
Economic analysts have observed the tremendous economic potential of a united Arab world, suggesting it might rival the so-called Brie economies (Brazil, Russia, India, China). With a combined population of 400 million, the region could provide both a mighty workforce for a major new global light-manufacturing base and a vast new marketplace. Undoubtedly a confederated Arab world would want to bring Palestine into the fold whilst reducing western military influence in the region. Israel would be obliged to adopt a more conciliatory attitude than it has done historically and finally negotiate a fair solution with the Palestinians.
Few studies dispute the correlation between people suffering humiliation, anger and frustration and political violence. It is a worrying thought that if the present impetus towards real change and unity is thwarted, young Arabs might be tempted to turn instead to less acceptable organisations which lack any form of democratic credentials.
[Sidebar]
Internet-based fundraising campaigns, volunteer forums and Facebook news pages have been organised with lightning efficiency
[Sidebar]
A framework of shared grievances has developed over the past few years. Youth unemployment across the region is around 30%
[Sidebar]
The importance of social networking sites in organising regional displays of protest cannot be overestimated
