The UAR: A Failed Attempt at Integration

           This week in class we learned that integration involves two or more nations to share or give up some of their sovereignty in order to work towards other advantages, which can include a variety of things. We know from such organizations such as the European Union and the United Nations, that integration is possible, but we also know that there have been many failed attempts as well. One such failed attempt was the United Arab Republic, a short-lived union between Egypt and Syria. The question here is: why did the UAR fail and what can other nations take from this failure in order to strengthen their own integration attempts? 

            The United Arab Republic began in 1958 and ended in late 1961 when Syrian military staged a coup that took back their nation and then split from Egypt (BBC). The Syrians became unhappy with the union for a variety of reasons, the largest of them being that the Egyptians were given too much, and the Syrians too little. As we learned in class, in order for integration to be successful, everyone must receive an “equal piece of the pie”. The internal problems the opposition of both Turkey and Israel, so outside factors could not have played a major part in the disintegration of the United Arab Republic – the problem with the UAR was between Egypt and Syria.

            Syrian, at the time, was extremely unstable. It had just won its independence from France twelve years before. Their military was extremely divided, as was the political system, which the military was also very active in (Palmer). Because of these conditions within the Syrian government, Colonel Nasser only agreed to the union if there was a plebiscite, the many parties within the nation were dissolved, and the military gave up its political control as well as his earlier demands that would mainly benefit Egypt (Palmer). So why did the Syrians accept these conditions that would clearly put Egypt above their own country? At the time, the political instability, pressures from the populous, and outside pressures from the Soviet Union plagues Syria, so at the time that the union was born, it seemed like the best option for the country as a whole.

            This decision by Syrian officials to unify with Egypt shows the power not only of the people of a country, but also the effects that outside pressures could have. The Syrian government saw the danger of falling to the Soviets, so in order to reduce that risk, they gave up some of their sovereignty in order to both satisfy the people and stop the Soviet pressures. The country was extremely optimistic about the union at the beginning. They believed that this merge with Egypt would give them short-term and long-term benefits, and that it would also led to the eventual formation of a democracy once the populous was able to see the full benefits of having such rights (Palmer). The problems arose soon after the union, because once the short-term benefits of the merge were satisfied, they began to see the downsides of the union at its fullest.

            First and foremost, the Syrians felt as if they were second to the Egyptians for a variety of reasons. The Syrian half of the government had been filled with a large number of Egyptians, while the Egyptian half of the government remained fully Egyptian. The majority of high-ranking positions in the united sector of the government were given to Egyptians. Also, many Syrian political officials and military officers were sent to Egypt, which made them feel as if they had been exiled from their homeland. When the Syrians complained about the inequalities, President Nassir created a presidential council that would consist of three representatives from each region (Palmer).

            The elite politicians were not the only portion of Syria that became unsupportive of the United Arab Republic. The general population did not see any of the benefits that they had thought would come to them when the two nations united. They were also cut off from the rest of the world. Nasser closed the borders that Syria shared with both Iraq and Jordan, causing the trade to continue illegally, hurting both Syria and the civilian population (Palmer). The hardships that Syria faced were multiplied by a three-year famine and a mass exodus of skilled workers illegally leaving Syria for a better life in other countries (Palmer). These workers were then replaced by Egyptians which once again added to the tension

            Another one of the issues that the Syrians and the Egyptians had was that they were unable to work together in order to form a well-working government that would be able to communicate. There was a lot of confusion among the different departments because they did not know where their jurisdiction started and ended. They were also unable to fully understand each other. Both countries had had just recently gained their independence, Egypt from England, Syria from France, so their conflicting identities was a major source of tension (Palmer). Also, because Syria was made to feel like it was second to Egypt the feeling of once again being colonized began to surface (Palmer).

All of this tension, made worse through rumors and economic hardship, was the impetus that caused the coup on September 28, 1961 in Syria (United Arab Republic). The Syrian military retook control of the country and declared the union over.

            This union came almost immediately after both countries gained their independence from the grasp of colonialism. This is dangerous in itself, because the wounds were still fresh. Nasser’s conditions set up the Egyptians to receive a bigger piece of the pie. This feeling of inequality that the Syrians received was multiplied by the fresh wounds of colonialism, causing distrust to run rampant. This coincides with the theory of realism because the two nations only joined together because they could see the long-term benefits of it. But, when it became clear that the union was only benefiting Egypt, Syria quickly staged the coup that ended their union.

The union came into being because of the long-lasting hope that the Arab world would eventually be united. They identified themselves as Arabs and Muslims which allowed for the United Arab Republic to be created in the first place. But, their shared identity was not enough to hold the UAR together. When Egypt took most of the benefit and then began to isolate Syria from the rest of the world, the Syrians united to restore their national identity.

The possibility of future Arab integration is not lost because of this one failed attempt. These countries were too young at the time of the creation of the United Arab Republic for the attempt to work out successfully. In the future, we could see another attempted integration in the Arab and Muslim world, and it could be successful, as long the countries involved realize that in order for integration to be successful, all actors must be given the feeling of equality, since they are all giving up the same amount of sovereignty for the same advantages. They should model themselves after more successful models such as the European Union.

           

Works Cited

"BBC News - Syria Profile - Overview." BBC - Homepage. BBC News, 5 Oct. 2011. Web. 05 Nov. 2011. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14703856>.

Palmer, Monte. The United Arab Republic: An Assessment of Its Failure.  Middle East Journal, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Winter, 1966), pp. 50-67. Middle East Institute <http://www.jstor.org/stable/4323954>.

"United Arab Republic (U.A.R.) (historical Republic, Egypt-Syria) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia." Encyclopedia - Britannica Online Encyclopedia. Web. 06 Nov. 2011. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/615447/United-Arab-Republic-UAR>.