The Mismanagement in the Arab World

It is perplexing to observe the financial management strategies employed by some Arab nations today, especially when considering their illustrious history as pioneers in fields such as mathematics and astronomy between the 9th and 15th centuries. Their seminal contributions to algebra and astronomy were so significant that they have influenced modern mathematical language, with terms like "algorithm" and "algebra" directly stemming from their work.

This rich intellectual history stands in stark contrast to the current state of affairs, where these nations, despite their considerable wealth, often appear to squander their potential. Such self-centered and profligate behavior is not new; it echoes historical figures like the Roman Emperor Nero, who wasted resources to satisfy his own ego.

In the contemporary context, consider Saudi Arabia as a case in point. The nation possesses massive oil reserves, and the valuation of its oil company, Saudi Aramco, rivals that of Apple—a company that had to overcome numerous challenges to achieve its current worth. Despite this affluence, Saudi Arabia seems to invest in extravagant projects rather than initiatives that could have a lasting global impact, such as solving the water crisis or developing innovative energy technologies.

This resource wastage becomes even more striking when compared to historical examples like the Spanish Empire, which, despite its wealth in gold and silver, eventually declined. Conversely, the United Kingdom, without access to such resources, sparked the Industrial Revolution and became a global power through innovation.

The lavish and extravagant behavior of some Arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, sharply contrasts with their rich intellectual and scientific history. Saudi Arabia's "Neom" project, for instance, has been criticized for its impracticality and extravagance, with experts like Nassim Nicolas Taleb labeling it as "stupid." Such projects appear more like whims of wealthy individuals than thoughtful initiatives to solve global issues.

This kind of wastefulness is also evident in Qatar, particularly with the hosting of the FIFA World Cup, which has raised ethical questions related to labor exploitation and environmental impact. In Egypt, another Arab nation, there is also a trend toward wastefulness, despite its historical reputation for frugality.

Such profligate spending is all the more troubling when compared to more prudent resource utilization examples, like Norway's sovereign wealth fund, which could potentially benefit every Norwegian citizen. Or even Libya under Gaddafi, who, despite his eccentricities, invested in useful infrastructure projects like the Great Man-Made River.

Architecture itself can become a vanity playground, as evidenced by London's Walkie Talkie building, criticized for its impractical design. Similarly, the design of the city "Neom" in Saudi Arabia, with its 400-meter tall mirror buildings, seems more focused on spectacle than on functionality or sustainability.

Such ostentatious expenditures raise ethical and practical questions. With such considerable resources, these countries could invest in projects with real and lasting impact, such as research on nuclear fusion, desalination of seawater, or even transforming desert into arable land.

In the end, these extravagances appear to be attempts to showcase power and wealth rather than efforts to solve concrete problems. This is particularly striking in the case of Qatar and the World Cup, where human rights and environmental impact concerns are sidelined in favor of grandiosity and spectacle.

These behaviors raise serious questions about the priorities and values of the leaders of these countries. They also underscore the importance of innovation and judicious investment, rather than mere accumulation of wealth, in creating a meaningful and sustainable future.

Egypt, like Saudi Arabia, also seems engaged in grandiose projects that do not address the urgent needs of its population. For instance, the construction of a Versailles replica near Cairo, with irrigated lawns in the middle of the desert, appears to be an unnecessary extravagance, especially in a region where water is a precious resource. Moreover, the plan for a military complex larger than the Pentagon diverts resources that could be better used to address pressing social issues.

In a country where slums are pervasive and road mortality rates are alarming due to lack of signage, such projects seem disconnected from ground realities. Instead of addressing issues like lack of education, access to clean water, or the need for housing and healthcare infrastructure, Egypt seems to prefer pharaonic projects that flatter the egos of leaders rather than serve the well-being of the population.

Such lavish spending is particularly troubling when considering the existing intellectual and creative potential in the Arab world. For example, Egypt has produced Nobel laureates like Naguib Mahfouz, and there is a pool of young talent in architecture and mathematics in the Maghreb region. Instead of investing in these local talents, billions are squandered on projects like NEOM in Saudi Arabia or this Versailles replica in Egypt.

With Financial Resources of Such Magnitude, More Judicious and Innovative Investments Are Possible: A Comparative Analysis of Financial Decision-Making in the Arab World

With such considerable financial resources at their disposal, one could envision far more judicious and innovative investments. For instance, with $5 billion, one could nearly finance an entire year of operations for France's National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), or construct Apple's headquarters. These funds could also be deployed to stimulate industrial revolutions or invest in a circular economy focused on waste reuse.

Much like 17th-century Spain, which squandered its wealth, some Arab countries appear to be making imprudent financial choices today. Instead of funding projects that address the fundamental needs of their population, such as hospitals, schools, or sustainable technologies, they opt for extravagant projects that seem more designed to flatter the egos of leaders than to serve the common good.

Take, for example, Egypt, which is contemplating building a new capital with lavish facilities, including a gigantic flag and a park the size of Central Park, all irrigated in the middle of the desert. This is a blatant waste of resources in a country where numerous social and infrastructural problems remain unresolved.

Similarly, Saudi Arabia plans to construct a futuristic city featuring 400-meter tall mirror skyscrapers, without taking into account the real needs of its population. These projects appear to be the product of misplaced pride, centered not on the well-being of the people but on the self-glorification of leaders.

The United Arab Emirates offer an interesting contrast. Abu Dhabi has judiciously invested in cultural projects like the Louvre Abu Dhabi, while Dubai, despite its appearance of prosperity, is actually financially unstable and dependent on Abu Dhabi.

What is lacking in these grandiose projects is a genuine long-term vision that takes into account the needs and aspirations of the people. In the past, the Arab world was a pioneer in fields like mathematics, medicine, and architecture, even collaborating with experts from different religions and backgrounds.

True greatness lies not in extravagance but in excellence, innovation, and community service. As the Sufi master Alawi pointed out, what we see today in countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt is "Pharaonic without Moses." What is needed is a return to the values that made the Arab world great in the past: intelligence, genius, and innovation.

I yearn to see an Arab world that leverages its talents and resources to create a better society, rather than squandering its wealth on projects that serve only to reinforce the power and ego of its leaders.

The Hypothetical Collapse of the United States: Geopolitical Implications and the Need for a New International Order

The notion that the United States could collapse is not as implausible as it may initially seem. Intellectuals such as Emmanuel Todd and Igor Panarin have posited such hypotheses, drawing on historical precedents that demonstrate the eventual decline of all empires. Vladimir Putin himself has described the fall of the Soviet Union as the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century" and appears committed to restoring a similar influence for Russia.

However, it is crucial to underscore that the collapse of the United States would have devastating geopolitical consequences. While their role in conflicts such as those in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya may be criticized, their global influence renders them "too big to fail" within the current international system. They dominate a significant portion of global trade and financial institutions, like Citigroup, which controls a substantial share of global transactions.

In the current context, the United States stands as an unparalleled superpower, possessing the world's reserve currency, influential diplomacy, and unmatched military might. Their downfall would create a power vacuum that could lead to large-scale conflicts and disruptions, potentially costing millions of lives.

One of the underlying issues is that the international system is still largely based on Westphalian principles dating back to the 17th century. This system, predicated on the balance of power, has not evolved substantially despite technological advancements, particularly in the military domain. In such a system, stability is often maintained by a dominant power, as was the case with the Pax Romana in antiquity.

Like the Roman Empire, the United States has used its influence to shape the world in its image, notably through its educational system that attracts young talents from around the globe. Common symbols, such as the eagle and the fasces, underscore this aspiration to be modern heirs to Rome.

However, it is important to note that since Roman times, no empire has succeeded in unifying the Mediterranean, and it is unlikely to happen again. The United States, despite its power, is not immune to the historical cycles that have seen the decline of numerous empires before them. Their fall, if it were to occur, would have global ramifications, highlighting the need to rethink our international system that has not evolved much since the Treaty of Westphalia.

Although the American empire is often criticized for its actions and policies, it nonetheless plays an essential role in stabilizing the global geopolitical landscape. As Zbigniew Brzezinski pointed out in "The Grand Chessboard," the sudden disappearance of this superpower could trigger a series of crises and conflicts on a global scale. For instance, without the American security umbrella, nations like Japan might feel compelled to rearm, potentially leading to a nuclear arms race involving multiple countries.

In this context, the United States acts as a stabilizing factor that neither France, the United Kingdom, nor any other country could replace. A world without American presence would likely be more chaotic, with increased regional tensions and armed conflicts.

What should be hoped for is not so much the fall of the American empire but the emergence of a more balanced global order. A multipolar world, where emerging nations like the BRICS gain influence, would be a desirable development. These countries should focus not only on their military power but also on their diplomacy and conflict-resolution capabilities.

Currently, global peace is largely maintained by the economic and military power of the United States, which can impose sanctions on almost any country. However, this system is far from ideal, as it relies on an international order that has not evolved much since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. The United Nations, despite their role, have failed to prevent major conflicts, and their effectiveness largely depends on American power.

This observation highlights our collective failure to create a more just and effective international system. It reveals our inability to establish a global order that is not simply based on the law of the strongest.

To conclude on a more positive note, I would cite thinkers like Ali Ndao and Martin Luther King, who both emphasized the importance of inner peace as a prerequisite for global peace. As stated in UNESCO's constitution, peace must be constructed in the minds of men if it is to be enduring. This serves as a reminder that change must begin from within, both at the individual and national levels.