The evident power gap that has presided over the Arab world must be viewed in light of our susceptibility to internal divisions as opposed to our relations with foreign countries. The absence of a unified approach to regional politics is mainly the result of a lack of confidence in the components of our identity. Debates over politics and religion, and the weakness of our economies have left us in a constant state of doubt and conflict. Corm’s contribution is of much importance as seldom does the Arab mind admit to the fact that our problems stem from trying to solve this identity crisis; that while we are so consumed with it, our other weaknesses exacerbate and deepen this crisis even further. With regional divisions and schisms making a unified Arab block impossible, the international community is far from taking us seriously. Countries like the US and USSR previously, and the US and Iran currently, have found it easy to manipulate our policies each to their own advantage. This fragmented identity and the consequences it has brought about from economic to military backwardness, has perpetuated a negative image of Arab countries across the world.

Arab policy makers, thinkers, and citizens alike have developed the habit of blaming the West and Israel for all their shortcomings. The interventions by these countries are not the cause of our inabilities, but the result of them. Arab countries exist as if without any common binding value system. And all of our differences were intensified when religion was employed into policies. This is when Arabs started looking beyond Palestine and fighting in places like Afghanistan and Eastern Europe. Corm compares this religious zeal to that of Zionism, one that has a narrow view of the world and that does not tolerate diversity.

What is then the reason behind the backwardness of Arab countries? Corm rightfully believes that in explaining our underdevelopment we should avoid the anthropological perspective that compares our countries to the western model. The problem of backwardness cannot be solved through ‘cultural dialogue’. According to him, the essence of this problem is our initiation into independence without any former experience in the governance of nations. Instead of building on our nahda from the 19th and 20th centuries, our post-independence experiments with power simply imported European ideologies, only to intensify debates such as the dichotomy of modernity versus tradition, and state versus religion. The latter, he explains, is not even applicable as there is no church hierarchy in the Arab world. What can be examined, however, is the freedom of interpretation of religion. Ridding ourselves of these foreign standards will help us create a common belief system and consolidate our state-building process.

As for our economic progress, he calls for a complete alteration of the rentier system. Though we do have valuable resources, we cannot continue to simply live off them. When we export our energy resources, we are merely bringing in wealth but not employing it in industries and services. Regional economies have become completely dependent on the price of one commodity- oil- making them susceptible to conditions in the countries of export. On the other hand due to the lack of our industrial and scientific development we do not even have the technical abilities to extract our own resources.

Here he directs the blame to Arab policy makers and intellectuals alike. Arab political thought has never attended to questions of economy, but only to those of religion and politics. Likewise, we have never shown any intention to compete internationally in the technical or scientific fields. The result today is highly fragmented economies and trends of immigration. Yet somehow our main concerns remain linked to religion and identity.