He was our Washington and our Lincoln, rolled into one

I had the honour this year of introducing and interviewing Dr Abdul Khaleq Abdullah on stage to a packed auditorium of around 1,350 UAE nationals. The occasion was a UAE National Identity summit held in the Higher Colleges of Technology, Sharjah Women’s College campus. Emirati students were there from across the HCT network.

Dr Abdul Khaleq, who is a personal hero to me and to thousands of Emiratis, stood at the podium and addressed the students – many seated on the stairs, others standing at the sides and at the back because there were no seats left.

“All of you have a birthday,” he told the students, “but in addition to the birthday on your passport all of you were born on December 2, 1971.” The applause began, and he continued: “All of you have a home, but in addition to the home you live in, your home is the entire land of the UAE.” The crowd cheered. “All of you have a father, your father’s name is written on your ID card, but all of you have a second father. His name is Sheikh Zayed.”

The hall was tense with emotions that I have never experienced, before or since. People started cheering “Bu Khalifa”, our affectionate nickname for the father of our nation. Nothing comes closes to an Emirati’s heart. Nothing compares to Sheikh Zayed.

Many non-Emiratis will not understand what goes through Emirati hearts, minds and veins when Sheikh Zayed’s name is mentioned. He has become a revered figure. Sheikh Zayed, to us, was George Washington and Abraham Lincoln rolled into one. Washington established the United States of America, and Lincoln saved it from its biggest threats. Sheikh Zayed lived long enough to do both.

Before him, the Trucial Coast states were not much more than warring tribes, some more established than others, but all relatively small, weak and vulnerable. So weak were these states that one of them was a victim of aggression and occupation by a neighbour in the small window of 72 hours between the British withdrawal and the union of the then six Emirates.

A couple of weeks ago, someone whom I cannot call an Emirati – even though he is a citizen – wrote on my blog doubting the success of the union. “We’re better off alone,” he said. That was truly un-Emirati of him. I was taken aback, along with a dozen or so others, Emiratis and non-Emiratis. Some responded, trying to talk some sense into him, but to no avail. His feelings seemed to be etched in stone. I realised then that we can’t win the heart of every person. Yet, even to this unrepresentative doubter, Sheikh Zayed was a red line that cannot ever be crossed.

To Emiratis, Sheikh Zayed wasn’t a mere person: he was an icon as well as a phenomenon. He singlehandedly created an identity, “The Emirati”, where one never existed before. No one ever talked about the need to preserve Emirati identity in his lifetime. There was no need, you see, “Emirati identity” was Sheikh Zayed, the definition and the personification of Emirati identity, as well as its guardian.

Sheikh Zayed’s impact changed our vocabulary for ever. Before him, both inhabitants and visitors would use the phrase, “the Arab Emirates are”; after him we say, “the Arab Emirates is”. How many can lay such a claim in the world? He was indeed a phenomenon that will most probably never be recreated. He was the right man at the right time, balancing the needs of several ruling families and tribes, not all of whom were in full agreement all the time. But all it took was one word from Sheikh Zayed and they would all acquiesce.

We continue to learn of his wise decisions years after his passing. Sending non-combatant Emirati troops to Afghanistan to assist the manipulated and war-ravaged people was one of them. The Emirati presence there is an essential element in keeping what peace there is in that country, as our knowledge of Islam and the traditions of the Afghans gives them trusts in us. No other Gulf Arab country stepped up to the plate, and the UAE continues proudly to shoulder that great responsibility alone.

Take the case of Libya and the Emirates; both states have a roughly equal amount of oil, with relatively small populations. In fact, Libya is probably in a far more advantageous position, lying on the Mediterranean next to potentially major trading partners. Compare both states’ literacy and education levels, women’s development and child health care, trade and commerce; in those areas, and virtually every other sense, the UAE outshines Libya. Even our sisterly Kuwait has sadly stagnated in the past few decades, despite its enormous oil wealth.

There is no doubt in my mind, not for one second, that our seven emirates, big and small, wealthy and poor, would not have survived in such a dangerous neighbourhood were they not tied in a union orchestrated by Sheikh Zayed. It is one debt that all Emiratis are proud to carry for the rest of our lives.

But how have we honoured him since his passing, five years ago today? The truth is that in his lifetime, roads and auditorium halls were named after him as well as a university, and today Abu Dhabi is building a museum dedicated to him. But is that enough? “I pity this new generation that is not growing up in the shadow of Sheikh Zayed,” my friend Talal told me recently. He’s right.

But those of us who were fortunate enough to have done so have a part to play in keeping his memory alive. Where is the Sheikh Zayed International Airport? Where is the dedicated day – work day or holiday, it doesn’t matter – that carries his name? Why aren’t school curriculums infused with his lessons? I have no doubt that we could have done much better than this. Comments such as “We’re better off alone” are a result of our complacency towards Bu Khalifa’s legacy, and that is un-Emirati of us.

Five years on, we’re just waking up to the UAE’s loss of the century; and it still hurts.

*This article first appears in The National on Monday, November 2nd 2009

It’s high time we saw a little more of the FNC

Since the passing of Sheikh Zayed in 2004 there have been many attempts to unify the young people of this country under an icon that represents all Emiratis. One thing is for certain: Sheikh Zayed’s legacy requires a collective effort to fill the vacuum created by his departure.

I have written on various occasions about the looming challenges that affect national identity in the UAE. There is, however, one entity in the country that could catapult Emirati nationalism to the forefront of public debate, if only it were more effective.

At first I hesitated to write this article since I admit that I have never been to a session of the Federal National Council. But in fact, that is precisely the reason why I decided to write it. The FNC should not be an organisation that you can believe exists only if you visit and see it for yourself, although sadly these are the sentiments that many UAE nationals have.

What has the FNC done for us lately, and does it have any real powers? At the outset, let me say that it would unfair to condemn the FNC as a failure. Its very creation in 1972, though an incomplete effort, was a major step in unifying the country. But rather than simply laying blame, we should start with constructive criticism that will hopefully make the FNC more visible – and not just to those who visit it once or twice a week, but to the average Emirati citizen and UAE resident.

First, the 40-member FNC rarely has any official presence at any of the various conferences that take place, either in the UAE or abroad, that discuss UAE culture, economics or academic affairs. Additionally, most of the FNC members have full-time jobs, and no matter how competent they are, they cannot dedicate sufficient time to study the various needs of one of the fastest emerging economies in the Middle East.

For instance, a draft law on establishing a National Council for Tourism and Antiquities was forwarded to the FNC in April 2007 by the UAE Cabinet, but two and a half years later we have yet to hear from them about it. As a result, the UAE, one of the top tourism destinations in the Middle East, is not a member of the World Tourism Organisation. This is a prime example of why having members who have full-time jobs may hinder rather than assist progress in the UAE.

Also, how can a country with a professional football league and an international team of full-time professional players have part-time members of a body that discusses not just UAE sports, but also commerce, culture, national identity, security and finance? And what sort of message does that send to our young people?

Furthermore, the FNC has failed to engage Emiratis from a young age, something it could achieve by sending representatives to schools and universities to explain to students what FNC members’ responsibilities are, and how they go about fulfilling them.

Frankly, the only time I felt the FNC’s existence as a UAE citizen was in my capacity as a journalist, when members debated a new media law that promised severe punishment for institutions and individuals in cases of transgression. Since the UAE is already home to many media outlets, and international organisations such as CNN are in the process of setting up, shouldn’t we be starting a conversation with the media first? Instead of inviting the press to its home and to hear a debate on the importance of publishing correct information about the country, the FNC’s move may have alienated much of the media.

As part of its mandate the FNC examines the national budget. Theoretically this is supposed to be submitted two months in advance, and under the premiership of Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid this was in fact achieved before the deadline last year. The FNC, also theoretically, has the power to discuss and propose amendments to the budget or proposed legislation if it deems this necessary. Has it ever done so? Yes, in 2002, it actually amended Federal law No 37 of 1992 that dealt with trademarks; but not much since.

The FNC can also discuss and possibly delay a law that it doesn’t like, but it cannot veto it. It reminds me of a newborn child that tries its best to bite, but its bite is soft. And like a child it can scream and cry and delay a parent, but it cannot stop the parents from doing what they want to do.

Some may argue that this is not such bad thing; after all, the UAE under its current leaders has achieved more in the past four decades than most countries have. Should we really wish for a parliament, as in Kuwait, that not only has the power to stop projects and progress indefinitely, but has exercised this power? In this case we must be careful what we wish for, we might actually get it.

* This article first appeared in The National on Sunday 25th October 2009

A vital paper trail that tells the story of a nation

It was the mid-1960s, the 48-year-old Sheikh Zayed had just become ruler of Abu Dhabi, and he had already set his sights on ending the British protectorate status of Abu Dhabi and its sister emirates along the Trucial Coast.

Sheikh Zayed realised that to be able to deal successfully with the British he would need proper documentation of essential details such as border demarcations, and copies of all the treaties signed by his forefathers and other rulers of the Gulf emirates. So, upon his order, the Centre for Documentation and Research was established in 1968. Its role in providing details and archiving important documents proved to be instrumental in the negotiations that led to the formation of the UAE on December 2, 1971.

As Sheikh Zayed focused on strengthening the ties within the UAE and institutionalising the union, the Centre continued collecting invaluable documents to record the living memory of Abu Dhabi’s emergence as a regional centre for diplomacy and economics, including the formation there of the Gulf Cooperation Council in 1981 and the founding of the Arab Monetary Fund in 1976, headquartered in Abu Dhabi.

When Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed was appointed chairman of the Centre by his father in 1999, its second stage was launched. Sheikh Mansour sought the expertise of Dr Abdulla El Reyes, an Emirati linguistics graduate from the University of Wisconsin who was part of the team involved in setting up Zayed University. Grand plans for the Centre were laid, beginning with a new state-of-the-art building with a 3-D Imax cinema that greets visitors with a film about the history of Abu Dhabi and the UAE.

But perhaps the most important development for which the Centre has been responsible was the ground-breaking publication of a book containing first-hand accounts of the modern history of Abu Dhabi. Dr Jayanti Maitra, an Indian historian and researcher, was working on the treasure trove of documents that the Centre houses when Dr El Reyes noticed a first draft of the book on the historian’s desk. Until then it had not been given official approval to be printed.

Sheikh Mansour recognised the value of the information contained in the manuscripts and authorised the Centre to publish what became Qasr Al Hosn: the History of the Rulers of Abu Dhabi 1793-1966, possibly one of the most detailed and frank accounts of any ruling family in the Gulf region. Bear in mind that within the tribal structures of the Gulf, documenting history is a sensitive issue that most governments shy away from to avoid the risk of irking the family and descendants of those mentioned.

Today, at its HQ in Zayed Sports City in Abu Dhabi, the Centre chronicles the history of the Emirates during four principal eras. In the first of these, the Portuguese era in the 15th and 16th centuries, several Portuguese fortresses were established across the northern emirates, with a mostly military mandate.

During the second era, the Dutch one, there were growing commercial ties between that European power and the southern Gulf that lasted through the 17th and 18th centuries, to secure trade between the major ports of Basra in Iraq, Java in Indonesia, and Amsterdam. The UAE islands of Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs, currently occupied by Iran, are first mentioned in the Centre’s records from the mid-17th century.

The Centre’s third major era is the British Political Residency, which existed, initially at least, mostly to support the activities of the East India Company, and lasted from the late 18th century to Britain’s withdrawal from the Gulf in the early 1970s. Finally, the fourth era that the Centre covers is from the formation of the UAE by Sheikh Zayed and the other rulers of the Emirates all the way to the present day.

When it reached its 40th anniversary last year the Centre’s mandate was expanded to include archives of not only Abu Dhabi but also the six other emirates, and its name was changed to the National Centre for Documentation and Research to reflect this enlarged mandate. Under federal law, all government departments in the union must maintain original copies of all signed official documents to preserve those that have historical significance.

The Centre has spared no effort in acquiring significant documents, and has also been successful in attracting private collectors of historical manuscripts from inside and outside the UAE. It keeps, among others, more than 200 books donated by Sheikh Falih bin Nasser Al Thani of Qatar, to be preserved and archived.

The historical significance of such documents cannot be exaggerated; one of the first destinations of Saddam Hussein’s army in Kuwait was its National Archives. Almost two decades after the invasion in 1990 the looted historical documents have yet to be returned, and Kuwait continues to refer to them as “Kuwait’s Memory”.

By the end of this year the National Centre for Documentation and Research – the UAE’s Memory, if you like – will open an interactive exhibition that will give visitors a valuable opportunity to learn more about this fascinating nation that defied the odds and emerged as the only successful union in the modern history of the Arab world.

*This article first appeared in The National on Sunday, 16th August 2009