The "Convergence of Interests" in the Arab Revolts by Ibrahim Al-Amin http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/amin151011.html

In the wars currently waged on the backs of the Arab revolutions, one particular term stands out in the lexicon of Arab politicians and their columnist and media acolytes: the phrase "convergence of interests," which has made a big comeback.In Syria, meanwhile, there seems to be a labyrinth of converging and intertwining interests. Some opposition figures concede that the Arab Gulf states are not qualified to give anyone lessons in democracy, equality, and freedom.

But they explain that they are aligned with them now, and turn to them to host their meetings or provide supportive media coverage, purely as a matter of converging interests. A second category of opposition figures insist that their lobbying of the US, French, British, and Turkish administrations is not aimed at luring them into overthrowing the regime of President Bashar Assad by force. But there is nothing wrong with cooperating with these powers, they maintain, even if that leads to intervention at a later stage. It's all in accordance with the principle of converging interests, nothing more.

On Tuesday, influential figures in the Syrian National Council set up by some Syrian opposition figures intervened with French security and diplomatic authorities to prevent fellow Syrian dissidents from holding a press conference in Paris. The French authorities have nothing against freedom of expression, but agreed to perform this squalid role because their interests converge with those of the rival opposition faction. These people were until recently trying to bribe Russia and China. They told them that, if they abandoned Assad, their interests in Syria would be safeguarded after the opposition took power. They could then agree on the convergence of their interests, as is being done with Europe and the US now.

Does Assad have the right to forge alliances with Russia and China, Iran and Iraq, given that their interests converge? Or is America closer to Syria and its people than Iran; or is the deranged Nicolas Sarkozy closer than Hugo Chavez; or does Britain have more in common with the country than Brazil or South Africa?