Grosso Back

Grosso Back
Do you think Inter will not ?!!?!? group

…. or you think you can recover and andvanced! Are Ibrahimovic should not exist (what is good for them), Grosso and Stankovic …..

I do not think that they will remember the 2002-2003 season, when they came out despite beating Arsenal 0-3 at home. Will think Sporting Lisbon, which is a defensive team good luck.

Brazil is a vital model for Arab States Federation

Hasan A. Yahya, Professor of Sociology

South America is less popular in  world history than Europe and North America for people live in the Middle East for two reasons, one is that the Arab countries which constitute a large part of the Middle East was dominated by western powers, mostly,  British, and French. For the writer, the  only popular states were only three, as I recall since the 1960s of the past century. The Cuba of Castro and Guevara (the revolution), and Brazil of Pele the succor great player, and Argentina as it’s rival.  

Europe and the USA where having the upper hand over laws establishment, military consultations and curriculum of educational institutions. Egypt-Sudan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf Area Sheikhdoms, and Iraq,  among the newly established  Arab countries, where  Britain culture kept strong relations with the new dominant tribes or ethnic groups in these countries. While Syria, Lebanon and most north Arab Africa nations have cultural connection with Europe, especially France and Spain. The curriculum in both British and French were consulted as well as  laws and constitutions. South America was not popular to think of or even include them in Middle Eastern curriculum and education.

I think the problem may be estimated that South America countries were struggling to find their way of independence and identity like the Arab countries. And both camps (Arabs and South Americans) were considered from the developing countries compared with European and North American advanced technologically countries. While popularity of South American countries like Brazil, Chile, and Argentina, are supposedly should be more popular among Middle East populations than Europe and North America, for historical similarity of both regions which can be described as passing toward independence and national identity, the popularity was undermined  and replaced by Europe and America.

The political experience in Brazil,  came late in 1988, where a federation of 6 states, came to be one federal district and municipality formation.  Where none  of these units has the right to secede from the Federation.  Brazilian States, like Arab States  are based on historical, conventional borders and have developed throughout the centuries, though some boundaries are arbitrary. But unlike Arab States, the states in Brazil, can be split or joined together in new states if their people express a desire to do so in a plebiscite. As Arab States, Brazilian States have autonomous administrations, collect their own taxes, but do not receive a share of taxes collected by the Federal government.  In the Arab case, their was no political unity type may  connect Arab countries together as federate. While Arab countries developed their legislations parallel to  occupiers (British and French),  in Brazil, the state have  a governor and a unicameral legislative body (Assembleia Legislativa) elected directly by their voters. Which is unlike the situation in the Arab countries,  legislator were appointed by the leader of the country.  Therefore, independent Courts of Law for common justice was not found like Brazilian states. However, compared Arab and Brazilian states with the United States political system both   countries have much less autonomy to create their own laws than in the United States. Brazil is closer to the United  States, but with one difference, for example, criminal and civil laws can only be voted by the federal bicameral Congress and are uniform throughout the country. While in the United States, each state has its own constitution concerning civil and criminal laws.

Changes in Mato Grosso state in 1977 was resulted into  two states. The northern new state retained the name Mato Grosso and the old capital, Cuiaba, while the southern area became the new state of Mato Grosso do Sul, , with Campo Grande as its capital. In 1988, the northern portion of Goias state became the new state of  Tocantins. Initially, the capital of Tocantins was the small city of Miracema do Norte (now called Miracema do Tocantins), but it was later moved to the new city of Palmas.

In the Arab countries, similar changes were happened, but less successful than in Brazil. Jordan and Iraq formed a new Union between kingdoms, it was a reaction to face Syria and Egypt  Union, almost in the same historical period between 1958 and 1961, where both unions failed to continue. In north Africa Arabs a similar union was formed but failed from Libya, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. The only union still surviving is the Arab Gulf States Union, which survived because of wealth of the states to keep oil revenues to the union, rather than including other poor Arab countries.

In Brazil, today the city of Rio de Janeiro  is the capital of the homonymous state,  Until 1960, Rio de Janeiro was the national capital, and its territory was Brazil’s Federal District. This led to the strange and confusing situation that the city of Rio de Janeiro was not located in the surrounding state with the same name. In 1960, however, Brasilia became the new national capital, and a new Federal District was carved out of Goias  state to contain it. Then the city of Rio de Janeiro became a new state, named Duandabara (after its large bay) , as one can still find in old books. Comprising only one city, Guanabara was the only Brazilian state that had no municipalities: the city was directly administered by the state government. All these anomalies disappeared in 1975, when the states of Guanabara and Rio de Janeiro merged, retaining the name of Rio de Janeiro. The city of Rio de Janeiro then became a new municipality and the capital of the new combined state. In contrast, the Arab countries each has its own capital, and change was not made to bring the Arab states into unity, whither economic, political or social, instead, nationalization was publicized to bring more dogmas among people to national borders and identity, which stood against any model of world states.

In conclusion, the Brazilian model was accomplished historically by the people of Brazil, This model I believe, would be more applicable to the Arab nations in making federation. Nationalism as it is today as each country first, (in the case of Jordan and Egypt and Libya and the Gulf area, for example,), does not work effectively in world politics or economy like Brazil as a federal government. Therefore, my suggestion, Brazilian model have to be studied in the Arab universities in order to possible application of their political system can be implied, aside  from European and North American influence which is common in almost all Arab countries which failed (may be intentionally for political reasons) to stands with unity of Arab states federation. Thus, the Brazilian model is may be the solution to follow by Arab states to glorious political future as the Federative Republic of Brazil did and became recognized worldwide as highly successful. ( 1140 words) www.askdryahya.com

About the Author

Hasan A. Yahya is an American writer, scholar, and professor of philosophy. Has two Ph.d degrees from MSU. He published 22 Arabic and 8 English books, and 200 plus articles on sociology, religion, psychology, politics, poetry, and short stories. Philosophically, his writings concern logic, justice and human rights worldwide. Dr. Yahya is the author of Crescentoly: Theory C. of Conflict Management and Cultural Normalization, 2009, on Amazon. He’s an expert on Arab and Islamic cultures, and was invited to several TV shows and international conferences on religion and future strategic planning. www.dryahyatv.com