Iso, I wanted to write on "Pan Arabism" a while ago, but I got bogged down with other issues. Now that you've brought it up again, allow me to divulge. You are not too off the mark when you said Pan Arabism may be re-gaining it's peak in recent times, although you may have been misguided to term it "nascent". I think it is imperative here that we understand the distinction between Empirical Expansionism, which leads to unity of peoples of one nation based on a single, expanded state, and "Pan-ism", which is the unity of multiple independent states for a perceived common purpose, based on similar nationhood, or language, or culture, or religion, or political aspirations, or one or more of these combined. Even though Arabism based on expansionism dates back to the times of Turkish Empire, Pan Arabism is relatively nascent (I told you you were not too far off the mark!), having experienced birth after the creation of multiple independent Arab states after the World War II, particularly in the 1950's, 60's, and the early 70's. Two important movements comes to mind when we talk about Pan Arabism: rise of Ba'thists in Syria and the rise of Nasirists (named after the first Egyptian leader after independence). In later years, Iraq also made serious attempts to exert its influence and become a leader of Pan Arabism, but their movement can be considered an off shoot of Ba'thists in Syria. In the beginning, the prospects of a strong Pan Arabism looked very promising -- the newly independent Arab states, weak by themselves, sought to strenthen their position in the world by making themselves parts of a larger movement. However, as it so often happens with "unity" among many different factions, classes, communities, etc., Ba'thism and Nasirism failed to unite the Arab world for real. Things would only get worse with the discovery of oil and a new found wealth that it brought with it -- Saudis and the oil rich Gulf states would have now wanted their share of leadership in the movement too. The 1967 War, after which the Israelis occupied considerable parts of the Arab land (Palestine), Pan Arabism seems to have gained an added momentum. The Arabs now had a new and powerful cause to unite for, the cause being that of the Palestinians. However, continued factionalism, and the rivalry thereof, sadly never let the concept of Pan Arabism dig a strong foundation, thus they have failed to be of much hope for the Palestinian cause. US and Israel knew this well, and they have done well in translating this disunity to their own respective advantages. You are also quite right in saying that the Iraq War gave another new impetus to Pan Arabism. I am doubtful, though, given the varying degrees (among the various Arab states) of economic successes, global relations (particularly with the US), and, most importantly, strong sense of factionalism, that Pan Arabism is to be counted as a viable tool of manipulating global and/or regional affairs. It may experience a rise at times, as it did after 1967 War, or the Gulf War, but I truly believe it is bound to fall back to it's weak position, if not collapse all together, sooner or later.