Democratic reforms in the Middle East and North Africa are both
warranted and wanted -- not only among the leaders who gathered
earlier this month on Sea Island for the G8 Summit but also by the
majority of the region's citizens.
While there is little agreement on what form change should take,
the most shocking dimension of the Bush plan for regional reform,
The Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative, or BMEI, is
the administration's continued partnership with authoritarian regimes
and the exclusion of democratic reformers.
It is refreshing that the U.S. government is finally taking seriously
the need for democratization in the Middle East and its very real
potential to be realized. One of the lessons of Washington's backing
for Saddam Hussein since the Reagan administration is the folly
of supporting autocratic regimes as "stable allies." The U.S.-allied
regimes of King Fahd in Saudi Arabia, Yasser Arafat in Palestine,
Husni Mubarak in Egypt, and Ali Abdallah Salih in Yemen, among others,
have consistently suppressed democratic movements, tortured opposition
voices and violated international standards for human rights. At
the Tunis meeting of the Arab League meeting in April, the group
shunned even vague rhetoric calling for democratic reforms.
In November, Bush promised to stop supporting friendly but non-democratic
regimes in the region, a vow omitted in the language of the new
initiative. Yet, invitations to the Sea Island discussions were
extended to only a select few American allies -- many of whom are
hardly paragons of democracy in the region. Yet, even many of these
usual suspects were reluctant to attend, including self-proclaimed
proto-liberalizers like Egypt and Tunisia to patently undemocratic
Saudi Arabia. The widespread aversion to U.S.-led democratization
let these regimes off the hook and enabled them to appear independent
while putting off a discussion of reforms.
Among those snubbed were Qatar, host to the al-Udeid U.S. Air Base,
which was not invited because of its support of the al-Jazeera satellite
network. While Qatar is not exactly a burgeoning democracy, it has
recently promulgated a constitution that provides for a partially
elected legislature and has, in its support for al-Jazeera, facilitated
the most progressive development in the region in decades.
The administration accuses al-Jazeera of inciting anti-American
violence, but the station has revolutionized Arab media by bringing
critical coverage of local politics to citizens accustomed to hearing
"news" from state propaganda machines. Few in the United States
know that authoritarian Arab regimes have been among al-Jazeera's
frequent targets and strongest critics -- even supposedly "pro-democratic"
Jordan temporarily expelled the local correspondent for "insulting
the monarchy."
Moreover, reform processes that are not state-led remain outside
of the administration's limited vision -- particularly when they
take place on the turf of Washington's regional allies. The administration
routinely ignores citizens' campaigns for greater civil rights in
Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan and Morocco.
The administration ignored the arrest in Jordan of Tujan Faysal,
a former parliamentarian and democratic reformer convicted of a
misdemeanor in 2002 after questioning whether the prime minister
had abused his position for personal gain. It failed to comment
on the imprisonment of Egypt's Saad Eddin Ibrahim on treason charges
(later dismissed) until Congress took up his case. And it has a
particular blind spot for the pluralist coalitions that have emerged
among parliamentarians in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco and Yemen
because joining secular liberals and leftists in these democratic
alliances are moderate Islamists.
With the United States unwilling to risk strained relations with
regional allies, the real voices for democratic reform in the region
have been entirely excluded. Only after early drafts came under
criticism did the administration insert perfunctory language that
"change should not and cannot be imposed from the outside."
Meanwhile, tremendous skepticism remains regarding the intention
and ability of the United States to lead ambitious reforms. Even
pro-democracy trends both inside and outside government channels
will be hard pressed to carry the banner of democratization when
it is emblazoned with the words, "Made in the USA."
The renewed emphasis on democracy in the Middle East is long overdue.
But the selective blindness toward existing reform measures and
the continued exclusion of non-governmental voices indicate that
the administration is unwilling to put forth a truly new initiative.
Sadly, the BMEI in this form can only produce more of the same.
Jillian Schwedler is assistant professor of government and politics
at the University of Maryland and author of "Faith in Democracy:
Islamist Parties in Jordan and Yemen." Maren Milligan is a senior
analyst and media coordinator at the Middle East Research and Information
Project in Washington, D.C., and a Ph.D. student at the University
of Maryland.
MERIP
OP-EDS
A Country at a Crossroads The Austin-American Statesman (Austin, Texas) November 9, 2007
Kamran Asdar Ali
"A
very frank discussion"— so President Bush described
his Nov. 7 telephone
conversation with Pervez Musharraf, four days after the Pakistani
general
imposed a state of emergency and dissolved the high court expected
to rule
his continued presidency unconstitutional. And frank the discussion
probably
was: In the face of spirited protest in Pakistan, and a querulous
press in
Washington, back-channel pressure succeeded in persuading Musharraf
to
promise parliamentary elections. Yet the generous U.S. aid earmarked
for
Pakistan — on top of nearly $10 billion since 2001 — is
quite evidently not
at risk.
What may be at risk is Musharraf's tenure as head
of the military government. Full
story>>
The
war debate in Washington is bogged down. Partisan rancor is one
reason why, and bipartisan desire for US hegemony in the oil-rich
Persian Gulf is
another. But many Americans are vexed by a nobler concern: that
a
“precipitous” US departure from Iraq would leave intensified
civil war,
ethnic-sectarian cleansing and massive refugee flows in its wake.
This
concern is legitimate. Unfortunately, the sad fact is that Iraq’s
civil war
and humanitarian emergency have grown steadily worse as the US
military
deployment there wears on. Full
Story>>
Should
the United States, seeking to recalibrate the balance between
security and liberty in the "war on terror," emulate
Israel in its treatment of Palestinian detainees? That is the position
that Guantanamo detainee lawyers Avi Stadler and John Chandler
of Atlanta, and some others, have advocated. That people in U.S.
custody could be held incommunicado for years without charges,
and could be prosecuted or indefinitely detained on the basis of
confessions extracted with torture is worse than a national disgrace.
It is an assault on the foundations of the rule of law. Full
Story>>
There
is an oft-told Palestinian allegory about a family who complained
their house was small and cramped. In response, the father brought
the farm
animals inside -- the goat, the sheep and the chickens all crowded
into the
house. Then, one by one, he moved the animals back outside. By
the time the
last chicken left, the family felt such relief they never complained
of the
lack of elbow room again. Full
Story>>