| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| The Promise of Arab Liberalism |
| 2004-06-09 |
| From Policy Review, an article by Tamara Cofman Wittes is a research fellow in the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. .... Americaâs past attempts to promote democracy in the Arab world were beset by two problems that many observers perceived as insurmountable. The first is encapsulated in the 1991 victory of radical Islamist parties in Algeriaâs first free parliamentary elections and the resulting cutoff of the democratization process by the Algerian military. The United States, like most Western governments, supported the military coup as preferable to the likely electoral outcome. The âAlgeria problemâ â defined most pithily by veteran diplomat Edward Djerejian as âone man, one vote, one timeâ â has crystallized as the nightmare vision for American policymakers of what democracy might bring to the Arab world: legitimately elected Islamist governments that are anti-American, and ultimately anti-democratic, in orientation. American efforts to promote free politics in Arab states have also traditionally fallen prey to a problem of competing interests. Pressing for democratic transformation in rogue states like Libya or Syria is easy enough; there is little to lose by trying. But the Middle East is full of regimes with which America has worked closely for years and whose cooperation it desires on a variety of security and economic issues, notably including the war on terrorism. Because of this, the U.S. government has typically subordinated its concerns about governance and human rights to other core issues like Cold War loyalties and the Arab-Israeli peace process. .... To avoid the risks of Islamist victory and the costs of prioritizing democracy over other more immediate goals, the U.S. governmentâs past reform efforts in the Arab world have generally been small, undertaken in full consultation with the targeted governments, and have emphasized technical assistance to government institutions rather than support for non-governmental social groups. .... As it stands today, many Arab reformers donât believe the Bush administrationâs fine words about reversing decades of American support for Arab dictators. Without proving the strength of our commitment to act as a force for positive change in the Middle East, we will not win the trust of those in whose hands we envision the Arab future to lie: the regionâs nascent liberal activists. At this point, one can speak of only an embryonic liberal movement in the Arab world, but that movement does exist. Some Arab liberal activists are lawyers, professors, and journalists challenging the de facto political rules by demanding enforcement of the rules as stated in their postcolonial constitutions. Others are parliamentarians demanding oversight of executive policy. Some are cabinet ministers challenging tribal leaders and other cornerstones of the ruling elite to recognize that future challenges demand significant change. .... The United States must press Arab regimes to reform their politics, not just their political processes. The United States should press a consistent message in the region: Controlled âliberalizationâ that creates quasi-democratic institutions with no power is not democratization. Elections are important, of course, but as Algeria taught us, they are not the primary need. Even more basic are the protections that enable a variety of citizens and groups to speak and organize and operate effectively in politics: freedom of the press, freedom of association, the right to peaceably assemble, and the legalization of political parties and advocacy groups. Some or all of these are absent in most Arab states. Forcing governments to withdraw their control over the public square and give power to participatory institutions is necessary if non-Islamist political forces are to organize, formulate agendas, and press their case against the state in competition with the Islamists. .... A successful democratization strategy involves challenging autocratic regimes not only from above, through diplomatic pressure, but also from below, through the work of civil society activists. .... We should not ask or expect to be embraced as saviors by Arab liberals ... many liberals still vehemently disagree with U.S. policies in Iraq, Israel, and the war on terrorism. They voice resentment of Americaâs overweening influence in their region and will continue to do so. But we should support them anyway. Enabling their success while not claiming it as our own is the most important thing we can do now to help liberals gain credibility in their own societies and to repair our credibility with them. In the final analysis, the sincerity of Americaâs intentions can only be demonstrated over time, through a credible pro-democracy strategy that is honest about the difficult choices it requires both from us and from our erstwhile Arab allies and that invests Americaâs considerable resources in making those choices correctly. If America tries to hedge its bets against Islamists by acquiescing in the regimesâ attempt to forestall their peoplesâ inevitable and just demands, it will produce only backsliding and the added bitterness of promises betrayed. A sustainable and successful policy is robust support of the emerging Arab liberals and the alternative future they represent. |
| Posted by:Mike Sylwester |