Demands for political reform are being watered down to make way for "a culture of entrepreneurship". Omayma Abdel-Latif reports from Rabat on the Forum for the Future The parliament square ( Sahet Al-Parlaman ) in Mohamed Al-Khamis Street echoes to the sound of the speaker's voice: "What democracy are they talking about? The democracy of Abu Ghraib or Falluja?" The speaker is Khaled Soufiani, a leading human rights activist, and the audience he is addressing has gathered to protest against Morocco's hosting of the Forum for the Future. "This forum," Soufiani goes on, "is only meant to serve American and Zionist interests. How can we forget what is going on in Iraq and in Palestine?" The audience -- mostly young men and women holding Palestinian flags -- chants in response: "Rebel against America, O free people across the world", "Enough of wars, America is the enemy of the people", "The forum is a colonial ploy: no rights and no freedoms." It is precisely these young men and women to whom US Secretary of State Colin Powell promised in his speech to the forum itself "the tools necessary for global citizenship"'. In their eyes, the Future Forum was just another attempt to push America's grand designs for the region, even if they were now dressed up in local clothing. But their protest was directed less at the US, and more against what they see as their own country's complacency in promoting the American agenda. "The Bush administration is not interested in democracy, but rather in hegemony," said Salima Bensaid, a Moroccan journalist who was among the protesters. "We don't accept that Morocco should be the venue for promoting such a hegemony." The anti-forum demonstration which took place on Friday and Saturday was the climax of a movement that has been building throughout the country against the government's new strategy of playing host to a number of events which are popularly seen as little more than promotion for the American agenda in the region. The key organisers of this movement which is gaining remarkable ground have formed the Moroccan Unit against the Future Forum (CeMaCoFA) (La Cellule Marocaine contre "Forum Avenir"), an eclectic mix of leftists, Islamists and nationalists. The upswell of popular feeling has also been translated into editorials in Morocco's major dailies, which focussed much harsh criticism on the event. The independent weekly Le Journal Hebdomadaire called the meeting's organisers "delusional" and branded the forum a "flop". "It is legitimate to wonder if the promoters of this charade really believe in it themselves," said the magazine's editorial. Meanwhile Al-Tajdeed newspaper, mouthpiece of the Islamist-oriented party of the same name, described the forum as a launch pad for what they dubbed "the third colonial wave". The angry sentiments prevailing in the Moroccan capital during the two-day event reflect the dominant mood in most Arab capitals. The majority of Arab citizens view such gatherings with suspicion, as they perceive them to be no more than a tool to impose a Western agenda on their societies. But as the two-day event drew to a close on Saturday, onlookers were left with more questions than answers. The very concept of the forum itself remained vague, since it was not clear to many of those attending whether this was yet another mechanism to push for a reform agenda in the region, or merely a repackaging of the Bush administration's BMENA initiative. Nevertheless, many observers and commentators in Morocco agreed that the meeting was essentially another attempt to promote an American agenda under a regional cover. This perception was further confirmed by the State Department documents which described the Forum for the Future as "the centrepiece" of the partnership for progress with the BMENA region. The forum's final communiqué itself described the event as "a setting for an informal, flexible, open and inclusive dialogue to strengthen democracy and participation of civil society". The Moroccan information minister, for his part, insisted the forum was simply "a venue for consultation and non- binding proposals". Doubts were also raised about the added value which the forum could bring to Western-Arab relations, even in its own terms. In his press conference at the end of the discussions, Powell described the meeting as "historic and successful". But with so many existing bilateral, regional and inter-regional mechanisms for cooperation, such as the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (the Barcelona Process), the US-Middle East Partnership initiative, and the forthcoming New Neighbourhood Policy Agreement which the EU will launch next month as part of a new initiative for the region, the need for an additional talking shop must be questionable. When asked by Al-Ahram Weekly in what way this particular gathering differed from previous West-Arab initiatives, Under Secretary of State William Burnes replied, "it is different in the sense that it brings more people to the table." American participants were adamant that the forum would help resolve what they see as primarily a communications problem between the two sides. "There is a realisation now that reform cannot be imposed from outside, but has to come from within the region," Burnes elaborated. "This forum is an attempt to have lively discussions about the ongoing reform processes and correct misconceptions about US attitudes in the region." EU Commissioner for Foreign Policy Javier Solana echoed the same line. Solana told the Weekly that the significance of the forum was that most of the reform ideas on the table "come this time from within the region, which is what is most needed." Solana also compared the forum to the Barcelona Process, which he said had "proved effective and offers very constructive possibilities for the region". In the view of many observers, however, the forum primarily reflects the West's need to avoid all talk of reform in the region being indelibly associated with an American agenda. The meeting therefore focussed on regional initiatives, three of which were the subject of extensive discussions. Italy, Turkey and Yemen presented the Democracy Assistance Dialogue Initiative (DAD) to promote and consolidate democratic institutions, norms and values. Afghanistan and Algeria presented an initiative to promote dialogue on literacy among donors and beneficiary countries in the region. And Jordan proposed to host a meeting on education. According to one diplomatic source, however, Jordan made its proposal without consulting any of the Arab states attending the forum. Egypt therefore demanded that a preparatory meeting be held to discuss the agenda of such a conference, since the education issue is a very sensitive one. During the forum discussions, which were closed to the press, most Arab participants spoke about the need to address the Palestinian-Israeli issue before embarking on any reform agenda. This is a move which many Western and American participants interpreted as an attempt to divert attention from the real issues. But according to one observer, the Arab governments can claim to have achieved few victories during the forum. "The Arab states have managed to sell the line that 'reform cannot be imposed from the outside, but has to come from within', to the point that almost every participant used it as their opening phrase, thus rendering it meaningless," Bahieddin Hassan, head of the civil society delegation to the forum, told the Weekly. "Very little thought was given to how -- if at all -- this process of internal reform would be monitored so as to ensure that economic and political reform go hand in hand." Hassan's view is confirmed by the fact that the call for political reform and democratisation clearly took a back seat as matters of security and economics were given precedence. This was obvious from the forum's final communiqué, which dealt at length with the economic dimension of reform, while placing little emphasis on its political aspect. All the talk was about spreading "a culture of entrepreneurship", and the "creation of enterprises" as a driving force for sustainable development in the region. The need to establish regional centres for entrepreneurial excellence was reiterated. The forum had also been expected to establish a $100-million fund for small business loans, and to provide funds for education and literacy campaigns, especially for women and girls. The meeting ended, however, with no mention of the fate of this fund. This prompted the head of the Egyptian delegation in the sub-cabinet meeting to inquire about the availability of funding. "Many of the projects proposed are an important addition to the partnership process," Ambassador Mohamed Shaaban told the gathering. "But the important question is, is there funding available to implement them, or not?" Clearly, some sort of compromise must have been struck by the participants, for any criticism of the lack of will on the part of the governments of the region to advance political reform and the democratisation process was completely diluted in the final communiqué. Not only that, but the text also went to the length of expressing "support to the democratic advances taking places in some countries of the region", though without -- of course -- naming any names. It was in fact Powell who mentioned -- in his speech -- some of the countries which the US perceived to be "moving forward on political, educational and economic reform initiatives". Those countries include Egypt, Yemen, Jordan, Morocco, Afghanistan, Bahrain and Algeria. The communiqué also stressed "the sovereign right of each country within its national unity and territorial integrity, to freely develop its own democratic, political and socio-cultural system." But it does not make clear whether or not that formula means that the Iraqi scenario will not in future be applied to other nations. The final text also adopted the infamous line which so many participants had been parroting during the meeting, namely, that "successful reform must emerge from within the societies of the region, and should not and cannot be imposed from outside." It further recognised that the pace and scope of change "will vary from one country to the other". This clearly indicates that the participants -- including the G8 members, as well as the Americans -- have decided to play along with the defence adopted by most governments in the region when the issue of political reform was first put on the table by the West. In return, the Arab participants used some very gentle language to describe the situation in both Iraq and Palestine. They thus welcomed "steps taken to achieve democracy in Iraq", and avoided any mention of US occupation or calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops. They also urged the Israeli government to "facilitate the holding of Palestinian elections". Ending his speech, Powell stressed that this "historic" forum represents -- among other things -- "the power of hope". But for the hundreds of young men and women standing in the freezing cold in Mohamed Al-Khamis Street, the only hopes this gathering had to offer them were false ones. * Most written sources agree that the idea for the forum originated in US President George Bush's Greater Middle East Initiative, which he launched in February this year, urging Arab governments to take steps towards political reform and economic liberalisation. The initiative has faced heavy resistance, particularly from the Arab governments themselves, and also from the Europeans. In the face of such criticism, the Bush administration had to reinvent its programme, giving it a new title while retaining the old rhetoric about the necessity for reform in the region. Thus, the Broader Middle East and North Africa initiative (BMENA) saw the light. It received the blessing of the G8 at the Sea Island summit last June. The Arab governments, which continued to voice their opposition to the reform plans, soon jumped on the bandwagon however, paying lip service to the reform initiatives mania by supervising a number of events with reform-oriented titles. These meetings reiterated the reform rhetoric, but had no intention of following up on any recommendations that might be produced. Thus we had the Tunis declaration in May, followed by the Alexandria declaration and the Sanaa declaration. * The forum brought together finance and foreign ministers of 20 Arab countries, along with ministers from the G8 and Russia, as well as representatives of civil society and the business community. Absent from the forum was Iran, which the Moroccan information minister said had sent apologies at the last minute. Israel was also not invited. According to the information minister, this was due to the pressure his country applied to prevent Israel from attending. But one US official who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Weekly that the fact that Israel was not invited to the gathering does not mean that it will not be invited to participate at a later stage, a possibility which Moroccan officials failed to mention -- whether deliberately or not. Diplomatic sources said that the Americans had not wished to extend invitations to Syria and Lebanon, but the Moroccan host had insisted that the two countries be invited. Syria was represented by a low-level delegation headed by Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Al- Muaalim. Sudan was the only Arab country which did not attend the forum. * For the first time, representatives of civil society were invited to attend the proceedings of the forum and make a contribution to the discussion by submitting a paper outlining their vision for the role of civil society in the reform process. During the first day, there were many complaints by civil society representatives that they were denied the floor several times and were only given a very short time to express their views when they were called to speak. Consequently, the representatives decided to boycott the sessions during the second half of the first day. There were also complaints that the document which they presented was not given proper attention. Civil Society representatives held a parallel meeting on 8-9 December in which they discussed many reform- related issues. They were, however, kept in the dark as to the details of the forum's agenda. Bahieddin Hassan, head of the civil society delegation at the forum, expressed pessimism that the forum was likely to be an effective mechanism to push for reform in the region. He also pointed out that civil society representatives were still considering whether there was any point in them contributing to such gatherings in the future. * Bahrain has offered to host the next meeting of the forum in 2005, while Jordan will host the 2006 meeting.
