Democratisation initiatives are coming thick and fast. But are they good enough for the region? Ahmed Abdel-Halim* urges gradualism The issues of political and democratic reform have for a long time presented a considerable challenge to Egypt and the Arab world. This became particularly true since the events of 11 September 2001. Domestic as well as regional developments make it mandatory to accelerate the pace of political and democratic reform so as to consolidate security and social stability and help the region address the question of progress. The Arab world stands today at the threshold of modernisation and reform. Furthermore, it has to reconcile domestic needs with international developments. As President Hosni Mubarak put it, Egypt began its march toward political reform years ago. Egypt is trying to create a firm foundation for state institutions, promote a democratic climate based on citizenry and equal opportunities, and consolidate the freedom of expression, human rights, and the sovereignty of the law. Egypt is also modernising its educational system, promoting the process of economic development and reform, moving from planned to market economy, easing red tape, stimulating investment, promoting basic services for all citizens, and protecting low-income classes. In doing so, Egypt is moving forward on two fronts: one is modernisation and development, the other the achievement of a just and overall peace in the Middle East. The country is particularly concerned about the deteriorating situation in Iraq, the prospects of resolving the Palestinian-Israeli problem, and the reduction of tension in the region. Several factors prompt Arab countries to adopt the option of modernisation, development and political reform. Domestically, there is an increased awareness that the absence of reform is cause for the weakness and other problems of the region. The lack of reform has given international powers, chiefly the United States, pretext to interfere in the region's affairs and pressure its countries for reasons of its own. In some cases, the lack of reform may explain the identity crisis noticeable in more than one country in the region. Many in the Arab world urge more democracy and political participation, a stronger civil society, and wider economic and political freedom. Internationally, the Americans contend that the domestic situation in Arab and Islamic societies lacks democratic culture and institutions, and therefore encourages fanaticism and militancy. For the US and other powers, this is good reason to interfere in the domestic affairs of Arab states with a view to accelerating the pace of internal change, democratisation and political reform. Numerous initiatives have been tabled by the US and Europe, including: First, the initiative presented by Secretary Colin Powell in December 2002, under the name of "US-Middle East Partnership Initiative: Building Hope for the Years Ahead", which calls for expanding the horizon of political opportunities and democratic reforms in the region though several mechanisms. Second, President Bush's speech on 26 February 2003 at the American Enterprise, in which the president speaks of redrawing the Middle East map, spreading democracy in the region, and undertaking extensive political and economic reforms. Third, the initiative proposed by President Bush in May 2003, in which the president calls for creating a free trade zone between the US and Middle East countries within 10 years. The assumption here being that free market forces and an improved legal atmosphere would end corruption and cronyism and set the region on a course of prosperity and freedom. Fourth, President Bush's speech at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington on 6 November 2003, in which the president underlines the resolve of his administration to push for democratisation in the Middle East. The president blames extremism and terrorism on poverty and repression, pointing out that democratisation can reverse the current state of affairs. Fifth, the initiative made by German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer during the 40th international conference on security, held in Munich on 8 February 2004, in which the minister calls for more democracy and economic and social development in the region as a means of overcoming terror. Sixth, the initiative made by French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin in an interview with Le Figaro on 19 February 2004. The minister calls for "true partnership" with the Middle East country, a partnership that goes beyond security matters to tackle economic, social, and cultural aspects of life. Seventh, the Greater Middle East initiative which President Bush plans to announce at the G8 summit in Georgia and the NATO gathering in Turkey in June. Designed for Arab countries along with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Turkey, and Israel, the initiative involves action on three levels: democracy, governance, and economy. Despite the importance of these initiatives, none was greeted with enthusiasm in Arab official and intellectual circles. Indeed, many questioned their intentions and credibility. There is a crisis of credibility facing the US and Europe in the region, a crisis arising from double standards. Most of the above-mentioned initiatives, with the remarkable exception of that made by the French, ignore the Arab- Israeli conflict, a main impediment to development and democracy in the region. Most of these initiatives try to link terror to the lack of democracy in the region, intentionally omitting any reference to the true causes of the phenomenon of terror, a phenomenon that is fuelled by Israeli and US repressive practices against the nations of this region. Furthermore, most of these initiatives overlook the specifics of Arab societies and the nature of their development and culture. A major debate ensued when US President George Bush announced his Greater Middle East initiative, detailing his vision for reform and modernisation in the Arab world without first consulting with the countries at the receiving end of that vision. The initiative was presented as a ready-made formula for modernising the Arab world, without much regard for the circumstances and special characteristics of the region. The US president does not seem to take into account that such things as attaining peace and stability in the region, tackling the deterioration in Iraq, and ending the double standards concerning mass destruction weapons can take us a long way towards change in the region. It is clear that there are substantial problems facing the Greater Middle East initiative, chief of which is the fact that it was formulated without consultation with the Arabs. Reform is best performed as a result of domestic dialogue and with local interests in mind. The initiative should have paid more attention to the cultural, religious characteristics of the region. It should also have linked the political settlement of the Palestinian issue, and of the Arab-Israeli conflict, to the overall reform process. There are several scenarios for political reform in the region. One is to introduce radical and rapid reforms, which could result in a situation resembling that seen in what used to be the Soviet Union. The other is to introduce gradual political reforms in a manner suitable to each country, so as to avoid social upheavals. This latter scenario suits Arab countries -- including Egypt -- at present. A third scenario -- one that Egypt is engaging upon, having made large strides toward political, economic and social reform -- is to stand as a "role model" for other countries in the region to follow. Conditions in the Middle East do not allow for quick and radical reform. Caution is advisable in dealing with political reform. Some societies are likely to unravel in the face of rapid and radical reform. Egypt is seeking to modernise its political institutions and decision-making methods. Egypt believes that civil society and its organisations are the true foundation for reform and that the march of democracy is not complete without the consolidation of human rights and the provision of safeguards for the rights and dignity of all citizens. Neither Egypt nor other Arab countries need the ready-made US formula for modernisation and development. The road ahead is clear, the tools are available, and the goals are well defined. * The author The writer is a member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs.
