The Complexity of W's Middle Eastern Policy

Liberals have long bleated about how Iraq is just like Vietnam.

Before the liberation it was that the war was on the same immoral plane as Vietnam (sending our boys to die even though there was no "imminent threat"). During the months leading up to the elections it was that Iraq was becoming a "quagmire" in the midst of the insurgency. Now that free and democratic elections have occurred it is that the elections in Vietnam changed nothing.

There is another way to view the similarities between Vietnam and Iraq.

The moral justification for Vietnam (warmly embraced by Democrat hero JFK) was the "domino theory" -- the belief that if one country were allowed to fall to communism others in the region would follow as communist imperialism expanded. Although much maligned by the left, the theory turned out to be correct: after we abandoned Vietnam communism swept through Cambodia and Burma.

The moral justification for Iraq is the exact opposite -- a domino theory of democracy. Establish a democracy in Iraq (and Palestine) and the winds of change will sweep through surrounding countries.

Thomas Friedman notes in a NY Times op-ed:

The war on terrorism is a war of ideas. The greatest restraint on human behavior is not a police officer or a fence - it's a community and a culture. Palestinian suicide bombing has stopped not because of the Israeli fence or because Palestinians are no longer "desperate." It has stopped because the Palestinians had an election, and a majority voted to get behind a diplomatic approach. They told the violent minority that suicide bombing - for now - is shameful.

That is the essence: the mere act of freeing a people instigates earthshaking cultural changes. In a region with one-party structures and fabricated voting processes, free elections empower the people more than any cache of arms ever could.

The president is pushing all nations in the region in the direction of democracy, even so-called allies. Last week Saudi Arabian men went to the polls in the first nationwide election in history. And while women were not allowed to vote, we saw serious questioning of this policy, and the questioning is becoming more vocal in the Arab press.

One Arab journalist offers this observation:

Arab citizens would very soon, we hope, pose some difficult questions: isn't it a shame that the freest elections in the Arab world are conducted under foreign occupation? Isn't it a shame that their national governments are still either rigging elections or claiming without popular authorisation that they serve the general will?

Isn't it a shame that in the 21st century there are still Arab governments that hold a single-candidate presidential referendum, which very often results in a 99 per cent approval rate.

This sentiment is being felt and often expressed by many others in the region. Michele Dunne, the editor of the Arab Reform Bulletin, remarked that there has been a shift in atmosphere throughout the Middle East -- a sort of guarded optimism. Democracy is being discussed in places where it was taboo just three years ago.

There have been several demonstrations over the last few months. There's a new small movement in Egypt called "Kifaya," which means "Enough," specifically demonstrating against President Mubarak's having another presidential term. This would have been unthinkable a few years ago. These demonstrations are small, a few hundred people at a time, but they are a new phenomenon.

Movements remains small because the people are wary; the people of the Middle East have been teased with the promise of democratic reform in the past but nothing ever came of it. This time, however, international pressure is being aggressively applied (hence the recent Saudi elections). In addition, this time the leader of the free world has made it is personal mission to make sure that the winds of change are sustained, and is determined enough and tenacious enough to make certain that democracy is brought to these people.

Another example is found in the formation of a new political party in Egypt, Al-Ghad (The Party of Tomorrow), which has been dubbed the "tangerine dream" because of the orange party color:

It is that Egypt's politics no longer exist in a vacuum, sealed off from external scrutiny by the west's reliance on Mubarak's support in a region replete with oil and political instability. This year started with promises from President George W. Bush to "end tyranny in our world" and that the US will embrace the active promotion of democracy, as against its passive advocacy. "Democratic reformers facing repression, prison or exile can know: America sees you for who you are - the future leaders of your free country," he announced in his inaugural address. Next month members of the G8 and the Arab League are due to meet in Cairo with reform on the agenda. Democracy seems to have advanced in Iraq - albeit at the point of US bayonets. It is being put squarely before the Arab ruling elites as the necessary next step. And in Egypt, at the end of last year, it seemed to be growing up from within.

Yet the importance international cooperation that the president is successfully fostering cannot be overlooked. France and the United States are working together to increase pressure on Syria to leave Lebanon. It is particularly important that they do so soon, in order to ensure fair elections in Lebanon in May.

But even that is not enough to satisfy the new-found determination of the international community. Syria itself must reform to avoid being isolated from the nations of the world:

Syria's only real card now is a credible process of political reform. This means not only introducing new reformists into the higher ranks of the Baath Party (as the party seems poised to do soon), it should also involve such "radical" steps as establishing a dialogue with opposition parties and dissidents inside and outside the country, freeing all political prisoners, lifting the state of emergency, and adopting a national reconciliation pact that can accommodate Syria's diverse ethnic, religious and political groups. A new Constitution and a new modus vivendi are in order here.

Only such a process would enable the Syrian regime to break out of its isolation, regain international legitimacy and become an active participant in the emerging order in the Middle East. The Europeans will most assuredly support such a process if it is authentic enough.

Moreover, the president has wisely coupled political and social reform with a push for economic reform. To aid this, the United States is pursuing bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTA) with a number of Arab countries. FTAs were signed with Bahrain, Jordan and Morocco last year. Talks with the United Arab Emirates will begin next month and it is expected that Oman, Qatar and Kuwait will follow.

In November, informing Congress of his intention to begin negotiations with the UAE and Oman, US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick said FTAs "will encourage the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council [GCC] to adopt standards that will promote trade and investment, encouraging development, more open societies and opportunities for people to improve the lives of their families". This objective is in line with recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission that a US strategy to counter terrorism should include economic policies to encourage development in the Middle East.

Democracy coupled with economic and social reform, proposed by the 9/11 Commission and embraced by the president (where are the Democrats that praise the president for that?).

In a recent letter to Arab leaders, Bush wrote:

The United States is committed to helping nations that embrace clear standards of economic, political and social reform. The United States stands with those leaders who are committed to reform and change.

Are there any who doubt the level of his commitment?

Having seen the president stand up to the European community and free millions, few doubt his word. This is driving commitment on a grander scale, an international scale. Earlier this week the 30-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) met in Jordan to launch an Arab public sector reform initiative:

Over 300 participants from 40 countries participated in the two days of meetings along the Dead Sea coast in Jordan that launched the initiative for "Good Governance for Development in the Arab Countries." The gathering was noteworthy, in the eyes of the participants, for several reasons: the process was initiated by Arab officials and activists working closely with UNDP; Arab governments joined on their own volition (all Arab League states were at the launch meeting except for Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, Somalia and the Comoros Islands); the entire process is jointly designed and implemented by Arab and OECD parties; civil society and the private sector in the Arab world are equal partners with their governments; and, the initiative's carefully thought out follow-up and implementation mechanisms are designed to share information and best practices among countries to achieve administrative, financial, and judicial reforms.

The six targeted sectors are civil service and integrity; the role of the judiciary and enforcement; e-government, administrative simplification and regulatory reform; the role of civil society and media in the reform of the public sector; governance of public finance; and, public service delivery.

This is huge! The fact that these problems are even admitted is a big step, but to actually join forces with the private sector to initiate reforms?

Don't get me wrong -- this will be a long and painful process with many, many missteps and the participants, having been disappointed before, are wary -- yet optimistic.

After all, expecting things like integrity in an Arab bureaucracy is a little like expecting the stork to deliver the Easter bunny to your house tonight. It will require a culture shift to get rid of corruption and stifling economic policies. But a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

Arab governments have made that step. The people of the Middle East will insist that they do not stop. And the president, as the Middle East Intelligence Bulletin notes, will continue to drive them to it:

The Bush administration's success in persuading most Arab governments to launch their own reform initiatives is significant. The fact that Arab officialdom is talking about the need to rescind emergency laws, for example, would have been unimaginable a few years ago. Most of these reform initiatives are still just talk at this point, but the talk itself is unprecedented and has greatly raised public expectations. This alone makes it more difficult than ever before for Arab governments not to match words with deeds. With the Bush administration displaying an unprecedented willingness to publicly criticize oppressive actions even by friendly governments (such as the above-mentioned arrests of Saudi liberal reformers), Arab regimes may find it too politically costly to backtrack on their promises.

Blog post #4526 in category War on Islamofascism
posted 11 February 05

 

Truly superior bloggers that reference The Complexity of W's Middle Eastern Policy:

» Submitted for Your Approval from Watcher of Weasels:

First off...  any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here,  and here.  Die spambots, die!  And now...  here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher's Council for this week's vote. Council link... [Read More]

Tracked on February 16, 2005 2:30 AM

» The Council Has Spoken! from Watcher of Weasels:

First off...  any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here,  and here.  Die spambots, die!  And now...  the winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are Kofi to World: Thank Us For Iraq! b... [Read More]

Tracked on February 18, 2005 1:52 AM

» THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN. from The SmarterCop:

Congratulations to this week's winners of the Watcher's Council voting! This week, we have a tiebreaker! Two most excellent posts by AlphaPatriot and Sundries Shack ended up neck in neck, but in the end Watcher's tiebreaker vote gave Sundries Shack... [Read More]

Tracked on February 18, 2005 7:28 AM

» Watcher Of Weasels Readfest from The Moderate Voice:

Here are some links from the Feb. 18 Watcher of Weasels Council post contest.

Winning Council link: Sundries' Shack's Ko... [Read More]

Tracked on February 27, 2005 11:01 PM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Remember personal info?

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

Who was the first Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court? (hint: it was "John Jay") (required):

« Must Reads

| Home |

Carter Eats Crow Like a Man »