-
Time for Arabs to control our own destiny
By
Henry T. Azzam, The Daily Star
-
Our region is going through a critical
period in its history, whereby a decision made today will determine the
fate of the people for years to come. The Sept. 11, 2001 attacks is likely
to have a much bigger impact on the Arab world than it did on America.
It is as serious of a shock as the defeat in the 1967 war. The region went
through a period of denial, refusing to admit that there might be a
problem with our system of governance. Following the stage of denial came
the introspection stage, whereby issues that were considered taboo in the
past are being discussed more openly.
For example, a group of some 100 Saudi reformists submitted their vision
of the future to Crown Prince Abdullah calling for an independent
judiciary, constitutional reforms, elections to the Shura Council, freedom
of expression and the creation of civil societies.
The Arab Human Development Report of 2002, published by UN, detailed an
extremely detrimental picture of the Arab world. It is hoped that the
present stage of introspection will eventually lead to the third stage,
namely fundamental political and economic reforms across the region.
While the 1991 Gulf War was fought in defense of the states quo, the next
Gulf War will be fought to destroy it. The “stability” of the region
that we are so much concerned about is considered “sterility” by
observers.
The US administration made it clear that it wants to change the regime in
Iraq in order to create a model democratic state that could be emulated
elsewhere in the region. The argument presented is that poverty and lack
of outlets for political expression create breeding grounds for
extremists. The Americans have called on Palestinians to change their
leadership and demanded that the Saudis reform their education system as
well.
It was relatively easy for the United States to impose democratic systems
on Japan and Germany after World War II. Some key members of the Bush
administration were also encouraged by the changes in Eastern Europe after
the fall of the Berlin Wall and feel that history can repeat itself in the
Middle East.
However, there is a strong belief in the Arab world that reform and
democracy must come from within and not imposed from an external
superpower. Even if the United States’ “democratization” campaign is
genuine, it will not be able to put in place new standards of Arab
governance. Democracy and reform should take into consideration internal
conditions and limitations of the various Arab countries. It is up to us
to decide how we want to transform our countries in order to step firmly
into the 21st century.
However, if Arab countries do not take the necessary steps to implement
the reforms, these will be imposed from outside, and we should accept all
the consequences associated with that.
When the Nobel laureate in Economics Amartya Sen was asked to single out
the most important event of the 20th century, he chose the spread of
democracy. In spite of the momentous events of the last century, such as
two world wars, the defeat of Nazism, the disintegration of the Soviet
Union, the landing on the moon, the rise of the internet, and the cloning
of living beings, Sen argues that preeminence should be given to
democracy, because it enriches individual lives through more freedom and
provides incentives to rulers to respond to the needs and demands of their
people.
Democracy is not only the rule of the majority, but the route to greater
tolerance, the protection of the rights of the minorities, and the
acceptance of differences. In several countries of our region, there is
still resistance to these basic principles at various social levels, thus
hindering rapid progress and development.
No one can claim that American policy in the Middle East is just. It has
shown how unjust it can be in Palestine with the blatant bias towards
Israel and the tacit support it gave Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
despite the atrocities he carried in the Palestinian territories.
Influential members of the US administration have managed to present
Israel as a democracy in a sea of autocratic Arab regimes, and thereby
portray US and Israeli interest as identical. Furthermore, US strategies
had always followed the military strongman solution in the past.
The way that then-President Franklin Roosevelt once described dictator
Somoza of Nicaragua as “our son of a bitch” could very well apply to
Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. The United States has for years supported
dictatorial regimes and continues to finance military expenditures of
several Arab countries, instead of directing more aid toward promoting
reform.
The Arab region today is at a crossroads. Its leaders can either choose
the traditional conservative approach, aimed at marginal damage control,
or take bold decisions aimed at securing the future. The minimalist
approach will almost certainly mean giving away the right to have a say in
the future of the region and accepting what is imposed on us by outside
powers.
One profound dilemma facing policy makers is the perceived conflict
between freedom versus security, progress versus stability and change
versus traditional values. The authorities in the region have typically
responded to challenges facing them in the past with long time lags. Today
the region is experiencing the cumulative effect of delayed responses to a
long series of challenges over the last few decades.
The main dimensions of a reform strategy would include: strengthening and
broadening the domestic political support base of government; making
economic growth a national obsession; developing human resources; changing
the role of the state; empowering the private sector and re-engaging the
world by projecting a positive image of the region’s culture and
religion.
Each of these requires reforms and policies that constitute radical
departure from the past, have short term costs and can alienate many
vested interests. At the domestic political level, this calls for changes
in the mode of governance. At the economic level, the challenge is for
policy makers to put economics ahead of politics and to think beyond short
term revenue needs and allocations concentrating on macroeconomic
viability, competitiveness and sustainable growth.
By far the most dangerous enemy at this stage is complacency. In the
current environment, every missed opportunity to act has direct and
immediate risks associated with it that should not be underestimated.
The region has been preoccupied with the Arab-Israeli conflict and huge
amounts of resources were devoted to mitigate this threat. In many cases,
long-overdue economic and political adjustments were delayed, using this
cause as an excuse. While the Arab region allocates about 8 percent of its
GDP on defense, this rate falls to less than 3 percent in many other
regions of the world. Not only have these resources been
“misallocated.” but the forgone income and opportunities associated
with this misallocation have undoubtedly affected the region’s economic
growth rates.
With a stronger and more credible base at home, Arab countries will be
ready to re-engage the world in a more constructive way. The region needs
to get its message especially to the American public and only then will
the US government listen. This requires the active contribution of
statesmen and professionals who are able to interact with the media, lobby
Congress and know the ins and outs of American politics.
Henry T. Azzam is CEO of Jordinvest.