POMED Notes: Road to Reform in MENA

On Thursday, the International Foundation for Electoral Systems hosted a panel discussion on the “Road to Reform in the Middle East and North Africa.” Panelists included Ambar Zobairi, Deputy Director, Middle East and North Africa, IFES; Elmar Brok, German Member of the European Parliament; and Michele Dunne, Director of the Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, Atlantic Council. The panel was moderated by Bill Sweeney, President and CEO, IFES.

For full notes, continue reading. Or click here for the pdf.

After Bill Sweeney welcomed and introduced the panelists, Ambar Zobairi set the stage for the discussion by outlining the political developments that have swept the region since January. Common factors in uprisings were a lack of personal freedoms or democratic institutions, and a lack of opportunities for youth. Protests were also driven by the belief that the outcomes of demonstrations would have significant impact on people’s lives.

Zobairi noted that the notion of democracy is “not an alien notion to the Middle East.” But for the first time citizens are expecting to influence change and with high expectations they have placed “extreme pressure on governments to deliver solutions.” As a result of this growth in political efficacy, governments should plan for very high turnouts in coming elections.

While greater political openings have occurred in Egypt and Tunisia, the reform process in both countries remains “murky,” lacking clearly defined priorities or details for reform implementation. In Morocco, notorious for low voter turnout, the extremely high turnout for the constitutional referendum was remarkable, but the quality of the reform process remains to be seen. Zobairi concluded by emphasizing that long-term, participatory processes with oversight and transparency are necessary throughout the region.

Next, Elmar Brok focused his comments on the role of the European community in assisting democratic transitions in the region. He raised the question of how foreign aid can be effective, and noted the importance of providing assistance and offering frameworks to foster the building of political foundations. Brok also emphasized the importance of judicial institutions and good governance, especially at the local level, in emerging democracies.

Michele Dunne provided a U.S. perspective on the uprisings. She divided the region into three types of cases. In the difficult but promising cases of Egypt and Tunisia, regime change has occurred and there is an explicit commitment to democratization, yet no guarantee of success. The very difficult cases include Libya, Syria, Yemen, and even Bahrain, where conflict is not evident in the streets, but Dunne predicts “it will be back.” Finally, there are the cases of Morocco and Jordan, viewed by the U.S. as easy situations.

Dunne argues that the U.S. approach of spoken and unspoken policies is “relatively clear.” In all cases, the U.S. has been relatively consistent in its support for universal human rights and opposition to the use of force against peaceful protesters. But the unspoken policy has been reactive, with the degree of U.S. interest and pressure in pursuing its spoken values in “direct proportion to intensity of protests in any given country.” Put differently, the U.S. has only advocated for direct regime change, such as in Libya, after citizens and others in the region call for change. Dunne argues that this understanding of U.S. policy makes the perceived contradictions quite clear.

Next, Dunne argued that the U.S. and Europe have “not yet made a compelling response to the changes in the region.” It is not yet too late for a “compelling transatlantic response.” The U.S. should make compelling offers to the countries in transition (Egypt and Tunisia), in order to incentivize the type of transition desired. In these cases, the economic situation “can either underpin or undermine the political transitions.” In this context, economic tools, particularly with trade, are the best available mechanisms for incentivizing reform. And Dunne recognized that in a gentle, diplomatic way, the U.S. should educate the transitioning countries on best practices and international standards.

Regarding the very difficult cases, the U.S. must find ways “to make clear what we stand for” without shifting the focus to a conflict with the U.S. government. With allies such as Saudi Arabia opposing the U.S., Bahrain is a particularly difficult case.

Finally, Dunne argued that the cases of Morocco and Jordan are deceptive. The U.S. has tended to shower these countries with praise and give reformers more credit than they deserve. Instead, the U.S. should be more cautious and monitor closely the happiness of the populations, as “we could be repeating old mistakes.”

During the question and answer session, Sweeney noted the importance of patience in ensuring credible electoral processes, and Zobairi asserted that governments must increase dialogue with civil society and clearly communicate the reasons for any delays in elections. And Brok agreed that patience, while difficult, is the only way to transform a country. He cited the example of Egypt and argued that not delaying elections would be dangerous, favoring the Muslim Brotherhood and the military.

Dunne elaborated on the challenge of Saudi Arabia. It remains to be seen if Saudi Arabia will pursue stability by providing economic aid while allowing internal political developments in various countries to proceed independently. Thus the extent to which there will be cooperation or competition between the transatlantic community and the Gulf States remains to be seen.

Sweeney concluded the panel by reiterating the hope that the United States and European community can work to support people of the region enact meaningful changes.