|
|
We need your support!
In order to continue to expand our work, POMED needs your support. Please consider making a donation through our secure, online donation site.
Click Here to Donate to POMED
|
|
Dear Friends,
Two weeks ago, I had the honor and privilege of being part of a US delegation organized by Democracy International to observe the elections in Pakistan. It proved an historic event.
Despite a pre-election period marred by General Pervez Musharraf’s suspension of the constitution, the dismissal of judges, problems with the election commission, and numerous incidents of violence, election day itself was marked more by the courageous turnout of voters than by bombs or rigging. And the message the voters sent was clear. Consistent with polling conducted by the International Republican Institute and others, Pakistanis resoundingly rejected Musharraf’s PML-Q party, awarding far more seats to the Pakistani People’s Party (PPP), formerly headed by Benazir Bhutto, and to the PML-N party led by Nawaz Sharif. To make the signals all the more clear, Musharraf’s closest political allies were ousted from their seats. Musharraf had no choice but to accept the outcome.
Pakistan still has a long way to go. Like Musharraf, neither Asif Ali Zardari, Bhutto’s husband and the new leader of the PPP, nor Sharif have demonstrated a strong commitment to the rule of law. And the next government will face serious social, economic, and security challenges. We will have to wait and see whether they will be able to work together in a coalition government, or whether past grievances will once again undermine cooperation and good governance.
And yet, we can already see the elections as a success. Holding elections enhanced the stability of the state. Voters were given an opportunity to circumscribe the power of a military ruler who viewed the freedom of his people as more of a hindrance than a goal - and they took it. Radical Islamists who profited from the absence of a functioning political system were undercut. The road ahead is filled with potholes, but with a legitimately elected government, Pakistan will be better equipped for the journey.
In addition to the Pakistani people, the U.S. can reap the benefits, as well. The PPP and PML-N may be more open in their disagreements with US policy than was General Musharraf, but at least we can deal now with a legitimate representative of the Pakistani people. Released from its dual role, the military can return to the task of policing the borderlands. And the US should now be able to downgrade its relationship with an unpopular ruler, which has fed anti-Americanism in the past.
The US should have been more fully behind the democratic aspirations of the Pakistani people from the start. But regardless, today we have an opportunity for a fresh start. By accepting the outcome of the elections and working with whatever government emerges, we can begin to rebuild our damaged credibility on democracy. By rewarding Pakistan for its democratic progress, we can signal our willingness to reward reforms elsewhere. Most importantly, by making our relationship with Pakistan about the society as a whole, rather than just a single leader, we can signal a willingness to form a sturdier alliance - not one based on a quid pro quo with an unaccountable autocrat, but on the well-founded recognition that our own security and the welfare of the Pakistani people are intertwined.
All the best,
Andrew
|
|
POMED Updates
February Event on Religious Freedom
On Friday, February 22, POMED and the Middle East Program of the Woodrow Wilson Center presented a panel discussion entitled, “Religious Freedom and Democratization in the Middle East: Links and Challenges.”
A panel of three experts examined the state of religious freedom in the Middle East and addressed questions:
- What consequences does the absence of religious freedom pose for US interests in the region?
- What connections should policymakers draw between the advance of religious freedom in Middle Eastern countries and the fate of democratic reforms?
- How can the U.S. promote religious freedom and democratization simultaneously, and what risks does that raise in the Middle Eastern context?
The three speakers were: Thomas Melia, Deputy Executive Director of Freedom House, Thomas Farr, former Director of the State Department’s Office of International Religious Freedom, and Joe Stork, Deputy Director of the Middle East and North Africa Division at Human Rights Watch and principal author of the recent report on Egypt, Prohibited Identities: State Interference with Religious Freedom. Haleh Esfandiari of the Wilson Center gave opening remarks and POMED Executive Director Andrew Albertson moderated the discussion.
For notes on the content of the event, click here. The video recording of the event is available here.
Young Global Leaders Forum: Democratic Development in the Middle East
In April and May, POMED and Americans for Informed Democracy (AID) will team up with several regional partners to organize a series of conferences in the Middle East dedicated to fostering political reform in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and exploring how the U.S. can best support this process. The participants will be a diverse group of American and MENA university students and young professionals who will develop policy recommendations at conferences in Morocco, Egypt and Jordan in spring 2008. The conferences will lay the foundation for a lasting network of reform-oriented young people by using social networking websites for political activism, fostering people-powered journalism and commentary, and providing training for participants to act as “voices” for the conference recommendations.
More details, including applications to participate in each of the three conferences, are now available on POMED’s website.
POMED Interview with Radwan Ziadeh
Radwan Ziadeh is a founder and former director of the Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies and has been a prominent advocate for human rights and political reform in Syria. He has published numerous articles and studies in both Arabic and English, and is currently a Senior Fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP) . This morning, Ziadeh will be a featured speaker at a USIP event on the human rights situation in Syria. Recently, POMED had the opportunity to sit down with Ziadeh to discuss the Assad regime’s recent crackdown on opposition leaders, the Iraq war’s effects on Syria’s political landscape, the changing character of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, and the view of U.S. democracy promotion from Damascus.
When asked what the U.S. can do to support human rights in Syria, Ziadeh replied, “If the U.S. government sends a message that it is serious about democracy, not only on Syria but throughout the region, that will improve U.S. credibility for the Arab people and send the correct message. A trip like [Senator Arlen] Specter and [Rep. Patrick] Kennedy’s, that’s very helpful for human rights in Syria. When every Western visitor will ask about the situation of human rights inside our country, Syrian officials will know that to improve their image outside the country they will need to improve the human rights situation.”
Click here for the full text of the interview.
|
|
|
Legislative Update
This month was marked by the renewal of debate surrounding Iraq within Congress, while President Bush announced his budget request for fiscal year 2009. Members of Congress closely followed the elections in Pakistan, with numerous statements issued by members of Congress in the days following the vote on February 18. However, there was no official reaction or legislation by Congress in reaction to the Pakistani elections, perhaps in part because Congress was out of session for the weeklong President’s Day recess. Throughout the month, most other issues of foreign affairs were overshadowed in Congress by the domestic economy and the passage of an economic stimulus package.
Iraq
On February 6, Rep. Wayne Gilchrest (R-MD) introduced H.CON.RES.288, expressing the need for a more comprehensive diplomatic initiative led by the United States, Republic of Iraq, and international community. The bill urges diplomatic engagement with all of Iraq’s neighbors and specifically Iran and Syria, in an effort to stabilize the situation in Iraq and contribute to Iraqi reconstruction.
Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) introduced H.CON.RES.298, acknowledging the urgent need to address the Iraqi refugee crisis, acknowledging the potential threat to U.S. national security posed by this crisis, and urging the U.S. to support the Iraqi Red Crescent Society as the “principal relief organization providing immediate relief in the form of food, shelter, and medicine to the IDP and refugee populations in Iraq.”
On February 13, Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI) introduced a pair of bills regarding the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from Iraq. S.2633 would require the President to withdraw troops from Iraq within 120 days, except for “Limited and Temporary Purposes” including targeted missions against al-Qaeda and protection of U.S. government personnel. S.2634 calls for a global strategy to combat and defeat al-Qaeda, including the redeployment and redistribution of U.S. military forces according to the global assessment of terrorist threats. Debate on the Senate floor continues this week on each of these two bills.
FY09 Budget
Following the release on February of President Bush’s budget request for fiscal year 2009, Congressional Committees saw testimony on varying aspects of the international affairs budget from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Millennium Challenge Corporation CEO Ambassador John Danilovich; USAID Administrator Henrietta Fore, and Under Secretary of State for Administration Patrick F. Kennedy. The overall request for the Department of State and all other international program for fiscal year 2009 is $38.3 billion, a 16.5% increase over the amount enacted for fiscal year 2008 (and a 9.4% increase over the President’s request for FY08). Hearings on the international affairs portion of the budget will continue throughout the spring, and the State and Foreign Operations bill is expected to be proposed within the House and Senate in June.
Outlook
Much continued debate on Iraq is expected in the coming weeks, accompanying the report of General David Petraeus on the state of political progress as well as the fifth anniversary of the war’s start on March 19. Various bills are expected to be proposed concerning the withdrawal of U.S. troops, evaluating political benchmarks for the Iraqi government, and addressing a potential long-term American presence in Iraq. There is also an expectation that the Bush administration’s policy focus may shift back toward Iran, and that Congress will follow. All eyes will be on Iran’s parliamentary elections on March 14, and their outcome may influence the course of U.S. policy toward Iran throughout the spring. Finally, the annual budget appropriations process is now beginning in earnest, and we will closely follow the course of relevant appropriations for the State Department and foreign operations.
|
|
|
