|
|
From the POMED Wire
The Center for Global Development hosted an event today focusing on “Worldwide Governance Indicators” (WGI) and governance in African countries.
This event featured Daniel Kaufmann, Director of Global Programs at the World Bank Institute, Obiageli Ezekwesili , Vice President of the Africa Region at the World Bank, Morton H. Halperin, Director of US Advocacy at the Open Society Institute and Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, and Aart Kraay, Lead Economist at the Development Research Group in the World Bank…
Algerian local elections are being held tomorrow, following the end of campaigning by political parties who remain concerned about voter turnout. The legislative elections in May faced a measure of voter apathy and boycotts, and some Algerians have voiced skepticism that the current elections are merely “passing off old as new.”…
|
POMED House Parties
POMED regularly works with individuals who host small get-togethers at their homes to build awareness and support for POMED. If you would like to learn more about hosting such an event, please contact Caroline Brennan at caroline.brennan@pomed.org.
|
|
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,
The Thanksgiving holiday provides us all with an opportunity to take a step back and consider the many reasons we have to be thankful. Without a doubt, 2007 has been a trying year for supporters of democratic progress in the Middle East. And yet, we at POMED nonetheless have many reasons to be grateful.
Despite pushbacks against democracy and democracy promotion, supporters like you have convinced us that a new consensus is building that recognizes that consistent, multi-faceted support for democratic development must be an indispensable part of a 21st-century US foreign policy in the Middle East. Even in this difficult environment, you have helped us to grow into an increasingly effective organization that gives voice to that consensus by promoting a reexamination of the pathways toward reform in various Middle Eastern countries and of America’s tools for supporting those processes.
If you have already contributed financially to POMED, we want to thank you again for investing in our work. Our conferences in the Middle East, events here in Washington, and publications are made possible by your generous support.
If you have not yet given, now is a perfect time to start! This month kicks off POMED’s first annual Year-End Fundraising Drive, in which we’re appealing to you, our readers and friends, to support our work through small financial contributions. If you read our blog or Weekly Wire, please help us defray the costs of producing these by “subscribing” to these services through a modest donation of $25.
If you have the means, please consider donating $50 or $100. Stand up and be counted as a supporter of a new and better US foreign policy in the Middle East!
Consider it an investment. Every dollar you give goes towards growing POMED’s activities and building our capacity to make a difference in the current policy debates in Washington. And we look forward to giving you regular updates on just how your investment is being used to expand our work.
Also, because POMED is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, every penny is tax deductible.
Your partnership is essential to our continued success. So today, please join our efforts to make 2008 a better year both for US foreign policy and for democratic progress in the Middle East.
All the best,
Andrew
|
POMED Updates
Capitol Hill Event on Political Reform in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States
On November 1, POMED co-sponsored a panel discussion in Rayburn House Office Building with Freedom House, entitled “The State of Reform: Human Rights, Democratic Development and Individual Freedoms in Saudi Arabia and the Arab Gulf States.” Moderated by POMED Advocacy Director Stephen McInerney, the discussion featured four experts who examined the state of reform in the Arabian Peninsula and the consequences for U.S. policy.
Thomas Melia, Deputy Executive Director of Freedom House and former Director of Middle East Programs at the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, and Ali Alyami, Executive Director of the Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, spoke on the state of human rights and reform in Saudi Arabia. David Mikosz, Associate Director of the Center for Democracy and Election Management at the American University in Washington, D.C., and Nathan Brown, Professor of Political Science at George Washington University and Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, spoke about reform in the other Gulf states.
The members of the panel agreed that these states, and particularly Saudi Arabia, are among the least free in the world and the minimal reforms that have taken place are largely symbolic. However, there is some hope that democracy could develop gradually though the accretion of power by parliaments or other consultative bodies. The panel also encouraged U.S. pressure on the Gulf states in support of reforms. For POMED’s full notes on the event, click here. To view a video recording of the full discussion, click here.
Young Global Leaders Forum to Kick Off in Spring 2008
Building on our successful conferences in Amman, Cairo, and Rabat in 2007, POMED is again partnering with Americans for Informed Democracy and six regional organizations to conduct a “Young Global Leaders Forum” in the Middle East in 2008. The forum, entitled “Democratic Development in the Middle East and North Africa,” will begin with a series of conferences in Morocco, Egypt and Jordan, bringing together young Americans and Middle Easterners ages 18-28 to discuss how the U.S. can best support political reform in the region. 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. Follow-up activities will include seminars on blogging, citizen journalism and social networking, as well as videoconference dialogues with American university students. Look for more information to follow as we choose conference dates and topics, speakers, and participants.
Our regional partners for the forum include:
- Alwaleed Center for American Studies and Research, American University in Cairo
- Center for Strategic Studies, University of Jordan
- Egyptology Club, American University of Cairo
- Leaders of Tomorrow (Jordan)
- National Institute for Youth and Democracy (Morocco)
- The Moroccan Center for Strategic Studies
POMED in the News
POMED’s Director of Research Shadi Hamid and Director of Advocacy Stephen McInerney, in an article for the New Republic, argue that the real way for Saudi Arabia to combat terrorism is through political reform, which can “not only offer hope for the beleaguered Saudi population, but also chip away at the repression that breeds the very terrorists whom we need the Saudis’ help in fighting.” They further argue that the U.S. should condition arms deals with the Saudi regime upon clear political reform benchmarks.
In a recent Washington Post op-ed, Andrew Exum and POMED’s Director of Advocacy Stephen McInerney argue that “by viewing Lebanon through the lens of confrontation with Iran, the U.S. is failing to give Lebanese democracy the help it needs.” They argue that the preoccupation with Iran has left the U.S. government unprepared for the threat of Sunni extremists in the country, as well as resulting in an ineffective approach to the ongoing political crisis over the presidency.
|
|
Despite Praise for Elections, Reform Stagnating in Jordan
By David Dryer, POMED Research Assistant
Last Tuesday, November 20, Jordan held parliamentary elections to broad international acclaim. The vote was the second since Jordan’s monarch, King Abdullah II, took power in 1999, and independent Jordanian observers certified the election as free and fair. Indeed, the elections went smoothly, a record number of female candidates competed and won seats, and voter turnout was an impressive fifty-four percent. But these facts belie the tenuousness of Jordanian democracy: voter fraud was practically unnecessary because eligibility for the elections was so restricted; international observers were uninvited, and voter turnout was inflated by low registration rates and high returns in areas supporting pro-government candidates. In short, long-promised substantive reforms are still a way off, and may be slipping further away.
Jordan is ruled by the monarchy in consultation with a bicameral parliament, in which the upper house is appointed by the king, and the lower house is elected. Since 2003, the opposition Islamist Action Front (IAF) held eighteen of 110 seats. The IAF took part in last week’s election warily, as irregular electoral districts award one representative for every 2,000 to 3,000 people in pro-government tribal areas, but only one per 90,000 in areas of heavy Islamist support. After only winning six seats, the IAF is also alleging voter fraud.
This election is merely the latest sign that prospects for Jordanian democracy may be fading. While Abdullah II has expanded individual freedoms and increased the independence of the judiciary, this has been accompanied by numerous setbacks, and Jordan remains decidedly unfree. Most notably, Abdullah II dissolved parliament in 2001 and ruled by decree for two years. In 2004, security forces stifled peaceful protests by professional associations, the core of Jordanian civil society. After a deadly bomb attack in 2005, Abdullah II gave in to pressures for greater security and replaced the moderate Prime Minister with a former general, Marouf al-Bakhit. Importantly, though Jordanian intellectuals blame the lack of progress on the self-preserving monarchy, influential conservative groups are also an obstacle to reform: Bedouin tribal leaders are averse to reforms that might westernize the country, and even liberal business leaders worry that electoral reform will empower Islamists, who may adopt illiberal economic policies.
Overwhelming Praise for Underwhelming Reforms
Limited reforms have progressed under Abdullah II. The king launched a broad civil society and political reform program called Jordan First in 2002. The program calls for efforts to enhance Jordanian social services, promote civic engagement, and enfranchise women. In 2005, Abdullah II assembled pro-government leaders to draft a similarly broad reform plan called the National Agenda, an important goal of which was to force pro- and anti-reform elites to work towards a consensus on liberalization.
Yet these programs exemplify the problem with Jordanian reform: the policy prescriptions in each are modest and superficial, but by earning the praise of the United States and western media, the programs allow the monarchy to quell criticism while avoiding true reforms. Indeed, the United States has loudly applauded cosmetic reforms in Jordan. Earlier this month the House of Representatives passed H.Res.575 “[commending] the people, the government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, and His Majesty King Abdullah II” for holding elections and promoting women’s electoral rights. Following last week’s elections, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack likewise herald the regime “for ensuring another step has been taken on the country’s path of political development.” The sentiment is borne out in U.S. military and economic assistance to Jordan, the second largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid per capita. American technical expertise and funds are vital to maintaining Jordan’s high-tech armed forces, and such assistance has never been conditioned on reform.
Recommendations for U.S. Policy Makers
In light of Jordan’s strategic value in stabilizing Iraq and fighting terror, maintaining strong ties with the regime is critical. But this is not incompatible with pushing for political reforms, and the failure to do so will exacerbate regional and U.S. security threats, as radicals use political disenfranchisement as recruitment fodder. Substantive reforms should be appropriately encouraged and applauded, but exuberant praise for superficial, disingenuous reform must be avoided, as this discourages reformers, lowers the bar for authoritarian leaders looking to satisfy calls for reform, and undermines U.S. credibility across the region.
In order to promote reform without jeopardizing bilateral relations, U.S. policy makers should create clear incentives for following through with reform. The United States should provide material and expert support for social service reform, and some military aid should be conditioned on benchmarks for judicial reform and increased political liberty. The United States should also encourage Jordan to recognize that the IAF is a valuable bulwark against radicalization in conservative communities. Whereas allowing greater Islamist political participation will boost the standing of non-violent moderates, continued exclusion of moderates will make them appear weak, and may drive their supporters to militancy. To the extent possible, U.S. leaders should also engage Islamist leaders directly in order to demonstrate the potential for cooperation, and dissuade anti-western rhetoric.
|
|
Legislative Update
While the Defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008 was passed this month, Congress remains at a standoff over supplemental funding for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. H.R.3222 was signed into law mid-November, authorizing $460 billion for annual Pentagon spending in fiscal year 2008. The bill also included a stopgap spending measure extending government funding through Dec. 14th. None of the other annual spending bills have yet been signed into law, and Congress is expected to be busy working on those bills until just before Christmas. Congressional activity in November continued to focus on Iraq and Iran, along with responses to political crises in Lebanon and Pakistan.
Iraq
November has seen some attempts in Congress to address the question of emergency war supplemental appropriations, notably S.2340 sponsored by Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and H.R.4156 sponsored by Rep. David Obey (D-WI). The administration has asked for $196.4 billion in supplemental funding for the war on terror, $190 billion of which goes to the Departmen | | |
