Iraq Election Shifts Opinion, Prompts Debate on Implications
Debate over the consequences of the Iraqi election continues to swell more than two weeks after the event. The relatively high voter turnout on January 30 propelled Iraq into “the potentially historic territory of democratic self-determination," notes one generally skeptical observer. Yet Rami Khouri of Lebanon's Daily Star believes “Iraq's transformation into a democratic multi-ethnic state will have powerful repercussions.”

Gamal Abdul Gawad, of Cairo's Al Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, argues that “no momentum has been created to activate or unleash a democracy movement in other Arab countries."  Others beg to differ. While the region's regimes will seek to limit the contagion, says Amr al-Shubaqi, Gawad's colleague at the Al-Ahram Centre, "democracy is an idea that is now on the march in the Middle East even if the efforts to contain it are immense."

The election turnout of approximately 60 percent, accurately predicted by only a few commentators was all the more remarkable --- and humbling to many of us in the complacent advanced democracies --- given Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's threat to “kill anyone associated with elections: candidates, monitors, and voters.” Zarqawi took his cue from Al-Qaeda ideologist Yussuf al-Ayyeri. “It is not the American war machine that should be of the utmost concern,” al-Ayyeri warned radical Islamists. “What threatens the future of Islam, in fact its survival, is American democracy." Tellingly, if inadvertently, the jihadists' pronouncements helped affirm that the election delivered a body blow not only to terrorist and insurgent morale but also to the noxious notion that Islam and democracy are incompatible.

In Fallujah, of all places, some 8,000 citizens defied insurgent threats to vote, accounting for 44 percent of all votes cast in the Sunni triangle's Anbar Province where fewer than 7 percent voted in total. Even before an election in which voters braved suicide bomb attacks, there was much evidence of Iraqi resolution and commitment. In one incident, a bomb exploded shortly before a scheduled workshop on coalition-building.Troops cordoned off the venue amid reports that a second suicide bomber was in the vicinity. Organizers "were planning to reschedule when their cell phones started ringing as people called to apologize for being late. Troops were blocking the hotel, but participants were waiting outside in the smoke and the wreckage and the body parts," said one organizer. When the cordon was lifted, some 165 people of the scheduled 180 attendees walked in. "At that point," he said, "I kind of figured there's something going on here."

Opinion Upbeat on Election's Regional Impact
When asked to assess the long term effects of the French Revolution of 1789, former Chinese Premier Chou en Lai famously replied, "It is too soon to tell." So caution may be appropriate in gauging the regional implications of the Iraq election. Some of the region's regimes clearly remain in denial, hoping to contain the democratic virus. Western commentators vary in their assessments, with the usual quota of cynics grudgingly recognizing Iraqi voters' bravery and idealism while elaborating their pessimistic scenarios.

But few openly deny that the election represents a critical watershed, and it could yet serve as both catalyst and inspiration for a regional wave of democratic reform. "For sure, we will have effects. It is already starting," said Dr. Shamian Al-Essa, Director of the Center for Strategic and Future Studies of Kuwait University. "Once they have security in Iraq, democracy will be the issue [and] democracy will spill over."

"Despite its many flaws and contested origins, the election in Iraq was a very significant and positive development that allowed Iraqis to express themselves freely for the first time in over three decades," said Osama Safa, Director of the Lebanese Center for Policy Studies. "The momentum from this process in Iraq should be fully embraced and supported by all Arabs." The election was "an extraordinary example of self-assertion by the Iraqi people," said Lebanese democracy activist Chibli Mallat. "Whether this electoral process has any impact on others in the Middle East will be determined by the next steps inside Iraq," he cautioned.

"Once people feel there are positive effects from the democratic process, they will want the same [as Iraqis and Palestinians]," says Hisham Qassem, President of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights.  "Especially countries like Egypt who felt they were ahead of Iraq but are now lagging behind," he said. "

In a notable indicator of a shift in opinion, readers of the militantly Arab nationalist Al-Quds Al-Arabi voted overwhelmingly (96 percentat the time of writing) to endorse the election as a positive development for the region. This is significant, coming from readers of a newspaper which has been consistently hostile to the coalition intervention in Iraq and which, in the week before the poll, highlighted the “many negative sides to this election.”

The vote validates survey evidence that pro-democratic attitudes in the Muslim world remain robust under exceptionally challenging conditions. Pew Global Attitudes surveys confirm popular receptiveness to democracy in nearly all of the 17 Muslim populations in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa covered by the polls.

The Iraq election also tells us something about political alignments in the West, argues Michael Gove of the London Times. “Just as the Spanish Civil War and the Cold War compelled people to take sides between democracy and oppression, so the Iraq war forced a choice on us,” he argues. Invoking the “Not In May Name” slogan of those opposed to the coalition's efforts to remove Saddam, he directs his polemic against the realist Right as much as the anti-war Left. “When you tell us that it was wrong to get rid of Saddam, foolish to press ahead with an election, naive to believe in Arab democracy, you exercise a valuable, cherishable freedom. But not in our name.”

Mid East Regimes Discomfited by Election ….
The region's Sunni Arab regimes fear the emergence not only of a democratic government in Iraq but also of what Jordan's King Abdullah called a “crescent” of Shiite influence and power spreading from Iran to the large Shia populations in the Gulf. With the region's rulers clearly anxious about growing pressure for reform, even His Majesty was forced to modify his rhetoric, recognizing the Iraqi and Palestinian elections as "good examples of the democratic process" that "help countries such as Jordan to be able to push the envelope."

In any case, fears that a Shia-dominated government would usher in theocratic rule and expand Tehran's influence in the region are misconceived, says regional expert Reuel Marc Gerecht. Iraqi political developments will effectively dilute Tehran's influence and provide an alternative model of Islamic democracy. “Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who is now certainly the most senior Shiite cleric in both Iraq and Iran, who is of Iranian birth and early education, has embraced a democratic political creed that is anathema to the ruling mullahs of Tehran,” Gerecht argues. The "Islamic paradox," is that democracy in the Middle East will ultimately emerge not from secular liberals or moderate Muslims but from anti-American Shiite clerics and Sunni fundamentalists. Their popular support and legitimacy, confirmed by the Iraqi election, suggests they “hold the keys to spreading democracy and will probably “liberate the Muslim Middle East from its age-old reflexive hostility to the West.”

Autocrats and authoritarians can perhaps take solace from some Western analysts for whom, contrary to appearance, the Iraqi election does not amount to a victory for democracy. "The price for the election was very high, and so if you're sitting in Saudi Arabia ... you look to Iraq and you ask: Is it worth the cost?," observes Rachel Bronson, a Middle East expert at the Council on Foreign Relations. Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria and the Carnegie Endowment's Marina Ottaway were two of many experts who helpfully reminded those laboring under the illusion that elections and democracy are synonymous that in fact a single election, “particularly one marred by such an unprecedented level of violence and fear, does not turn a country into a democracy.“ Others might suggest that elections are generally also a good indicator, if not a precondition, of democracy and liberalism.

… But Much Depends on Internal Players
On a more nuanced note, Middle East specialist Barry Rubin notes that the election was a “major victory for democracy, but not necessarily for liberal reform" in the region. Observing that liberal reform parties that aimed to transcend communal ties did not do well in the poll, he suggests the election typified the problem faced by Arab democratic reformers: “They have compelling arguments, but they lack large numbers of followers.” Nevertheless, cautions Rubin, author of a forthcoming book on the Arab struggle for democracy, the “liberal, democratic reformist movement among Arabs is here to stay," and has “already become a major contender in the Arab world's battle of ideas.”

Although the election demonstrated “a level of conviction and determination and fearlessness that recalls some of the great moments of the democratic revolutions of the last thirty years," democracy expert Larry Diamond believes it was nevertheless “a very superficial election and in some ways a very unfair election.” Of the many parties engaged, most had no money, no access to the media, and, because of the security situation, no chance to campaign. Diamond, criticized by some for calling for the election's postponement and for suggesting it would "grease the slide to civil war" remains cautious. Profound challenges have yet to be overcome, he insists, but Iraq may yet beome a democracy "in which people can choose and replace their leaders in more or less free and fair elections, hopefully with some significant degree of rule of law and accountability.”

While the election was a staggering defeat for Arab authoritarianism, leading observer Fouad Ajami warns that “the Cassandras have Iraq's history on their side, and the terrible ways of an Arab political tradition steeped in authoritarianism and sectarian bigotry.” A similarly cautious but hopeful note is sounded by Kanan Makiya who, echoing Gerecht, argues that if the Shi'ites think beyond a narrowly conceived self-interest “they might just become the agents for a genuine democratic transformation of the whole Middle East.” He identifies hope for that prospect in Article 61(c) of the interim constitution which holds that no future permanent constitution can be ratified if two-thirds of voters in any three governorates reject it. The debate over this article -- in effect, a debate about minority rights -- prefigures the “most fundamental political struggle that will take place in the National Assembly of the new Iraq -- the struggle over what it means to be an Iraqi.”

Democracy Assistance Plays Key Role
The overwhelming credit for the election's success belongs, of course, with the Iraqi people. But it would be wrong to overlook the brave and vital contribution of international solidarity through the many groups and agencies that worked closely with Iraqis on the ground for many months to help ensure the election's success. Hilary Benn, the UK Labour Government's development minister, is only one of many to recognize the extraordinary courage of Iraqis and their international supporters alike.

External assistance largely focused on voter education and assistance to political parties and civic associations through "National Endowment for Democracy-type organizations" like the National Democratic Institute and International Republican Institute. “The NED groups, which pull in teachers from other democracies to internationalize the training, … proved excellent midwives for other transitions from authoritarianism to representative government,” says one commentator....They worked closely with Iraqi politicians and grass-roots activists of all political stripes, providing training on the basics of political organization, campaigning and electoral conduct. But this is not only “a process that is geared for a particular election,” says NDI's Ken Wollack, “but rather a long-term program for the development of political parties, the development of civic participation, popular political participation in the country and to expose Iraqi citizens to some of the experiences of those who have gone through the transition process in other countries.”

This international solidarity should not be regarded as a purely Anglo-American effort. IRI's Judy Van Rest notes that their Iraq program engages staff from Central and Eastern Europe, drawing on their recent experiences with democracy-building in their own countries. Nor is it a question of promoting a particular model of democracy or instructing others on appropriate political behaviour. "What people want is not to be told, 'Here's how we do it in America so here's how to do it, little brother,' " says IRI president Lorne Craner. "They want to be told, "Here's 28 countries in the last 10 years ... who have gone through what you're going through, and here's how their constitutions turned out."

"Incentives Not Sanctions" Will Promote Arab Reform
The Iraq elections proved that "[w]hen given the chance, the peoples of the Middle East are eager to prove wrong those arguing that Islam and democracy are incompatible, and to fulfil their aspirations to freedom and self-rule", argues Rouzbeh Piroux, Chairman of the Civility Programme for Middle East reform at the UK's Foreign Policy Centre. Piroux suggests that the European Union offer incentives for Arab political change by initiating an "EU-lite" club of reform-minded states. The EU should attach reform-based conditions to some of the €1 billion ($1.3 billion) in non-military aid and €2 billion in soft loans that the EU gives annually to Middle East and North African states. Compliance to club rules, including devolution of power to an elected parliament, would be monitored by a board including the new EU Foreign Minister and European Commission President.

A successful pro-democracy strategy for the Middle East will need to abandon the standard and sometimes over-emphasized tenets of civil society promotion and pressure for economic reform, according to a provocative analysis in the latest edition of the US journal Foreign Affairs.

Civil society groups played a key role in undermining communism but there is little evidence to suggest that they can play a similar role in the Arab world, argues Steven Cook, an analyst with the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations. Arab countries are “already awash in civic organizations,” many of which provide critical social services. But many civil society groups are undemocratic, including those affiliated with radical Islamists, while others have been co-opted by local regimes, receiving government patronage in return for collaboration.

Democracy via economic development is an equally flawed approach, confusing correlation with causation. Economic development and democratization may often go hand-in-hand, but this does not mean that the former causes the latter. In the Middle East, economic liberalization occurred “without either the institutionalization of market economies or the emergence of democracy,” and local business elites have also been easily co-opted.

The real obstacles to change in the region are flawed institutions which are designed to ensure the authoritarian character of the regimes by restricting political participation and individual freedom, while concentrating power in the executive branch of government. Institutional change will only occur through positive conditionality and offering incentives, such as sponsorship of Arab participation in the World Trade Organization.

“A viable democratization strategy would employ the considerable economic leverage" the US and EU possess “to pressure these states toward viable reforms,” argues Ray Takeyh, also of the CFR. Echoing the arguments of Piroux and Cook, he says that the EU’s own "gravity model" of democratization illustrates the benefits of making preferential trade agreements, foreign aid and market access contingent on political reform.

Wahhabi Toxic Texts Distributed in US
Anti-democratic and intolerant publications from Saudi-funded sources are widely distributed in US mosques, according to a new study from Freedom House. The Arabic-language writings, published by the Saudi government or Wahhabi clerics, attack democracy as a form of government, as well as Shia and other Muslims and Christians and Jews.

The publications are "widely available in America, in some cases dominate mosque library shelves, and continue to be used to educate American Muslims," reports the Center for Religious Freedom attached to Freedom House, the non-partisan human rights group founded by Eleanor Roosevelt in 1941.

Jews “kill Muslims, imprison them, destroy their lands, tear down their mosques, burn their holy book—no, no they have no dignity,” states one pamphlet. "Wahhabis invariably present Jews as falling permanently under God's curse, and often less than human," the Freedom House report notes. "Even apart from the issue of Israel and the Palestinians or any Arab-Israeli conflict, Wahhabi hatred for Jews as Jews is primordial."

Many Islamic groups and observers denounced the Wahhabi texts as unrepresentative of American Muslims' views.

Chechnya Coverage Prompts Criminal Case Against Russian Human Rights Newspaper  
Prosecutors have started a criminal case against Russian newspaper Pravozashchita (Rights Defense), charging it with advocacy of "extremist activity" in its coverage of the war in Chechnya. The paper had previously been harassed, by the FSB security services and human rights groups expressed concern that journalists could be killed or "disappeared."

"I have the impression that after having sorted things out with television, the authorities are now turning to print media," said Stanislav Dmitriyevsky, head of the Nizhny Novgorod center of the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society which co-publishes the paper. The case refers to Pravozashchita publishing statements by Chechen rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov urging the international community to help end the war in Chechnya, and by his envoy Akhmed Zakayev, calling on Russians not to vote for President Vladimir Putin and thus help end the war. Pravozashchita is supported by the US-based National Endowment for Democracy.

NEWS IN BRIEF

Egypt Pressed on Jailed Opposition Leader
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this week expressed "very strong concerns" about the jailing of Egyptian opposition leader Ayman Nour and insisted the situation be resolved quickly. Her comments came at a State Department news conference with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit.

Nour, a member of parliament, was remanded in custody on February 1 for 45 days on charges that he forged documents to set up the Ghad (Tomorrow) Party. His arrest followed mounting criticism of President Hosni Mubarak and demands for constitutional reform.

Emma Bonino, European Parliamentarian and former member of the European Commission, introduced an urgent written question to the European Commission and Council over Nour's arrest. Bonino underlined that the EU's bilateral association agreements with Egypt are based on respect for the principles of democracy and respect of human rights. Graham Watson, leader of the European Parliament's Liberal Democrat Group called upon the Egyptian authorities to respect the letter and spirit of the EU-Mediterranean Agreement. “The “politically-motivated arrest of the leader of the only real opposition movement in a country dominated by a single ruling party sends all the wrong signals" as the Barcelona process undergoes its 10th anniversary review.

Transatlantic Democrats Mourn Passing of Jan Nowak
Former Polish resistance hero and post-war campaigner for a democratic Poland, Jan Nowak, has been remembered in memorial services this month after passing away in late January. As a leading voice of Radio Free Europe, Nowak went on to play a crucial role in raising support for Solidarnosc and other pro-democracy groups in Poland.

New US Advisor for Global Democracy Appointed
Elliott Abrams, special assistant to the US President has been appointed Deputy National Security Adviser with a focus on promoting global democracy and human rights. Abrams, who since December 2002 served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Near East and North African affairs, becomes National Security Adviser for Global Democracy Strategy but will continue work on Israeli-Palestinian affairs. While Abrams role in promoting democracy in Latin America sometimes stirred controversy, no one ever questioned his competence, or commitment.

Study of EU Assistance to Democracy
The European Parliament has accepted a proposal from the Dutch Institute for Multi-Party Democracy for a study of European Union assistance to democracy and human rights. The project will examine financial instruments available to the EU for its human rights activities in third countries and in particular the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights. A research team comprising experts involved in the 2004 conference Enhancing the European Profile in Democracy Assistance will complete the research by the end of May 2005.

OPPORTUNITIES

Stanford Summer Fellows on Democracy and Development
The Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at the Stanford Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, California, invites policy makers and activists from countries undergoing political, economic and social transitions to participate in its first annual summer fellows program on democracy, development, and the rule of law to be held from August 1-19, 2005 at Stanford University on its northern California campus.

This Program will offer a unique approach to studying the ways in which democratic institutions (i.e. political parties, competitive elections, and an independent judiciary) and institutions that foster economic development can be established and strengthened. In contrast to other programs on democracy promotion that seek to transfer ready made models to countries in transition, the Stanford Summer Fellows Program seeks to provide a comparative perspective on the evolution of established democratic practices as well as a conceptual background into issues of democracy and good governance.

While traditional programs focus either on democratization, economic development, or the rule of law, the Stanford Summer Fellows Program will seek to locate the points of interaction among these areas. Ideas and learning will flow two ways. Participants will bring their country and professional experiences into the seminars to help each other develop case-specific methodologies for addressing real-world problems of democratic and economic development.

Participating Stanford faculty and scholars have been at the forefront of research at the junction of democratic advancement, economic growth, and issues surrounding the establishment of rule of law and human rights. The regular seminars will be complemented with field trips to local government institutions, NGO, and business organizations.

This Program is aimed at early to mid-career policy-makers, academics, and leaders of civil society organizations (such as representatives of trade unions, non-governmental organizations, the media, business and professional associations) who will play important roles in their country's democratic, economic, and social development. The program will recruit 25-30 individuals dedicated to democracy and development promotion within their home countries -- particularly in, but not limited to, the regions of the Middle East, Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa, Afghanistan, Central Asia, and other parts of the former Soviet Union.

Successful applicants will be proficient in spoken and written English and will have academic and practical credentials necessary to benefit fully from the course and actively contribute to programmatic discussions. The ideal course participant will have extraordinary motivation, at least three to five years of experience in a relevant field of democratic development, and a keen interest in learning and sharing their knowledge and experiences in transforming their respective countries.

Stanford will pay travel, accommodation, living expenses, and visa costs for the duration of the three-week program for a certain portion of applicants. Where possible, applicants are encouraged to supply some or all of their own funding from their current employers, international non-governmental organizations, etc.

For additional information about the mission of CDDRL, its faculty, and fellows go here. Application materials are available by visiting CDDRL's website and clicking on the tab marked “Stanford Summer Fellows on Democracy and Development.” Applications sent by e-mail or fax are due on April 1, 2005. Emailed applications should be sent to: Ganka@stanford.edu. Airmailed applications should be postmarked by March 15, 2005. Decisions will be announced no later than April 30, 2005. Information can be sent by contacting: Ganka Hadjipetrova, Stanford Summer Fellows on Democracy and Development Coordinator, Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law, Stanford Institute for International Studies, Encina Hall, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-6055 Tel.: 1 + 650-725-3036; Fax: 1 + 650-724-2996 or by emailing: Ganka@stanford.edu.

EVENTS

February 18, 10 am, Brookings Institution, 1775 Mass Avenue NW, Washington, DC
The U.S. and U.N. Roles in Nation-Building: A Comparative Analysis.
James Steinberg, BI; James Dobbins, lead author, The RAND History of Nation Building; Francis Fukuyama, author, State Building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century; Bill Nash, former commander, U.S. forces in Bosnia and UN administrator in Kosovo; Susan Rice, BI. For more information call 202-797-6105, or click here.

February 18, 2:30 pm, SAIS, Rome Building, 1619 Mass Avenue NW, Washington, DC
Corruption and Developing Countries: An Inevitable Union?
Susan Cote-Freeman, Transparency International. RSVP Felisa Neuringer Klubes, 202-663-5626 or e-mail, fklubes@jhu.edu. For more information, go here.

February 19,10:30 am, Institut Francais, Queensberry Place, London.
Iran: the geopolitics of the Islamic republic.
Zhand Shakibi, London School of Economics. For more information, telephone: 44-07984-178-193.

February 23, 6 pm, Commonwealth Club, Northumberland Ave, London WC2
Bad governance in the South: their fault or ours?
Mick Moore, Institute of Development Studies, plus guest speakers. For more information, telephone: 44-01273-877-752, or go here.

February 24, 9 am-10:30 am, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty
1201 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington, DC
Islamism and the Democratic Transition, Mokhtar Benabdallaoui, Professor of Islamic Contemporary Thought, Hassan II University, Casablanca, Morocco.
With elections either recently completed or due in countries throughout the Islamic world, including in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and many of the countries of Central Asia, questions are often raised concerning the compatibility of Islam and democracy. Professor Benabdallaoui, who has published widely on Islamist politics, civic education and citizenship, will discuss how Islamist political parties will adjust to democratic reforms, and their reservations concerning democratic values and structures. RSVP by February 23 by email to: dc-response@rferl.org, by telephone to Melody Jones at (202) 457-6949, or by fax to (202) 457-6992.

March 7, 2005, 7:30 pm, The Mall, London.
Why believe in Europe?
Will Hutton, Work Foundation; Mark Leonard, Centre for European Reform; Mary Kaldor, LSE. ICA, For more information, telephone: 44-020-7930-3647, or go here.

March 7-9, Wilton Park, Sussex, UK
Representative Institutions in the Arab World.
What are the options for promoting participatory governance in the Middle East? How can transparency and accountability be best protected? What constitutional reform is necessary?  How can legislatures be strengthened? To what extent have political parties developed? What should be the role of business? What measures are needed to ensure the inclusion of minorities? How will US policy to promote reform develop under the next administration? For further information, gohere.

March 8-11, Club de Madrid and the Varsavsky Foundation, Barcelona Spain
International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security, "Democracy for a Safer World."
The conference, sponsored by the Club de Madrid and the Varsavsky Foundation, is supported by the Government of Spain, the Regional Government of Madrid and the City of Madrid. More than 50 former and current Heads of State and Government, decision and policy makers, world experts, and citizens will participate in this forum. For more information, go: here.

March 29, 6 pm, SAIS, Rome Building, 1619 Mass Avenue NW, Washington, DC
The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future is Eclipsing the American Dream
Jeremy Rifkin, President, the Foundation on Economic Trends . RSVP to Felisa Neuringer Klubes by phone at 202-663-5626 or e-mail: fklubes@jhu.edu, or go here.

April 25-28, Wilton Park, Sussex, UK
Arab-West Policy Dialogue on Common Security and Confidence Building
How can dialogue between the Arab region and the West on security needs be strengthened? Can the EuroMed dialogue improve relations between the Arab world and the West on the lines of the earlier East-West CSCE/OSCE process? How can issues such as democratic values and transformation best be addressed? For further information, please go here.

April 28-30, 2005, Santiago, Chile
Third Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies.

April 29-30 2005, Rabat, Morocco
EuroMeSCo Annual Conference: Euro-Mediterranean Partnership Priorities Towards 2010
The EuroMeSCo Annual Conference will discuss EMP Priorities Towards 2010. EuroMeSCo members and others involved in partnership activities will be invited to discuss the Barcelona Principles and Participation of Political Actors and Civil Society in the EMP. Working group sessions will focus specifically on the following themes: Euro-Mediterranean Co-operation in Multilateral Fora; Civil Society, and Migration; and Identifying Specific Areas for Security Co-operation.