US Deeds, Not Words, will enhance the prospects for Arab Democracy
Robert O. Freedman and Mohamed E. Hamdi 09-03-03


It goes without saying that establishing a genuine democracy in the Middle East is essentially the responsibility of Arab masses and Arab elites. But in the age of the one global village, the West can and ought to help and support the drive for democracy in that part of the world.

In this context, despite the impassioned words of US National Security Advisor, Condoleeza Rice, who on August 7th, called the development of freedom in the Middle East the ``security challenge and the moral mission of our time", democracy is unlikely to come to the Arab world unless the United States matches its words with deeds. 

The other three elements of US policy in the Middle East:(1) Freedom and independence for Iraq, (2)a two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the ``Road Map" and(3) economic development in the Middle East leading to Free Trade agreements with the United States by the year 2013 are moving ahead, albeit unevenly. However, the fourth element of US policy, democratization, has languished. This is the case not only because, unlike the other three policy components, there is no senior official directly responsible for implementing democratization, but also because, despite Condoleeza Rice's impassioned words, the administration does not have a clear ``road map" for democratization in the Arab world.

To be sure, democratizing the Arab World will not be an easy process.  Whenever Western nations, such as the United States urge democracy on the Arabs, the rulers of the Arab States, seeking to rally the support of their populations, denounce such calls as ``Western interference in their internal affairs" or ``Neocolonialism".  Yet when the concept of democracy is broken down into its component parts, such as respect for human rights, freedom of the press, and fair and free elections, it is much harder for authoritarian Arab leaders to oppose them.

As a start on the road map to democratization, both the United States and the European Union should make economic aid to the Arab world conditional on the establishment in recipient Arab countries of genuine freedom of the press.   Such a policy would have four major advantages.  First, genuine freedom of the press, where journalists are protected from jail - and worse - places limits on the authoritarian nature of a regime by widening the public space in a country that is independent of the government.  Second, because journalists often uncover corruption, this would mean that the issue of opposing corruption is not left only to the radical Islamists who put it at the top of their political agenda.  Third, freedom of the press would mean multiple voices in the public arena, including both secular and Islamic voices, which could compete openly for the public's attention.  This would have the benefit of giving the Islamists a stake in the existing system.  A fourth advantage of freedom of the press is that newspapers often serve as the focus around which political parties can form, and independent political parties are another check on authoritarianism.

The time has come for both the United States and the European Union to condition their economic assistance to the Arab World on the establishment of a free press, as a major first step on the road to democratization. Both the Palestinian Authority, which has promised to democratize as part of its commitment to the ``Road Map", and Iraq, which is currently under US military control, would appear to be the best candidates to try out the concept of conditioned assistance.  If the experiments there were successful, they would have a very positive demonstration effect in the rest of the Arab world.

However, whether President Bush, despite his oral commitment to democratization, has the will implement the concept is an open question.  Even more so is the question as to whether he has the diplomatic skill to coordinate the conditioning of aid with an EU that is increasingly unwilling to follow the US lead in world affairs.   Nonetheless, the failure of President Bush to actively work for democratization in the Arab world could well imperil the success of the other elements of his Middle East Policy, something that would be a tragedy, not only for the United States but also for the Middle East.

Finally, there is another vital factor for the success of this policy: the US must stick to its democratic values even in times of crisis, and must not opt to extraordinary measures that will enable authoritarian rulers to compare their treatment of dissent to the way the US is treating some of the issues that aroused after Set.11. Military courts, secret hearings, secret evidence, arresting people without charges and without presenting them to fair courts are the normal practices of a number of Arab governments. If they are able to argue that the US government is doing the same, than the US won't be in a position to lecture others on democracy. In fact, the cause of democracy will suffer a great deal, not only in the Middle East but also all over the world.


Dr. Robert O. Freedman is Peggy Meyerhoff Pearlstone Professor of Political Science at Baltimore Hebrew University and Visiting Professor of Political Science at Johns Hopkins University.  Dr. Mohamed Elhachmi Hamdi is the Director of the London-based Arab Television Network Al-Mustakillah, and the chairman of the Human Rights Club.