RSS« MENA Business Media, sharing a memo I wrote | Delayed, so: On Iraq, Steel, Projects & CPA »
March 26, 2004
An Arab Editorial on Greater Middle East Initiative.
I thought this might be interesting to share, as I know the writer quite well:
Reforms are long overdue
By Tayseer Abdel Jaber
THOUGH THE American initiative calling for political, economic, social and cultural reforms in the “Greater Middle East” has not been officially formulated in a final forum, it has created a widespread response. At the official level, most Arab leaders declared that reform should be homegrown and adapt in form and speed to the historical developments and current conditions of each country and society. They refuse imposed reforms from outside and suspect their timing and reasoning.
At the individual level, many writers and columnists have expressed their opinions. They range from complete rejection to mild acceptance. Some question the motive and the choice of region, which is basically Muslim and includes all Arab countries. Others raised the valid point that previous American administrations cooperated with Middle Eastern and other governments in spite of some having out-of-date political, economic and social systems.
I believe that the debate has mixed many issues together. There are basic questions that should be raised and answered clearly. The first, and of utmost importance, is whether reform in our region is needed or not. Can we simply rely on the evolution that took place in the last two or three decades, if any, to continue or do we need more forceful and direct changes that bring this region in line with major countries and nations in the world?
My answer to this and related questions is that our region needs comprehensive reforms and fast. Reforms in all areas are long overdue. This has been strongly pointed out by many Arab intellectuals in different fora over the last three decades. Since the early 1980s, many meetings of the Arab Thought Forum have concluded that democracy in the Arab countries stands as a condition for real economic and political development and participation. Lack of it has led to apathy, tribalism, skewed economic development, massive poverty and unemployment, heavy-handed governments and brain drain.
Many economists pointed out, as early as the 1960s, and continue to do so, that the Arab regimes are missing a lot of potential economic progress due to the irrational restrictions they impose on the flow of people, goods and services, and capital. The Arab Economic Unity Agreement was reached in 1957, the same year of the Treaty of Rome. Look at the great disparity between the achievements of the European Union and the meagre ones of Arab integration!
The challenges facing individual Arab economic systems are immense and will not be settled in each country alone and in isolation. This situation is already not sustainable. It has spilled over to worsen the political and social conditions.
Are these conditions not known in each Arab country? Have they been discovered only in the last month? Haven't they been raised over and over again?
Another example was the Arab Thought Forum study of the education system in the Arab countries that was carried out two decades ago. It was clear in that study that there was wide room for urgent reform, but again the volumes of that study were shelved! Why awaken dormant problems?
The problem areas were very clearly defined even before the last two Arab Human Development Reports were issued in 2002 and 2003. The UNDP Human Development Report was first issued in 1990 and since then it has been published annually. It covers about 180 countries, including the Arab states. In each report, it is evident where the Arab states stand. Though they differ among themselves, as a group, and compared to other regions, they have the lowest participation of women in political life, the highest illiteracy rate, the highest spending on arms, the lowest economic growth, the least intra-regional trade, the lowest women participation in the labour force, and the list continues. Do we need reform or shall we wait for the conditions to get worse, to deteriorate more?
Should we be against reforms on the pretext that they come from the outside? Perhaps this nicety could be tackled by protocol people and diplomats, in order to make it partly homegrown. But most Arab countries, as well as others, do follow international developments and benefit from others experience. Moreover, all Arab countries that had to implement an economic adjustment programme had to accept economic and institutional reforms that were imposed by the IMF and the World Bank. They may be called “national economic reform”, but the fact remains that they are under the scrutiny of the international institutions which are controlled by major Western countries.
Another example can be taken from the accession to the WTO, which usually forces a country to amend and introduce many crucial economic and other legislations. Even the Association Agreements between each of the eight Arab countries and the European Union do include a political section which commits Arab countries to respect the United Nations Charter, human rights and democracy.
So, no country in the world closes its doors and windows against overdue reform proposals, especially when there has been a continuous flow of local demands for these reforms coming from inside the room. Reforms are top priority for our future and do not contradict our deep concerns for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Introducing reforms, regardless of their origin, might even strengthen our position worldwide, including our position against occupation.
The writer is a former minister and executive director of the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA). He contributed this article to The Jordan Times.
Monday, March 22, 2004
Posted by The Lounsbury at March 26, 2004 11:13 PM
Filed Under:
Jan-Jul 2004
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1212
