Reforming the Arab world
The US-British war in Iraq has liberated the country's people, argues John Sawers, British ambassador to Egypt
The conflict in Iraq, thankfully, is over. The hard part now begins. How do the friends of the Iraqi people, fellow Arabs and Westerners alike, help Iraq recover from 45 years of increasingly despotic military dictatorship? How can a diverse nation like Iraq best be governed? How can the skills and talents of Iraq's people find room to flourish?
Britain and the United States did not want to fight this war and let me say straight away, we have no plans and no intention to fight any more wars in this region. But now that we have had to defeat Saddam's regime, we are determined that the future for the people of Iraq will be vastly better than the past. The Iraqi people have already shown their joy at Saddam's downfall. Our forces will leave as soon as they can, once the Iraqis have decided on a new constitution reflecting the diversity of the Iraqi people, and elected a new government to rule them.
Many Egyptians find our approach hard to believe: they are convinced that we "invaded" Iraq for our selfish interests, for oil, or for Israel, and that we want to "occupy" the country for years to come. Our actions in the coming months will show that those allegations are unfounded, and that the conflict really has liberated the Iraqi people.
Why, you might ask, do we the West, have an interest in modernising Iraq? Why don't we just identify an Iraqi general and give him the reins of power? Why don't we just accept the views of some Arabs who say of themselves "We are not ready for democracy"?
I'll tell you why. Because military rule always turns sour. Look at what happened in Iraq after the 1958 coup. The generals concentrated power in a small élite, they became corrupt and self-serving, and uninterested in the social and economic development of the Iraqi people. They waged war on their neighbours and gave backing to terrorist groups like the Abu-Nidal organisation. They could never be thrown out by the people because of the strength of their Praetorian guards and secret police. Military rule made for an evil society and an unstable region. We can see similar, less extreme examples in other countries around the world, where the generals seized power and never passed it on.
Britain believes that Iraq deserves better, and that Iraq will be a better neighbour and a fuller partner in the world community, if it has a government that leaves power in the hands of the Iraqi people.
What does that mean in practice? It means:
Preserving Iraq's territorial integrity. We do not believe the majority of Iraqis want their country to split into several parts, and we will act to prevent that happening.
Providing for Iraq's stability and security. The coalition forces have a serious job to do in keeping order. It would be foolish for them to withdraw immediately. Fighting between factions would ensue, and power would pass to whoever had the most weapons. We don't want to stay longer than necessary, but to leave now is not sensible.
Ensuring that Iraq's resources, above all the proceeds from Iraqi oil sales, are all channelled into Iraq's development, is also a priority.
Supporting a political process in which new Iraqi leaders can come forward with the support of their towns and their communities. This process has begun, and the United Nations will, we hope, be an important partner. We envisage that an interim Iraqi administration will be launched in the next month or so.
Encouraging the holding of a constitutional conference, bringing together Iraqis from all corners of the country, and from all the main communities to draw up a new constitution for Iraq. Those who fled abroad during the period of military rule will be able to play a part, but only those with genuine popular support inside Iraq will gain influence.
My own view is that a federal system based on the 18 governorates of Iraq would be the best way to bring power close to the people and to reflect Iraq's diversity, while preserving and strengthening its unity. But that is only one possibility among many. The Iraqis themselves must decide, and do so freely.
Iraq will need help, above all from its Arab friends. No one wants another Saddam. So far, Arab governments have held back, offering their views but little practical help to those Iraqis who want to build a better Iraq. I hope engagement will soon begin. It is a fast moving situation, and those Arab countries who want to see a more modern Iraq should roll up their sleeves and start talking now to the emerging Iraqi leaders.
What happens in Iraq will carry influence elsewhere in the Arab world. There are many initiatives for reform -- here in Egypt in the National Democratic Party, in Saudi Arabia under Crown Prince Abdullah's Charter for Reform, in Bahrain, Morocco and elsewhere. The emergence of pan-Arab TV channels, and newspapers is allowing for freer debate. State interference in the judicial system is being increasingly highlighted, and rejected as unacceptable.
The Arab world has fallen behind in recent years, but there is still time to catch up. Other Muslim countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Turkey have become democratic without losing their Islamic character. Political pluralism and economic success go together and are mutually reinforcing. The Arab world attracts only 0.5 per cent of the world's foreign direct investment, and that is in part because investors find more stability and greater opportunity in democracies than they do in autocracies.
Political pluralism is now the norm in Latin America and most of Asia, and even in Africa. Now is the chance for the Arab world to show that democracy is as suitable for Arabs as it is for Asians, Europeans, Africans and Latin Americans.
It will not happen overnight. Democracy is more than just elections. It is about free debate, accountability, political pluralism, an independent judiciary, tolerance of diversity, respect for minorities. These conditions exist, in some form, in many parts of the Arab world, but nowhere convincingly enough to imbed real democracy. The warm welcome that Iraqis gave coalition troops came out of their being deprived of these freedoms. Iraq has shown how a leadership can alienate its people by denying them basic freedoms. True legitimacy comes from the consent of the people, and that requires real participation in decisions. It is, in some ways, easy to rule with a heavy hand, to whip up fears and hatred, to resolve an argument by using force. But in the 21st century, I can confidently predict that the number of countries run in such an autocratic way will diminish.
Of course there are problems in the region, above all the unresolved injustice of the Palestinian question. My prime minister has shown his determination to get a new peace process going. Among the Palestinians, we see a new prime minister and a change of attitude. Israel has a new government and seems to accept that it must resume talks on peace. And there is a new recognition in Washington that enduring stability in the Middle East requires a just solution to the central problem. We, Britain, will keep our shoulder to the wheel. Modernisation and settlement of disputes can be pressed in parallel. Indeed, both goals are more likely to be achieved that way.
The opportunity to start afresh in Iraq is an opportunity for the entire Arab world. Will you take it? I hope so.
* This article is drawn from a speech Ambassador Sawers was scheduled to give at Cairo University on 22 April at a conference on Reform in the Arab World that was partly funded by the British Embassy. The day before the event, the university asked the ambassador not to attend owing to concerns about demonstrations.
