Pushing ahead

Pro-reformers must take up the baton if the momentum towards democratisation is not to peter out, argues Khalil El-Anani

---

Do events in Iraq, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Egypt really suggest that a wave of democracy is sweeping across the region? Arab regimes have long argued that reform was impossible given the nature of their societies. Yet suddenly they have started to change. One explanation for the U-turn is that, following the invasion of Iraq, foreign pressure became irresistible and Arab regimes concluded that they must change voluntarily before it was too late. The position of the Egyptian government, which has consistently ruled out the option of amending the constitution, changed overnight. Meanwhile, elsewhere in the region, the drama continues to unfold. Elections were held in Iraq, albeit under occupation. Elections were held in Palestine, under more or less he same conditions. Saudi Arabia held its first ever municipal elections. And Lebanese protesters took to the streets, bringing down the government and demanding Syrian troops withdraw. Even Libya is opening up.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia, in particular, have come under external pressure. The Americans asked them to lead the region in reform, just as they do in other fields. The US and Europe are in rare agreement that the Middle East must embrace democracy. It may be propaganda, but it is no less effective for that. Domestic pressure has also been growing. In Egypt, Kifaya (enough), a coalition of non-partisan forces, is challenging Mubarak's hold on power. It was against this backdrop that the Egyptian president decided to amend Article 76 of the constitution. The article will be changed so as to allow competing candidates to run for the office of president. Individuals who are not members of a political party, however, will have a hard time applying for the job. Unfortunately restrictions on candidacy, which may be designed to keep the Muslim Brotherhood out of power, distort the spirit of reform and reduce the presidential elections into a race among the ruling party and a handful of ineffective opposition parties.

Can we regard this constitutional amendment, clearly an anomaly in the course of Egyptian political life, as the beginning of a meaningful process of democratisation? Authoritarian regimes, after all, do occasionally introduce reforms when the pressures on them become unbearable. Regimes that remain in power for long periods of time see the vested interests of a few grow alongside the discontent of the majority. At some point domestic discontent grows to a point at which the regime finds it expedient to change its ways, or at least appear to do so. The aim of the strategy is to take the wind out of the opposition's sails, avoid foreign pressure, maintain political credibility and remain in control of the pace of reform.

Egypt's leadership has been aware for some time that some adjustments of the local scene would have to take place sooner or later. Not that one can discount the role of outside influence in recent developments. Domestic tension is nothing new in Egypt, where the opposition has long demanded an opening up of the political arena. But foreign pressure alone can play only a secondary role in political reform anywhere. It is the combination of external and internal factors that finally brought things to a head.

The US has been pushing hard for democratisation and political reform in the region. The US president and secretary of state have urged reform on more than one occasion. Lately, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D- Connecticut) tabled a bill suggesting measures to promote democracy around the world.

The Advance Democracy Act allocates $250 million towards bolstering civil society in undemocratic countries. The Department of State's Human Rights Report has been increasingly critical of conditions in the region and several congressmen have urged the government to cut back economic assistance to authoritarian regimes.

None of the above measures is totally new -- the same tactics were used in the 1990s to encourage change in East Europe. The US has in the past pressed authoritarian regimes to introduce democracy and a market economy. What is new is that it is now doing this in the Arab region in the hope of deterring terror and violence. But the changes we have seen in Egypt and the region do not mean political reform is round the corner. Reform is a multi-tiered, multi-dimensional process of which democratisation is but one aspect. Something, though, is clearly afoot and it is now up to the opposition and civil societies to run with the baton.