DUBAI, 5 July 2006 — US President George W. Bush, speaking last month at Vienna summit, said: “What is past is past and what’s ahead is a hopeful democracy in the Middle East.”
No American administration has talked more about democracy in the Arab region than the Bush administration. The president and his advisers have spoken optimistically about a post-Saddam democracy in Iraq, one that might eventually become a veritable light to other Arab nations. This grand vision assumes that sooner or later, advocates of democracy throughout the Arab countries will demand the same freedoms and rights that Iraqis are now claiming. Yet, however inspiring this vision appears, the actual reform plan that the administration has thus far set out has been doomed to a large extent by things going dramatically bad in Baghdad.
From Moscow to Singapore, we are witnessing a new trend of democracy that is altering the so-called copy book definition of “Democracy”. Vladislav Surkov, the Kremlin’s political mastermind, rebuffed the US vision of democracy by saying “democracy in the era of Boris Yeltsin resulted in creation of oligarchs and businessmen who used wealth to achieve political power, damaging the country’s economy and development.” At the same time Lee Hsien Loong, Singapore’s prime minister, criticized multiparty democracy by saying “although democracies make exciting politics, the national interest could suffer in a multiparty system. Endless debates are seldom about achieving a better grasp of the issue but to score political points.”
Both countries have transformed themselves, the former in the last few years and the latter in the last few decades, into successful economies. Unlike in the 1990s, when public cries for freedom were leading to the collapse of the Soviet Union, last month in a survey conducted by Pew Global Attitudes Project Today a majority of Russians said they believed that their country would be better served by a strong leader rather than a democratic government. The poll found that the Russian people would choose a strong economy over a good democracy by a margin of almost six to one. Of course, Russia is far from alone in the priority it gives to a vibrant economy; even in countries where confidence in democracy is strong, the desire for economic wellbeing is stronger. Majorities or pluralities in eight of the nine countries in which this question was asked said that the economy was a more important priority than democracy. This includes India, which has been a functioning democracy for more than half a century. Indeed, Indians are now closely divided over the relative merits of democracy and prosperity, a significant change from 2002 when they favored democracy by a 56 percent-31 percent margin.
Democracy (by which I mean a system in which adult universal suffrage is used to elect representatives) and reforms need each other. Reforms generate better living standards; the other cushions injustices and thereby anchors public support. But this mutual dependence is tricky, because if democratic prerogatives are overused, they may strangle reforms.
The Arab Human Development Report (AHDR) has persistently quoted gender inequality as one of the main obstacles to development in Arab countries, along with deficits of knowledge and freedom that were addressed in consequent AHDRs. The oil wealth in Arab countries is matched by social backwardness, and the only other region of the world with an income level lower than the Arab region is sub-Saharan Africa. Productivity is decreasing, scientific research is virtually nonexistent, the region is suffering a brain drain, and illiteracy afflicts half of Arab women. Arab countries have the largest proportion of young people in the world, 38 percent of Arabs are under the age of 14, and by 2020 the population of all Arab countries combines may top 400 million. In Libya, over 60 percent of the country is under 15, with unemployment close to 30 percent. In Saudi Arabia, 38 percent of the population is under 15, with 25 percent unemployed.
The Arab region has the highest population growth rates in the world, home to more than one quarter of the earth’s total unemployed young people between 15 and 24. If several million youth are entering the job market each year, who will supply the jobs needed to employ them? Who will generate millions more such jobs to bring down sky-high unemployment rates? Mastering the task of employing these teeming Arab millions is not only hard to imagine in current circumstances, but impossible without a major rethink of the current economic and social model that prevails in the Arab region.
Reforms do not measure up when compared with the pace of reform in other parts of the world. Elsewhere, true revolutions are underway, as countries cope with the challenges of globalization by opening up, liberalizing their trade and investment regimes, investing heavily in information and communications technologies and implementing reforms which aggressively try to create friendlier policies and regulatory environments for private sector development. Knowledge determines the wealth of nations and defines the livable state in this age of globalization. There are only 18 computers per 1,000 citizens in the Arab world, as compared to the global average of 78 per 1,000.
Presently, the more significant topic for the Arab region are reforms on the social and economic fronts rather than democracy. The Arab region today stands at a very critical juncture. Sustaining the status quo will only widen the development gap between this region and the developed world — not to mention the growing number of developing countries and regional blocs that are taking swift measures to integrate into the global economy.
The three key problems afflicting Arab societies are: A deficit of social freedom, a lack of opportunities for women, and a knowledge gap with the rest of the world. Democracy can wait, as it happened in Korea and Taiwan, both now vibrant democracies. The important issues are social and economic reforms.
Arab countries need to understand that the false populism and religious fanaticism of Islamic extremism offer no political, economic or social model capable of satisfying the real world necessities of a growing Arab world. Immediate economic and social reforms are needed. Sustained economic and social reforms will expand opportunity and allow the people to satisfy legitimate aspirations in all walks of life.
As for political reforms we can wait for the time being and concentrate more on economic issues that are affecting the Arab masses. At the end of day jobs and shelter are a more important issue for an average Arab than democracy. Democracy requires certain conditions, such as a market economy and a middle class in order to thrive. The empty political rhetoric of democracy as seen in Iraq will not fulfill the utopian dream of the US administration for the Arab region. International multilateral organizations should engage with Arab countries and communities in promoting peaceful social and economic reforms.
