Bush and Kerry on Middle East Democracy

In the op-ed “Arabs on the Verge of Democracy” published August 9th, 2004 in the New York Times, Danielle Pletka notes “for the first time in half a century, democracy is the talk of the Arab world.” Pletka attributes this to President Bush’s policies that have created a “pro-democratic ferment.” While noting that this has not yet led to true reform by governments or regime change she writes that the process is in full swing and gaining momentum.

In light of this, Pletka expresses dismay that Presidential Candidate John Kerry has said it will not be his priority to continue the campaign to promote Middle East democracy. Instead, she notes that Kerry has said that he would urge stability in the Middle East. Pletka argues that with the low levels of economic success and high levels of illiteracy, violence and repression, the benefits of stability are nowhere to be found.

Herewith are excerpts of that op-ed:

“Early last month, John Kerry devoted 11 days to fleshing out his foreign policy priorities. Promoting democracy in the Middle East, he made clear, will not be high on his agenda. Sadly, Mr. Kerry's decision could not have come at a worse moment. For the first time in half a century, democracy is the talk of the Arab world…”

“…Mr. Kerry has not been specific about many of his goals, but one thing he's gone out of his way to advertise is his distaste for pushing reform at the expense of "stability" in the Middle East. Sure, he's in favor of democracy in principle, but not as the centerpiece of his foreign policy agenda…”

“…The initial reviews of the current President Bush's push for reform in the Middle East may have been harsh, especially from the region's entrenched powers. Yet in the last few months, the debate, once confined to émigré papers published in London or Paris, has suddenly bubbled up onto the pages of the state-controlled press in the Arab world…”

“…And what about the argument that democracy can't be "imposed" from the outside? That counsel of despair was knocked out of the park by the Palestinian scholar Daoud Kuttab, who wrote in the London-based Arabic daily Al Hayat that "Arab democrats have failed to reach their goals through their own efforts" and should welcome support from outside "irrespective of the messenger." Naguib Mahfouz, the Egyptian Nobel laureate, went even further in Al Ahram, Egypt's main daily newspaper, warning that postponing reform would be "playing with fire.”

“Mr. Kerry and his surrogates, meanwhile, worry about change that comes "too quickly" and breeds "violence and repression."…Arab democrats and their supporters abroad, however, might respond that the Arab world is hardly short of violence and repression as things now stand, and change that comes too slowly might prove the biggest danger. Indeed, the fruits of "stability" are hard to find in the latest Arab Human Development Report issued by the United Nations Development Program. It describes the Arab Middle East and North Africa as the least politically free region of the world. It also describes a region where 65 million adults are illiterate, almost two-thirds of them women, and where one in five citizens lives on less than $2 a day…”

“…It's not 1989 in the Middle East, and a series of velvet revolutions aren't on tap for the immediate future. But the intellectual firepower that underlies any such revolution
is growing; the region is in the throes of genuine pro-democratic ferment. And governments have taken note, admittedly in their own half-hearted fashion. The Arab League has embraced a series of self-serving reforms; the Saudis have announced plans for municipal elections starting in November; and the Bahrainis and Qataris are making real changes to their political systems….”

“…Ferment is not change, but Mr. Kerry and his advisers may be kidding themselves that an incipient upheaval can be turned off just by Washington whistling another tune. More likely, without change, the United States will face one collapsing dictatorship after another and an instability much greater and more threatening than any that would come from an aggressive American push for democracy. Mr. Kerry would be wiser to try to see the world as it is – and realize that hoping the United States can impose an unchanging "stability" on the Arab world may be the greatest unrealism of all.”