In mid-March, right after his tumultuous visit to Israel, Joe Biden enjoyed a much more tranquil day in Amman. While there, he met with leading activists and civil society groups. The next day, the government-affiliated Jordan Times printed a sneering attack on the U.S. vice president, accusing him of clumsily meddling in Jordan's domestic affairs by meeting "clandestinely" with hopelessly marginal organizations preoccupied with "amassing foreign funds without necessarily having any real message that resonates with the wider public."
This is not an easy time for organizations in the Arab world that seek to be independent of the state. Over the last few years, as "civil society" groups have tested the limits of their freedom and challenged stagnant regimes, states have responded by tightening the screws; throwing up new rules about how NGOs must register with government ministries, which routinely reject such applications; and then criminalizing any activities by nonregistered groups. Jordan's governing law, passed in 2008 and amended last year, permits the Ministry of Social Development to reject such applications for any reason. Egypt's Ministry of Social Solidarity has now drafted "reform" legislation that local NGOs fear could reverse the gains of recent years by placing them under stifling state control.
COMMENTS (6)
More...
Arab regimes' intransigence on matters of democracy and human rights poses the same problem for President Barack Obama as it did for George W. Bush, who made the democratic transformation of the Middle East the central message of his second inaugural address, and arguably of his foreign policy. The creation of a free Iraq was supposed to empower democrats across the region and sweep away its entrenched autocrats; a violent civil war and an ambiguous outcome in Baghdad only seems to have strengthened them instead.
In his Cairo speech last June, Obama distanced himself from his predecessor's blustering language on democracy and refrained from criticizing any specific government in the region, including that of his host, Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled Egypt since his predecessor Anwar Sadat's 1981 assassination. Obama's goal, after all, was to offer a fresh start, rather than to rub salt in old wounds. Nevertheless, Obama expressed his "unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things," including "the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed."
The White House speaks much of the "post-Cairo agenda," and has even appointed a National Security Council official, Pradeep Ramamurthy, to oversee it. Tamara Cofman Wittes, deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, observes that what the Cairo speech offered was not so much specific deliverables, but a new basis for the U.S. relationship with the Middle East: "mutual respect, mutual interests, and mutual responsibility." This new mantra, endlessly repeated, covers a range of actual policies: the new bid for Middle East peace, engagement with Iran, the willingness to examine America's own record on human rights, engagement with ordinary citizens and, yes, civil society.
The first public event of the post-Cairo agenda was last month's "Presidential Summit on Entrepreneurship" in Washington. This was, of course, an apolitical event where, as Obama said in his opening address, "America can share our experience as a society that empowers the inventor and the innovator." But the president also framed the initiative in the soaring terms of his Cairo speech, in which, he recalled, "I pledged to forge a new partnership, not simply between governments, but also between people on the issues that matter most in their daily lives -- in your lives." He added his favorite expression of self-approbation: "Many questioned whether this was possible." (Answer: it was.)
The entrepreneurship summit was only the first in a series of such programs: Coming soon are educational exchanges, science envoys, a Global Technology and Innovation Fund, entrepreneurs in residence, and Partners for a New Beginning, which according to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will "engage the U.S. private sector in carrying out our vision for a new beginning with Muslims in communities globally."
They seem like fine initiatives. But few will question whether they are possible. Of the pledges Obama made in Cairo, the partnership between people was the most uplifting, and least controversial. The pledge to uphold the rights of free expression and free association, on the other hand, could be understood either as a harmless banality or as a meaningful, and inherently difficult, commitment. The place of democracy in the speech was, in fact, an intensely contested matter; one White House official with whom I spoke says that though democracy advocates have decisively won that debate, the discussion has shifted to "how is that strategy different from the Bush administration, and what priority does it get?"
SUBJECTS:
(6)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE