Middle East Regional Security and Cooperation
I would first like to thank the organizers of a meeting I have attended for giving me the opportunity to participate in this fruitful event. My primary purpose of attending this conference is to absorb as many points of views as possible from different people within the participating countries on issues concerning the Middle East region. I believe that this gathering has more to it than just exchanging business cards and having panel discussions; I would have to italic, underline and bold the side discussions we had there, truly reflecting the level of sophistication and intellectuality of participants, accepting all participants views disregarding how radical some actually were.
The democratic culture discussion group mainly focused on issues of liberalization, democratization, and political reform, also discussing related matters like gender, education and religion. During this conference, I believe that some subjects brought up were more crucial than others, and would therefore like to share with you some insights we gained out of our democratic culture group.
Numerous topics were discussed in this panel, one of which was the current situation in Iraq. Iraqi government officials indicated imperative points and appeared not pessimistic and more neutral in viewing the current status of Iraq. Judging the current position of Iraq and predicting its future is difficult and is not being supported by the whole region democratically, assuming that this is due to the region actually lacking the practice of democracy, which clarifies the jet lag the Middle East region is facing. To better understand, let us remember when the Soviet Union was demolished and smaller states were formed, like Slovakia. The Europeans enhanced the democratic movement in these newly formed states by sharing with them their history of democracy, trying to avoid past lapses they made. Ironically, political prearrangements for Iraq were not performed very well which consequently reflected on the current instability and chaos in the country.
Time is also an important matter that must be considered given that Iraq has only been given an opportunity for a year to practice democracy after the Saddam regime was pulled out of power, yet still reflecting 70 % turnout of the eligible population to vote. Iraq right now is going through a transition phase, where transformation from dictatorship to democracy is strongly influenced by time. It is also relevant to mention that since the Saddam regime was brought down, NGO participations have increased in favor of the formation of democracy, not to mention the media influence on the nation with more to come, currently distributing around 200 newspapers along with 20 TV channels.
I prefer looking at the brighter side of Iraq, but something worth mentioning is the number of security incidents Iraqis face which is 40-120 incidents per day; that’s only a little of what was revealed.
Looking at Iraq from a different angle, democracy should be composed of 2 essential elements; fairness and freedom which Iraqis think they have, but pragmatically do not. Elections is not always the solution for a country coming out of war, especially when a portion of the voter population refuse and some are abandoned from taking part in the elections. Although the “nationalists” or “seculars” or “liberals” are considered a minority in Iraq, they are considered to be the key drivers of democracy. For the U.S to come out in a decent picture, Iraq had to have an election that even if it mainly adhered to the Shia, Sunni and Kurdish groups. The last parliamentary election took place in December 2005 and revealed that the small minority of nationalists and liberals were present, but also confirmed the Shia and Sunna groups control as a majority; the cabinet members also illustrated similar weights of the population. By now, the Shia groups announced their candidate for the prime minister position that is likely to be so, clearly demonstrating how much influence religion has on the government and society.
Going a little towards the west, Hamass in the Palestinian parliament have witnessed dramatic changes in the political arena lately. Hamas started off with the late 1980s Intefadha as an anti-Israeli movement during the time of which Alfateh party were running the Palestinian Government show. Hamass then progressed in painting the nationalists picture of Palestine while Alfateh party’s mask was gradually put down to reveal its corruption face to the Palestinians, which got Hamass to have a political agenda for later years. On grass-root levels, Hamas operated an excellent network of social and charitable organizations to the Palestinians, and carried this attitude all the way to stereotype themselves in the correct position for the Palestinians. The latest Palestinian Legislative Council elections revealed (January 2005) 57% Hamas representation in the council, which was an imminent power and ideology change. The story of Hamas's victory in Palestine is due to Hamas's admirable social tactics provided with the correct intelligence of the area along with the thorough understanding of the Palestinian people. Palestinians began to see how much Alfateh’s selfishness influenced the government’s decision making, but no competition was there to remove them out from their seats.
Hamas's slogan for the latest elections was "reform and change" which honestly is what the Palestinians needed. Upon Hamas’s decision to run for parliament, America and Israel were apprehended by their coming, retaining some confidence to the Palestinians; a major plus for Hamass. The candidates chosen for Hamass were also very intelligent and bright figures in Palestine and at the end had the religious and national feel which really moved many Palestinian hearts, leading some Christians to vote for Hamas too.
The world and Alfateh saw themselves draining down and witnessed Hamas's victory. Hamas's change and reform strategy was tailored to the Palestinians, making them understand the need of forming the correct Palestinian identity.
When you start any project, hypotheses are shelved for you to experiment on, which is what Hamas did since it first started, and only after their victory in the parliament are they going to announce their theories. I do not think Hamas will follow its aggressive original direction after they are in power right now because you all know that politics is old people talking and young doing; My prediction indicates that Hamas is done with the doing part. Hamas will evolve and perhaps adopt foreign policies gradually in the future and should be given the opportunity to prove their intentions, as some of the Islamic fundamentalist leaders have already indicated that the peace process could move forward as long as Hamas feels "the respect and confidence of the international community." Some may have already declared the boycotting of Hamas, but this will cause more violence to emerge in the area and as a result, will not be an alternative for the world to undergo.
Egypt was also amongst the spectators that witnessed Islamists climb up the political ladder this year. The current dominating party is the National Democratic Party represented by President Husni Mubarak who won the last presidential elections with a majority of 88%, which followed by the parliamentary elections wining 141 seats; approximately 72% of parliament.
Since the elections took place, not much has changed politically. The political heads and government figures have stayed the same, but something more remarkable occurred during the practice. Around 1000 citizens were arrested during the elections, 15 killed and 350 wounded; all in favor or under the idea of correct electoral practice. Egypt has been affected in different ways, not in terms of parliament or political presence, but in the actual procedures leading to the current turnout. A much higher rate of funding or bribing has been injected in the last elections, with the increase of candidates from the National Democratic Party for the elections. There wasn't a significant decrease in the National Democratic Party parliament representatives, but what shocked the government is the strong turnout of the Muslim Brotherhood in the parliament, taking 88 seats with a total number of 2 million votes, roughly around 20 % of votes. The brighter side only suggests that the actual cabinet members are acting smartly for the first time, considering a new development phase for the recession Egypt's economy has been facing for the past couple of decades.
On the other hand, Mubarak for the first time has accepted the fact of people's consideration of perhaps a better alternative than himself in the future, and for the first time amended the constitution, declaring the multi-candidate elections to promote a democratic idea for the public. Mubarak put together his influence to prevent any existing parties from even trying to practice their roles, excluding the Muslim Brotherhood. Mubarak set a campaign expenditure ceiling of 10 million Egyptian Pounds, with only 17 days to campaign and lots of other impossible to win regulations. Mubarak won and second turned to be Ayman Nour representing Alghad Party (Liberal party), currently in prison for political reasons. Ayman Nour was warned tackled several times by the government to prevent his party from gaining vote counts in every way, getting to a point of Ayman receiving a video clip on CD of him and his wife in bed with a warning to follow election policies or the spreading of the clip.
The government only gave breathing space for the Muslim Brotherhood to run around, only realizing how much potential the brotherhood had at a later stage. Parliament elections proved the Muslim Brotherhood really strong and so the government needed to act upon this matter; reaching a point to prevent people from voting in every area that that the Brotherhood had strong support in (only towards the end of the day of elections).
Looking at adversary side of the Islamists were the secular and liberal parties. Specifically looking at Kuwait, the Islamic groups continue to spread its wings reaching limits even above the sky. All statistics and figures reveal the downfall of the liberal mentality because of several contributing factors.
In every organization of any field, the mission and goals of all of its competitors is usually the same or somehow very similar; what differentiates each from the other are the people taking the roles. The Muslim Brotherhood's history shows that it existed in Kuwait since 1948 when some high net worth individuals believed in Hasan Albannah, and imported his ideology to Kuwait. The brotherhood carried a message for the people that others didn't have; emotion. Yes, the message was all about emotions. Emotion is what moves every human being for any belief he/she carries. The brotherhood used a very intelligent formula to deliver their message “Islam is a religion and a State”. Hasan Albannah based his ideology on 10 messages that were passed on to different generations, but the key success of Albannah’s messages was the messengers. As generations develop and pass, people also evolve and the interpretation of the messages for the later generations begin to be practiced differently, reaching a point right now that many brothers (Muslim Brotherhood followers) not even knowing what Albannah’s 10 messages are. Modern Islamists were given the opportunity to be more flexible and lenient with the globalization era, completely adapting to the modern Muslim policies. The most important element of the brotherhood's success is the organization factor. Their relationship with the Kuwaiti government has been outstanding throughout the years which got them high government positions that they have made use of. Their services were offered to grass-root levels; exercising their influence of their leading positions for the real Kuwaiti community.
The brotherhood began attracting different population groups in Kuwait at even early stages of life, ranging from people in elementary schools to ministers and parliament members. Even at an administrative level, the administration of the brotherhood in Kuwait included young intellectuals to fill in the gaps of age differences between old and younger generations, and disregarding any conflicts between any of them, what made them even stronger is that they always came together with one voice under one umbrella. Dr. Bader Alnashi is the current general secretary of the brotherhood; Resigned from his job as professor and head of department at the college of higher studies in Kuwait when he was appointed general secretary to completely devote his time for the Constitutional Movement (Muslim Brotherhood’s party in Kuwait).
The secular or liberal groups in Kuwait on the other hand, have been busy decentralizing their efforts. From 1990-1995 they were identified as leftist, 95-00 as liberals and from 00-05 seculars; lately being referred to as sinners or anti-Islam groups. The fact is they do not carry an identity. Being a minority in Kuwait, the liberals are made of 2 main parties, and instead of unifying their efforts, a new party was founded more recently in 2004. The liberals in Kuwait have failed to come to a common cause they would all fall under and that is mainly due to the greediness and self-oriented attitude they carry. Being very selective in the formation of liberal parties is considered to have been a factor that separated them from the majority of the society, not that only but from also the younger generation. The lack of institutional or organizational behavior is considered the main weakness here because if you take a look at the main figures of the liberal groups in Kuwait on an individual level, you will find the best writers, best businessmen, best academic instructors, seriously speaking; the cream of everything. Liberals need to realize that we are in a different era today, where 50 year old mentalities can no longer operate like they did before; even religions can not be practiced like they did 2000 years ago.
The "islamocratic" culture has identified itself as a very successful candidate in the Middle East, outperforming all major competitors in the region. I would like to address the issue of emotions again and how much it relates to belief, the technique that every successful organization heavily depends on. Starting with individuals to institutions, one should always dedicate his/her efforts to a cause they believe in; from a young adult going to college and choosing what field to major in to organizations and institutions being established on what their vision and mission should be, even if the area of concentration is not popular. Once that is achieved, chemistry will connect the two ends together to complement each other, which is how Islamists used religion as a mediator between their political intentions and the people.
A nation with sub-societies, religious ones especially, should always come to a conclusion of having a secular state that would resolve lots of internal social and political conflicts. The state should come to this resolution with the support of all groups; convincing different religious groups to have a secular state should be done with the use of religious factors that enforce this concept.
Last but not least, I would truly like to congratulate all the Islamic movements in the Middle East for the very impressive results they have shown, and a small piece of advice for the secular and liberal groups: You can offer Middle Easterners waffles to eat but with spicy dressings instead of maple syrup.
