Spring Fling

The Arab Spring swept the Arab world and its regimes by surprise in 2011 when a Tunisian activist inspired millions of Arabs to rise against dictators and authoritarian regimes. Many countries in North Africa and the Middle East took their lead from the Tunisian popular revolt, and soon Egypt, Libya and Syria witnessed mass demonstrations demanding change, whilst other countries witnessed softer forms of manifestations that called on reforms and democratization. Unfortunately, and after three years of the initiation of the Arab Spring, only Tunisia found itself stable, quasi-democratic and on the path of reform. Things did not turn out the same in other countries, and the process of regime change and democratization has failed. Challenges facing each country vary, and conditions on the ground do play a role in hindering any assistance offered by the international community to assist countries in reforming and opening up to democracy. Three examples will be offered in this context, highlighting the difficulty that each country faces and the hurdles that the regimes in these countries impose on any form of assistance - technical or financial – to reform the political system.

1.      Jordan

Jordan has embarked upon a political reform programme since 2005, with the adoption of the Natioanl Agenda, and has since been active in reforming the political system and responding to popular demands, especially after the popular movements’ initiative that mimicked the Arab Spring in other Arab countries. Despite some steps taken by the government in that direction, Jordan remains a semi-liberal autocracy with the King concentrating both executive and legislative powers. Given the tribal nature of the society, the King’s leadership and the regime’s legitimacy were never challenged, but was has been repeatedly demanded and continuously advised upon by both Jordan citizens and by the international community is the empowerment of the legislature. The EU, under the ENP, has allocated a financial package under the ENPI 2007-2013 dedicated to promoting the role of the parliament and indirect assistance to political parties in this field. The project reaped very modest results, given the challenges that face the country. The challenges facing any initiative of project to strengthen and empower the legislature to assume its role as a democratic representative of the people are:

·         Laws and regulations that limit the parliament’s power and place it under the King’s complete control, noting that the King can dissolve the parliament at any moment and without requiring a justification. Moreover, the parliament serves as an entity that passes laws rather than promulgating them, acting therefore as mere administration office for draft laws its receives from the prime ministry. The power to question ministers and reject policies has been dwarfed throughout the years, and any attempt to oppose the general policies taken by the government would threaten the continuity of the parliament and the status of its members before the regime. Therefore, attempting to empower a legislature and engaging its members in capacity building programmes has thus far reaped futile results, considering that the core problem – the legal aspect – has not been addressed.

·         The problem of immigrants, Arab refugees and particularly Palestinian refugees in the country. At the moment, Jordan hosts over two million refugees from various nationalities. Moreover the Palestinian community in Jordan, registered as refugees at UNRWA or not, outnumber the Jordanian community (representing over 60% of the population). The issue of political loyalty, identification with Jordanian local concerns, solidarity and sense of belonging is lacking amongst the great majority of citizens/residents. The regime’s response to the situation, and in an act of protecting itself and its continuity, explain why political freedoms and political plurality are much feared and controlled. A neutralized and silenced legislature with little powers may be considered as a survival strategy for a regime that fears the escalation of events in the region and the reaction of the non-Jordanian community if empowered.

·         The growing fundamentalist Islamic current in Jordan. The Islamic Liberation Party that has need since the 1950s is still present in Jordan gaining popularity in rural and impoverished area. The number of salafi groups and independent activists affiliated with the ISIS fighters is on the rise, signally to the regime that exerting further pressure and control over political movements and monitoring their access to the legislature is a necessity. Should there be open elections and should the parliament be given its full powers, these fundamentalist actors will pose a danger to national peace.

·         The nature of the Jordanian society that remains a tribal and traditional one, respecting the hierarchy rules and the figure of the patriarch pose a great difficulty to any reform agenda and any attempt to empower the people and give them the change to take part in political activity. Whether as voters or as members of parliament, the local population still depends of family ties and social relations and kinship in their political dealings.

2.      Egypt

Egypt’s 2011 revolution brought much hope to the people, not only in Egypt but the entire Arab world. The stepping down of the president in 2011, the amendment of the constitution and the celebration of elections on December 2011 were signs that Egypt was heading in the right direction. However, in January 2012, the Islamists won the elections with a very modest majority. The presidential elections confirmed the notion that Egyptians still did not know where they stand in terms of democracy, where an Islamist candidate and a candidate from the Mubarak regime both won the majority of votes. The election of the Islamic president was frowned upon by both national and regional actors and the power struggle led to the June 2013 military coup ousting the President and his party. The military General Al Sisi won the elections in May 2014 and in a blink of an eye Egypt went back to the Mubarak era. Only last week was a new national security adviser appointed, Ms. Abu Al Naja, who was one of Mubark’s closest advisers and who was criticized for allowing human rights violations in the 2011 revolution. The main challenge facing Egypt is twofold: for one part, the military regime that has taken power since the 1950s has been infiltrated in all institutions and has been accepted as the status quo. Viewed as a lesser evil in comparison with the Islamists, the military establishment rules with an iron fist, controlling all aspects of the political apparatus. The lack of political options led the Egyptian society to endorse a regime it detested, yet a regime that is strong and that can curb the spread of fundamentalism, or endorse a party that promises nothing but an authoritarian system masked behind a theological slogan. The second issue facing democracy promotion in Egypt is the impoverishment of its citizens. According to studies, citizens with meagre economic means tend to focus more on economic aspects of their lives rather than engage in political activity. Despite that fact that a democratic system would ensure a dignified living standard, illiteracy and extreme poverty amongst a large proportion of the society (along with extremist ideological and fundamentalist views) convince citizens otherwise.

3.      Lebanon

Lebanon can be considered as one of the very few democracies in the Middle East. Political parties are strong and have their affiliated, competing freely in elections and engaging in political debated in complete freedom. Furthermore, political and religious tolerance set Lebanon apart from its neighbours. However, the extreme political diversity in the country, the lingering civil war anger sentiments, the occupation of lands in the south and the division of the society upon sectarian lines have rendered the task of electing a president impossible. The tenure of the current president, Michael Suleiman, has ended in May 2014, and five times has the government failed to elect a new leader. The reason behind that is the political division of the two main currents or blocs: the 14 of March group and the 8 of March group.  With parties in each bloc standing firm and insisting on not compromising, the wedge between the two sides is digging deeper and parties are converting little by little into a one-man-show. Lebanon is an example of a paralyzed democracy, where the parties do not need empowerment, but need to adopt a strategy to overcome stalemates. The main challenge in fostering democracy in Lebanon is the issue of regional alliances of its parties, Hezbollah and its militia, a turbulent and powerful neighbour (Syria), and the divisions within the society, converting the country into small patches inhabited by segments of the society who fiercely defend their ethnicity and religious affiliation at the cost of democracy and compromise.

The Arab Spring has turned into a cold cold winter, and all hopes pinned on reform and democratization have been washed away by tornadoes of violence, terrorism, civil wars, fear and dangerous indifference. It was indeed a spring fling...a flirtation with reform, a tease. Perhaps what is needed after all is not a spring but a raving ocean.