The Birth Pangs of a New Middle East

In the 2006 war between Israel and Lebanon, during which Israeli aerial attacks claimed more than 1000 lives (mostly civilians) in Lebanon, Secretary of State Condi Rice, in declining to push for a cease fire, famously described the carnage as the “birth pangs of a new Middle East”. The Bush administration’s “new Middle East”, which was western initiated democracies who would be friendly to U.S./Israeli hegemony, was stillborn. In 2012 we are seeing in Egypt a newborn fledgling democracy that, in all its messiness, is being born of Middle Eastern lineage and parentage.

In this week’s initial presidential election voting 13 candidates competed fiercely for the support of Egyptian voters. Egyptians that I heard from described their feelings about participating in their first election in which the winner was not predetermined and in which their vote actually meant something as a mixture of excitement and fear of the unknown. Many did not make up their minds until they were standing in line at the polls. Although the official count will not be known until next week, it appears Mohammed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate and Ahmed Shafiq, a former Prime Minister in the Mubarak regime, will face off in the run-off election on June 16 and 17.

Many commentators and analysts expressed surprise at the strong showing by Shafiq who has been described by opponents as a “remnant” of the old regime. However, in my discussions with Egyptians during my trip to Egypt last month, it seemed to me that there was room for support for a “law and order’ candidate. In discussing the rising chaos and lawlessness, one Egyptian said to me “We overthrew Mubarak for this?” The lawlessness has varied from nuisance, such as an occupy movement in Tahrir Square and driving the wrong way around the Tahrir Square roundabout to the more serious burglaries and assaults. Fearing criticism of their tactics, the police have largely stood on the sidelines. The people working in the tourist industry, the largest industry in Egypt, have been devastated by the unrest which led to the collapse of tourism. They are fed up with the insecurity and just want an opportunity to work and to earn a living.

As we approach the run-off election, it must be remembered that Shafiq and Morsi received only 50% of the vote. The 50% that supported other candidates will have to decide if they want to give the Muslim Brotherhood complete control of the government or if they want to bring back part of the old regime in the name of stability. Western commentators have been apoplectic about the outcome, describing it as a “nightmare scenario”. (See here.) In democratic elections, sometimes the candidate you don’t like wins. Get over it. Whatever the result, it will have a “Made in Egypt” label.

Technorati Tags: Egypt Election,Ahmed Shafiq,Mohammed Morsi

Success and the Iran Nuclear File

 

With the convening today of the second meeting of the current round of negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 (or the E3+3, depending on whether you are talking to Americans or Europeans) over Iran’s nuclear program, there has been much discussion about whether or not these talks will be a “success”. In order get any kind of answer to this question, we need to define what “success” means and I think that it means something different to all of the parties.

For the Iranians, the primary objective is to normalize relations with the West and to have the U.S. recognize Iran’s legitimate role in Middle East regional politics. Everything that Iran has tried to accomplish over the past decade has been designed to achieve sufficient negotiating leverage to obtain significant concessions from the P5+1 and to create a stockpile of enriched uranium that can be used as a bargaining chip in any negotiations.

Defining “success” for the P5+1 or E3+3 is a more complicated endeavor since there is little agreement among the parties on what success looks like. For the European countries (Britain, France and Germany) “success” is obtaining an agreement with Iran that ensures that Iran does not develop nuclear weapons and that modifies any sanctions so that Europe is assured of a continued flow of oil to the weak European economies. Russia and China share the goal of no nuclear weapons in Iran, but differ in their approach. Russia, as an oil exporter, is comfortable with the ongoing confrontation as it drives up the global price of oil. China on the other hand is an oil importer and desires a return to normal commercial ties with Iran.

The U.S. is an even more complicated situation as there are numerous powerful forces influencing policy decisions and thus preventing a united position. The Obama administration would like to “kick the can” past the elections and, in the interim, lower the tensions in order reduce the price of gasoline. To this end the U.S. has quietly signaled to the Iranians that it would accept low level uranium enrichment. Also, according to an Iranian political analyst close to the government, the U.S. recognizes that the Iranians consider the threat of military attack as a “bad joke”, and has signaled that the military option is no longer on the table. (See here)

The Israel Lobby and its allies in Congress, on the other hand, see “success” as regime change in the Islamic Republic and are taking steps to blow up any negotiations, and maybe the region as well. By large majorities, both Houses of Congress have rushed through legislation that will tie the Obama administration’s hands in the give and take of negotiations and are also taking steps to remove the Iranian terrorist group MEK/MKO from the U.S. terrorist list, a move that will enrage all Iranians.

My definition of “success” is much more modest. I would be pleased if we just managed to schedule another meeting.

(Photo by FARS News Agency)

Technorati Tags: Iran Nuclear Program,Nuclear Negotiations

King Abdullah’s Dilemma

With the recent resignation of Prime Minister Awn Shawkat al-Khasawneh after only six months in office, the Jordanian political
merry-go-round continued to spin. Ever since the Arab Awakening arrived in Amman last year, King Abdullah has enhanced his strategy of avoiding political reforms by expressing support for reform, appointing study committees, ignoring their recommendations, blaming the failure on the Prime Minister and then firing the Prime Minister. The exiting PM then fades gracefully into the background until called upon again in some future political round. As the International Crisis Group recently reported, “The king has shuffled cabinets and then shuffled them again, using prime ministers as buffers to absorb popular discontent. He has charged committees to explore possible reforms, but these remain largely unimplemented."

Al-Khasawneh violated all the political rules by resigning in a curtly worded letter submitted while he was traveling in Turkey. Al-Khasawneh was generally seen as a reformist, liberal politician determined to root out corruption and reign in the intelligence service. He opened dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Islamic Action Front and other opposition groups. His failure to deliver on his promises and his introduction of a new election law designed to further marginalize the opposition by banning religious parties and limiting the number of opposition seats in Parliament cost him what support he had among opposition MP’s.

The Jordanian political landscape is characterized by sharp divisions between “East Bankers” and “West Bankers”. The “East Bankers” are largely Bedouins who tend to vote along tribal lines and generally support the monarch. The “West Bankers” are largely urban Palestinians who migrated to today’s Jordan when the West Bank was part of Transjordan or are refugees from the wars of 1948 and 1967. Making up half of Jordan’s population, “West Bankers” tend to be more Islamic in their politics and advocate for a more powerful and representative Parliament. They have been marginalized politically by election laws that weight the tribal vote much heavier than the urban vote.

Low level unrest demanding real reform and deteriorating economic conditions continue to plague the ruling political class. The new Prime Minister, Fayez Tarawneh, is seen as a conservative who is unlikely to bring about significant change.

When I was in Jordan last month, I asked a number of Jordanians about their views on the current political situation. Most that I spoke with expressed support for King Abdullah and his fashionable wife Rania. I tend to agree with Middle East analyst Shadi Hamid of the Brookings Institute Doha Center who commented on Twitter, “Jordan will seem 'stable', until it's not. And then it will be too late”.

(Picture by ForeignPolicy.com)

Technorati Tags: Jordan,Arab Spring