AMMAN, Jordan — The lingering fallout from the November 9 terror attack against three hotels here in the Jordanian capital Amman continues to be characterized by a peculiarly Jordanian combination of determination and indecision. A bold and courageous willingness by King Abdullah II and his state security capabilities to confront the criminals who kill civilians throughout the region and the world is somewhat countered and contradicted by a corresponding meekness in promoting the kind of domestic political reforms that would pull the rug out from under the terrorists in Jordan and regionally.
Amman today is a city of swirling political emotions, sentiments, expectations, and, above all, rumors, as the consequences of the November 9 attack remain unclear to most people. At the same time, there is a widespread sense that things cannot stay the same. Fighting terrorism with the same old methods will work to a large extent, but will not prevent determined criminals from doing their evil deeds. A qualitatively different kind of anti-terror policy is needed, and Jordan is one of the few places in the Arab world that could envisage moving down that path.
I mentioned in my last column that Jordan, unlike most other Arab states, has a special opportunity to make the sorts of historic, substantive changes in its society that could provide the first successful Arab example of a country that fights terror effectively and over the long term. It can do this not only by military, security and intelligence means, but rather by the more effective method of mobilizing all Jordanians to forge a political culture of inclusion and accountability that gives the terrorists and extremists no fertile ground in which to operate.
The general problem and threat throughout the Middle East, and increasingly globally, is the spread of an extremist political ideology that uses violence against its own societies and foreign targets. Terror by Osama Bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi are symptoms of a deeper malaise, and older distortions and tensions in Arab society. These are fundamentally political in nature, along with economic and social aspects that cannot be ignored. The core pan-Arab problem that has allowed fundamentalist religious extremism to flourish and small terror groups to emerge is the problem of abuse of political authority and economic resources in societies where average citizens feel increasingly alienated and powerless. Defeating terror requires eliminating the underlying political environment that allowed it to breed in the first place.
The antidote to terror is not only security measures managed by police and intelligence agencies, or tougher new laws enforced by ministries of interior. The antidote to terror is a political and economic culture in which the majority of ordinary citizens feel empowered, represented and respected as citizens with equal rights. This kind of citizenry working closely with its security agencies can then provide that combination of political legitimacy, social tranquility, and technical police efficiency that will defeat existing terror groups and prevent new ones from springing up.
Jordan could pioneer this concept if it can muster the courage and boldness on the political front that its King Abdullah has already shown on the security front and in his assertions of the moderate Islam that is represented by his own Hashemite family that descends from the Prophet Mohammad. Practical political changes are now needed to transform popular indignation and the leadership’s moral boldness into a new phenomenon — Arab democracy — in which security agencies connect with and are empowered by their own citizenry, but also are held accountable to it. The security-citizenry link is crucial because it represents that pivotal power relationship that now drives much of the Arab world’s discontent, and that in turn makes the political and social environment open to extremist movements.
I would like to suggest some specific examples of procedures that could be instituted in Jordan and all other Arab countries to forge a closer, healthier, relationship among the security services, the political institutions and the citizenry as a whole. Jordan is uniquely placed today to do this because of the rare combination of assets and conditions that define the country. It enjoys a strong wave of public support for the king and leadership. The political elite has spoken often and impressively of setting an example of democratic transition and political reforms for the entire Arab world, but without its deeds matching its words to date. The security system — police, intelligence department, armed forces and others — is both efficient operationally and respected throughout society. It is time to bring these three forces together into a more profound political culture.
Four specific areas of innovation can be explored, which would benefit the security agencies as well as the public at large. The first is to forge a more formal, institutional link between the security system and the public through some sort of civilian oversight body that meets regularly with the security leadership to evaluate policies and strategies, discuss complaints (from all parties), evaluate budgets, make suggestions, and, most importantly, generate a sense of accountability and solidarity that is not always there now. A small group of distinguished men and women could be appointed by the king as a security sector advisory and oversight council, a modest first step towards a more institutionalized accountability mechanism that could be developed later. An even more limited trial could be done by appointing a civilian oversight committee to review the work of the anti-corruption department within the intelligence department.
The second step would be to open the security sector to greater cooperation with the mass media, starting with regular interviews and press briefings, including background and off-the-record briefings. If citizens knew more about the work, methods, concerns and aims of the security agencies this would have two powerful impacts: it would take away much of the sense of marginalization and powerlessness that many citizens feel in the face of their state security systems, whom most citizens assume can act with impunity; and it would conversely prompt many citizens to cooperate legitimately with their police and security sector. More openness and mutual trust between citizen and security agencies would benefit both.
The third possible move would be to forge a more structured relationship of mutual accountability between the security agencies and both the elected lower house of parliament and the appointed upper house. This sort of give-and-take could happen in public at one level — the televised discussion of the security sector budget, for example — while other issues would need to be discussed in closed committees. If Arab parliaments have no say in the running of Arab security systems both will eventually experience serious credibility problems with their own citizens, which is already evident across the entire Arab world.
My fourth suggestion relates to the police force, which is the security agency that has the most direct, daily contact with the public at the local neighborhood level. It is vital that police-community relations be improved and injected with a mechanism for two-way communication, feedback, complaints and problem-solving initiatives. It would be relevant now to establish some local police-community relations councils that include not just the traditional sheikhs and tribal and business leaders; young people — including women, who have their own security issues to raise — need to be included in this sort of effort. The police cannot ensure security alone; they can only do so with the active participation of the entire community, and that requires a deeper, more egalitarian level of communication between police and citizen.
Forging a healthy, transparent, mutually satisfying citizen-security sector relationship is absolutely crucial to the three goals that Jordan seeks to achieve, and that confront all other Arab lands as well: fighting the terror threat, promoting a stable society that does not give rise to extremist movements, and achieving a dignified, prosperous life for all citizens through political, economic, social and educational reforms.
At some point some Arab government will have to stop talking about these goals and start taking practical measures to achieve them. Jordan has the best opportunity to do that given its unique set of circumstances today. I hope it does so, and generates that one elusive example of a democratic, inclusive, accountable Arab political culture in which stability emanates from the dignity and self-confidence of a satisfied citizenry, rather than from the more common pan-Arab phenomenon of open-ended security laws and often unaccountable security and police agencies.
Rami G. Khouri is editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star newspaper, published throughout the Middle East with the International Herald Tribune.
Copyright ©2005 Rami G. Khouri
—————-
Released: 23 November 2005
Word Count: 1,388
——————-
For rights and permissions, contact:
rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or 1.336.286.6606