BEIRUT — The “reform” industry in the Arab world has been on a roller-coaster for the past 15 years or so, soaring high at moments of exhilaration and ambitious expectations, then plummeting to earth in gut-wrenching disappointment. Reforming prevailing political, economic, security and administrative systems in the Arab world is a critical prerequisite for any hopes for stability, prosperity and a normal life for the majority of citizens.
A new report by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace captures accurately and fairly the important experience of one country — Jordan — where the reform agenda has been simultaneously dramatic and erratic. Jordan’s track record is important because its leadership has trumpeted reform as a major goal and achievement, it has make impressive progress in some areas, yet it has suffered serious shortcomings in others.
The pace and nature of reforms since the early 1990s have varied considerably across the Arab region. Some pockets of excellence and splendid efficiency in citizen-state bureaucratic encounters contrast sharply with most others that are a nightmare of wasted time, abuse, petty corruption and numbing inefficiency. The issue has become complicated in recent years with the injection of a foreign ideological component: primarily in the form of US-driven reform efforts that are now broadly tucked into Washington’s “global war on terror.”
Foreign assistance in promoting Arab reform should be welcomed in principle. Yet Western insistence on making Arab reform part of an ideological battle that downplays other critical issues for Arabs — such as foreign militarism and occupation — transforms the reform agenda from a critical need to a divisive distraction, or even an active political battleground. We see this in Tony Blair’s appointment as the Quartet’s envoy to help build democratic systems of good governance in Palestine — when Palestinians more urgently want to end the Israeli occupation. Trying to replace political and national rights with the niceties of reform agendas is a childish endeavor, tinged by unsubtle overtones of colonialism and racism.
Consequently, homegrown and Western political pressures are slowing down two vital areas where the Arab world must move swiftly for its own sake: economic-social reform and political democratization. Jordan is fascinating in this respect because it has pioneered some impressive and substantial reforms in areas like deregulation, trade liberalization, privatization and administrative efficiency. Yet, as the report by Sufyan Alissa of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut notes, “Initiated under severe economic crisis conditions, the reform process in Jordan [since 1989] has been slow, selective, and uncoordinated. Thus far Jordan has succeeded in stabilizing its economy and engaging in a process of trade and financial liberalization and privatization, but it has failed to find long-lasting solutions to major social and economic challenges facing the country.”
In other words, it is possible to engage in reform without substantially moving ahead economically or politically. Jordan’s reforms have boosted economic growth, attracted investment, and created many new jobs, allowing it essentially to stay in place and avoid any further economic deterioration. The combination of strong political and security institutions, international support, and high levels of remittances have assured Jordan’s social and political stability and eased social and economic pressures, without alleviating underlying problems and stresses.
Alissa says this has allowed the country to “postpone engaging in deep economic reform” to confront major social challenges and economic vulnerabilities in the areas of poverty, unemployment, public debt, and high dependency on foreign aid. This report does not even touch on the sensitive political issues of Jordanian, Palestinian, pan-Arab, Islamist and pro-Western political identity and allegiance that have confounded Jordan since soon after its independence. This focus on pure economic-administrative issues makes this report even more important and timely.
The most interesting part outlines the reasons for erratic, inconsistent or incomplete reforms. King Abdullah II and his band of young reformers will not be happy with this section, but it is the one they should read and ponder most intensely. The report says that the state’s capacity to implement thorough economic reform, “is limited by three key constraints: First, economic reform in Jordan lacks a clear constituency; second, it faces severe resistance from elites benefiting from the status quo; and third, previous reform efforts have failed to address social and economic problems affecting the majority of the population, which has undermined public support for the reform process. In addition, Jordan has limited institutional capacity to implement complex economic reform programs, adapt to changes, and handle their consequences.”
If the king and his young technocrats’ economic and administrative reform impulses are both genuine and deep — as I suspect they still are — they will use this report to spark a serious public debate, alongside more discreet private deliberations, on the reasons for their mixed report card on reform. In this, they could set an example for themselves and for other Arab countries that is badly needed.
Rami G. Khouri is an internationally syndicated columnist, the director of the Issam Fares Institute at the American University of Beirut, editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star, and co-laureate of the 2006 Pax Christi International Peace Award.
Copyright ©2007 Rami G. Khouri / Agence Global
—————-
Released: 15 August 2007
Word Count: 801
—————-
For rights and permissions, contact:
rights@agenceglobal.com, 1.336.686.9002 or 1.212.731.0757