{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Egypt",
"Gulf",
"Levant",
"Maghreb"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
To have a chance at impacting political reform in the Middle East, the Obama administration should open a dialogue with governments in the region, modeled on the Helsinki process that was used to improve relations with the Soviet bloc.
WASHINGTON, Nov 19—President Obama is under pressure to relaunch the political reform agenda in the Middle East, but low U.S. credibility and the region’s political stagnation leave little hope that typical methods will be successful. The last time a U.S. administration faced a similar situation with such unfavorable circumstances for advancing political reform was over 30 years ago during the height of the Cold War.
To have a chance at impacting political reform in the Middle East under the present circumstances, the Obama administration should open a dialogue with governments in the region, modeled on the Helsinki process that was used to improve relations with the Soviet bloc. The United States must be willing to discuss the universal principles that should underlie its own Middle East policy if they want to engage Arab countries in a discussion of the principles they should respect, contends a new brief by Marina Ottaway.
If the Obama administration wants to embark on a new policy of promoting political reform, it must understand certain realities:
“There is, of course, a much easier way for the Obama administration to show that the United States still cares about political reform in the Middle East, one that would not require the United States to adjust its own policies,” writes Ottaway. “It could go back to exhorting Arab governments to change; it could launch new initiatives on women’s rights or education; it could even become more daring and enter into a dialogue with Islamist parties. Given the conditions that exist in the Arab world now, such steps would make little difference and do nothing to restore the United States’ much-eroded credibility on the subject of democracy and political reform.”
###
NOTES
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
When the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding was announced, the UK, France, Germany, and Italy declared their readiness to help demine the Strait of Hormuz and lift nuclear sanctions on Tehran. But does Europe need new tools to recover a diplomatic role?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
As geopolitical rivalry weaponizes global supply chains, the EU’s true vulnerability lies in emerging-risk imports. For these goods, suppliers are growing more concentrated, substitution more difficult, and political risk is looming.
Sinan Ülgen
The EU’s new migration policy is not suited to today’s realities. With climate change increasingly becoming a driver of displacement, Europe needs to rethink its deterrence-focused approach.
Shana Tabak
The battle over free speech has taken center stage since U.S. Vice President JD Vance accused Europe of censorship. From travel bans to social media regulation, especially around the Israel-Palestine conflict, are liberal democratic governments weaponizing free speech?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
Europe seems to have accepted its sidelining in the Middle East. The EU must reassert its support for the international rules-based order and step up engagement.
Rym Momtaz