Marina Ottaway, Omar Hossino
{
"authors": [
"Marina Ottaway"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"North Africa",
"Egypt",
"Gulf",
"Levant",
"Maghreb",
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
Middle East Democracy Promotion Is Not a One-way Street
The Obama administration must engage in a new type of dialogue with the Middle East, one modeled after the process used to improve relations with the Soviet bloc, if it wants to have any chance of impacting political reform in the region.
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.
If the Obama administration wants to embark on a new policy of promoting political reform, it must understand certain realities:
- Incumbent regimes are more firmly entrenched than ever.
- Increasingly low election turnout signals rising disenchantment with political processes and organizations.
- Arab states are unable to govern effectively. Rather than tackling the serious underlying problems, they choose patronage and populist gestures to win support.
- The fallback solution of democracy promotion, supporting civil society and political parties, will have little impact in countries that have systemically limited the political space for these groups.
- The United States cannot threaten to withhold aid to encourage reform, as it depends on the oil of many Arab countries.
- In the early months of his administration, President Obama could ignore the issue of political reform. But the Arab press is now openly questioning his commitment to a new U.S. policy in the region.
“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.”
About the Author
Former Senior Associate, Middle East Program
Before joining the Endowment, Ottaway carried out research in Africa and in the Middle East for many years and taught at the University of Addis Ababa, the University of Zambia, the American University in Cairo, and the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa.
- Reactions to the Syrian National InitiativeArticle
- Slow Return to Normal Politics in EgyptArticle
Marina Ottaway
Recent Work
Carnegie India 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.
More Work from Carnegie India
- India Signs the Pax Silica—A Counter to Pax Sinica?Commentary
On the last day of the India AI Impact Summit, India signed Pax Silica, a U.S.-led declaration seemingly focused on semiconductors. While India’s accession to the same was not entirely unforeseen, becoming a signatory nation this quickly was not on the cards either.
Konark Bhandari
- The Impact of U.S. Sanctions and Tariffs on India’s Russian Oil ImportsCommentary
This piece examines India’s response to U.S. sanctions and tariffs, specifically assessing the immediate market consequences, such as alterations in import costs, and the broader strategic implications for India’s energy security and foreign policy orientation.
Vrinda Sahai
- NISAR Soars While India-U.S. Tariff Tensions SimmerCommentary
On July 30, 2025, the United States announced 25 percent tariffs on Indian goods. While diplomatic tensions simmered on the trade front, a cosmic calm prevailed at the Sriharikota launch range. Officials from NASA and ISRO were preparing to launch an engineering marvel into space—the NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), marking a significant milestone in the India-U.S. bilateral partnership.
Tejas Bharadwaj
- TRUST and TariffsCommentary
The India-U.S. relationship currently appears buffeted between three “Ts”—TRUST, Tariffs, and Trump.
Arun K. Singh
- Indian Airstrikes in Pakistan: May 7, 2025Commentary
On May 7, 2025, between 1:05 and 1:30 a.m. (IST), airstrikes carried out by the Indian Air Force hit nine locations inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). It was codenamed Operation Sindoor.
Rudra Chaudhuri