The conflict is threatening stability in Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Zaur Shiriyev
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Middle East",
"North Africa",
"Egypt",
"Algeria",
"Morocco",
"Lebanon",
"Jordan",
"Palestine",
"Syria",
"Kuwait",
"Saudi Arabia",
"Yemen"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}REQUIRED IMAGE
The vast array of reforms implemented by Arab governments over the last two decades have been superficial and designed to present a façade of reform while maintaining the concentration of power among authoritarian rulers.
WASHINGTON, Jan 22—The vast array of reforms implemented by Arab governments over the last two decades have been superficial and designed to present a façade of reform while maintaining the concentration of power among authoritarian rulers, says a new book from the Carnegie Endowment. By imposing key elements of democracy—elections, parliaments, economic reform, human rights—without truly redistributing power, Arab governments have appeased the international community, who wish to promote democracy, without risking destabilization.
In Beyond the Façade: Political Reform in the Arab World, editors Marina Ottaway, director of the Carnegie Middle East Program, and Julia Choucair-Vizoso, a former Carnegie associate, analyze the reform process in ten countries—Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Palestine, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, and Yemen—and present the sources of and obstacles to political change in the Arab world.
Key Conclusions:
“What we have not witnessed so far is any example of outside pressure convincing the incumbent government to expose itself to competition that might results in its ouster from power. Nor is it clear whether the United States and other outsiders pushing for reform really want to see the enactment of measures that could lead to a political paradigm change with unforeseeable consequences. Modest, even cosmetic, change often accommodates the political requirements of both incumbent governments and outsiders better than far-reaching measures with unpredictable consequences,” the editors conclude.
###

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.
The conflict is threatening stability in Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Zaur Shiriyev
Stakeholders must demand major restructuring of the Board of Peace and robust oversight and transparency before engaging with it. Until then, rights-respecting existing platforms and mechanisms for multilateral peacemaking should be supported.
Zaha Hassan, Charles H. Johnson
In an interview, Kheder Khaddour explains that Damascus is trying to stabilize its borders, but avoiding war isn’t guaranteed.
Michael Young
The conflict is exposing the deep energy vulnerabilities of Korea’s chip industry.
Darcie Draudt-Véjares, Tim Sahay
The decision of Lebanon’s parliament may look exceptional, but in reality it is not.
Issam Kayssi