EIN Seminar
FAES Foundation 28/02/2013
Report on Round Table – The Arab Spring – democracy and institution-building
Branislav Stanicek, MA in Geopolitics, Sorbonne University
Chairman: Ø Mario DAVID MEP, Vice-President of the EPP Group in the European
Parliament, Chair of the EP Delegation for relation with the Mashreq countries, Member of the EP Committee on 'Security and Defence' and 'Foreign Affairs'
Guest Speakers: Ø Amine GEMAYEL, former President of Lebanon, leader of Kataeb Party and
vice-president of the Centrist Democrat International (ICD-CDI)
Ø Ana PALACIO, former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Spain
Panellists:
Ø Hansi ESCOBAR, Spanish Ambassador on Special Mission for Mediterranean
Affairs, Member of the Executive Committee, European Endowment for
Democracy
Ø Amira KHALIFA, General Director of the International Cooperation Department
at IDSC (The Egyptian cabinet Information and Decision Support Centre)
Ø Lahuari BENARBA, Secretary of International Relations, Rassemblement
National Démocratique Algeria
Ø Samer KAWAR, Chairman, Jordanian Young Economists Society
The Arab Spring – democracy and institution-building
Although it is hard to interpret the whole Arab Spring movement since its beginnings two years ago, it is tempting to suggest, following the debate of panellists, a twofold interpretation. Firstly, two groups of countries have emerged in the area: one group of countries that have preferred internal institutional changes marked by political continuity, as a preliminary step to a wider popular engagement, and another group that have brought about regime change through disruptive democratic revolutions, but that have so far failed to create the internal political consensus necessary to rebuild institutions and put in place pluralist democracy; and, secondly, this political choice was correlated with the much deeper cultural and religious roots, marked by different relations to time and by different interpretations of the past (e.g. the Koran as the cultural and religious basis of a society) i.e. by different temporalities. These basic interpretations are informed by two value structures, by a different understanding of time and history, and by a different relationship with the Koran, its reinterpretation and critical exegesis.
Within the first group, which includes rather autocratic countries like Morocco and Jordan, the role of the monarchy is well rooted in society, and the monarch himself not only carries out secular functions, but also has a religious role to play. Reforms that seek to establish new constitutional arrangements require not only the support of politicians and the groupings behind them, but a genuine politics of consensus and compromise and a broader sea-change in religious belief, since, in the Middle East, it is "difficult to forge any political idea without religious wrapping" (Hansi Escobar Stenman). In the case of Morocco, where the elites are questioning "the role of the Monarchy, but not the continuity of the Monarchy itself" (Ahmadou Souilem), King Mohammed VI is introducing both political and religious reforms with a distant aim of broader political participation. King Abdulla II of Jordan's calls for a moderate Islam (Amman Message) must be seen against a very similar political background: continuity of regime and gradual internal reforms supported by a more open Islam.
Thus, in countries where political leaders also hold religious power, but try to forge a more open dialogue-based Islam, institutional reforms can advance pretty well. However, in countries such as Egypt, Tunisia or Libya, where the Arab Spring sprouted radical popular movements, a new form of "revolutionary democracy" (Amira Khalifa) marked by violence took hold before any new normative framework could be set up to replace the regimes overtaken by history. In these countries, people face a normative and institutional vacuum and, in consequence, internal struggles marked by "democracy" without pluralism, and, as in Egypt today, by political deadlock, the fear of counterrevolutionaries in judicial clothing, suspicion of those loyal to the former regime and the desire to control the whole of society, including the secular opposition and the Coptic Christian Church. A "culture of democracy" (Amine Gemayel) is therefore necessary.
As suggested by Semar Kawar, critical dialogue-based reading of Koran could pave the way for a rigorous Muslim universalism, tailored to the present day and the new challenges of global pluralist society. Questions about the current relevance of past events are undeniably part of the task of exegesis, as was shown recently by Al-Azhar University or Amman Message. The seriousness of this historical quest should in no way be diminished: on the contrary, it should be enhanced, both by the European Union and its allies, and by Arab countries themselves. A historical-critical reinterpretation of the Koran that would allow a more open Islam, re-emphasising Islam's core values of compassion, mutual respect, tolerance and freedom of religion, is the key step for both institutional reforms and for a democratic transition of power.
Thus, faith, and not reason alone, remains critical for the success of Arab Spring, and for European engagement in the area. What is now needed, as recalled by Mario David, MEP, is new industrial investment, increased intra-regional trade, enhanced social cohesion, pluralist media, and closer relations with and support for political parties that share core European values. All of this relates to the basic question of how the countries of the region are tied into the modern global world and its conception of legal norms, political freedoms and human rights. Despite formally democratic regimes, countries with failed institutions, that have not succeed in creating open societies and dialogue-based political processes, risk being marginalised both in terms of global financial markets, and as regards human capital. Until now, EU policy was "not adapted to the region" (Ana Palacio) probably because it failed to take account of the fact that the whole area needs not only to converge with the EU economically and socially, but also in the terms of renewed relations between the faith and reason.