PREMIUM SEARCH Search by job title, geography and build a list of executive contacts
Can democracy flourish in the Middle East? Can Iraq, post-Saddam, become a model for the rest of the region? These questions are being debated all over the world, including in Middle Eastern capitals such as Cairo. BusinessWeek contributing correspondent Susan Postlewaite recently spoke with one of Egypt's leading democracy advocates, Egyptian-American Saad Eddin Ibrahim, about the challenges of instilling democracy in the Middle East.
Ibrahim, a 64-year-old sociology professor at American University in Cairo, was acquitted Mar. 18 of alleged political offenses by an Egyptian court. He had spent 18 months in prison before being released in December for a retrial. Prior to that, a special state security court had sentenced him to seven years for "defaming Egypt" by disseminating information about problems between Egypt's Muslims and Christians and accepting European Union money to monitor elections without government permission.
Ibrahim's case received widespread attention in the West and so angered the Bush Administration that Washington threatened last August there would be no new aid for Egypt until his release. Here are edited excerpts of Postlewaite's and Ibrahim's conversation:
Q: The U.S. wants to accelerate the development of democracy in the Middle East. What's the state of democracy now?
A: The good era of democracy was from 1920-50 in Egypt, the liberal age. Since then, there has been a decline in the values and practices of democracy. There's been a growing middle class pressuring the autocratic regimes for democracy for the last 30 years. However, the regimes of the Arab world have perfected their means of coercion. They silence and frighten the democracy advocates, including [myself]. [I have] been made into a negative role model for would-be democracy fighters.
Q: Is this war a reasonable way to impose or introduce democracy in Iraq?
A: Introduce implies give-and-take, not force, so I hope it's the latter, where they introduce democracy to Iraq and negotiate the details. Iraq had a liberal experience like Egypt from 1924 to 1958. It wasn't perfect but it was certainly better than what followed. Because the country is made up of three major ethnic groups plus some smaller ones, it lends itself to a federal style that would enable each of these groups to have partial home rule.
I object morally and in principle to the war -- but in the case of Iraq, this dictator could never have been removed except by force. I wish [the war] could have been given more time to gain international legitimacy, but I am more committed to removing Saddam. I wrote him a letter on Aug. 25 from prison asking him to step down.
Q: I think you're in the minority in Egypt in supporting the war.
A: I am a minority of one. I speak my mind. And I end up in prison.
Q: Which countries in the Middle East have the most developed democracy?
A: Morocco, Turkey, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, in that order. Then you have the semi-authoritarian governments: Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, and Yemen. And the totally authoritarian: Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Saudi Arabia.
All of them, however, have a sizeable middle class, including Iraq. The middle class has historically been the backbone of any democratization process, so the region is ready sociologically for democracy. What is needed is to loosen the grip of the authoritarian regimes. We have tried. We need external help that is perceived as sincere and sustained.
Q: Can the U.S. push democracy on the Middle East? Could democracy be imposed from the outside?
A: No.
Q: Could the outside help?
A: Yes. The outside helps with economic development and with peace initiatives. Why should we reject assistance in democracy? It's true the U.S. now has a bad name in the region because of what is happening with Palestine. But if the U.S. shows sincerity and consistency, it will be gradually accepted.
For the time being there is cynicism about whether the U.S. is sincere. A forceful move to deal with the Arab-Israeli conflict evenhandedly has to be the yardstick by which we measure sincerity.
Q: Egypt has made several moves since the beginning of the year that look like democracy, but are they?
A: Doing away with the state security courts is symbolic. More important is doing away with the state of emergency law. The flotation of the pound was welcome, if you want trade. The appointment of a woman to the Supreme Court was symbolic but welcome. Designating Coptic Christmas as a holiday was symbolic. My release in December was also symbolic, but it was a welcome symbol! My acquittal [Mar. 18] was not [symbolic].
Q: Often in Egypt, doesn't it seem that when the government talks about democracy it's really talking about economic freedom, not political freedom?
A: They would like to have free trade, not political democracy. Only the NDP [the ruling National Democratic Party] thinks we have democracy, nobody else.
Q: Is democracy a danger in countries in this region? What if the fundamentalists gain control?
A: That is a fear in the West. The Taliban did not come to power by election. Nor did [the late Ayatollah] Khomeini in Iran. We can mention examples where the Islamists have run for power, in Turkey, in Bahrain, and nothing [bad] has happened.
Q: If there were free elections in Egypt, what percentage of the vote would the Islamists get?
A: The Islamists would get 15% to 20%, according to our own surveys. But [the system] is so politically fragmented they could get 40% of the seats [in Parliament]. They would never get a majority, not in the foreseeable future. If they get a majority, then they should rule.
Q: Then what would happen? Would they implement Islamic law like Iran?
A: [That] is a legitimate fear to guard against. We don't want a democracy where we have one man, one vote, for just one time.
Q: When might Egypt have free elections?
A: Maybe in 5 to 10 years there could be free elections.
Q: Should the U.S. be pushing more of a human-rights agenda in the Middle East? How could that be achieved effectively?
A: Conditionality. [The U.S.] could suspend aid -- as [it] did in my case, although it was symbolic because there was no request for more aid at that time. But even [that] was a welcome move. Every one of these countries needs the U.S. for one reason or another. Some need economic assistance like Jordan. Some need military protection. Some need the U.S. to dislodge Israel from its intransigent position, like Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria.
Edited by Rose Brady
Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.
Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed.
Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video.
To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here.
Copyright 2003, Bloomberg L.P.
Printer-Friendly Version
