Real democracy for Arabs needed to stop the bloodshed
Date
6/12/2016 5:09:18 PM
(MENAFN- The Peninsula)
By Jamal Khashoggi
Democracy is in crisis all over the world, and a prestigious magazine- the Economist has devoted a special report to discuss this matter in its recent issue. The article emphasized that democracy is suffering from a lack of confidence in it, and it offered several suggestions to improve the performance of democracy and revive its tools to regain people’s trust and achieve its goals, represented in good governance which we have not yet achieved.
Real democracy has become an absolute necessity for us as Arabs, in order to stop us killing each other, and instead to achieve good governance. This is applicable to Arab republics that collapsed after the Arab Spring while trying to get rid of traditional Arabic dictatorship systems. These countries failed even to restore the traditional tyrant systems which were the reason for their collapse during the 2011 revolutions. Therefore true democracy remains the only elusive possible solution to end the current bloodshed.
When people in the West discuss the situation of democracy in their respective countries, they still have concerns about voting trends such as when they begin to support the far right wing, and unmanageable candidates like Donald Trump. They are also concerned about the low participation and decline of voters who increasingly show dissatisfaction with parliaments. They seek solutions for such problems to revive the good practices of democracy to assure compatibility with modernity.
Arabs in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen only need democracy to survive and to stop the killing machines which are claiming hundreds of thousands.
However, Arabs whose hopes were in democracy, have begun to lose confidence in it. People in Iraq demonstrated against the parliament and assaulted it’s headquarters in Baghdad. This was the public announcement of the death of the lean democracy, which collapsed before the all the chaos took place. It was a protest called by the Iraqi religious leader Muqtada Al-Sadr. Unfortunately democracy in Iraq is still only on paper, described in the constitution but failing in practice because of sectarianism, corruption and Daesh. Its failure will be used as an excuse for its opponents, under the pretext of religion and tradition. Some of the opponents of democracy are also addicted to oppressive regimes and they claim that “Arabs can’t be ruled by democracy” or, like some fake liberals, say that “societies must be prepared and educated before implementing democracy”.
The problem with the opponents of democracy in the afflicted countries is that they don’t offer any alternative solutions except restoring the traditional Arab regimes that collapsed in 2011 after half a century of ruling.
Peoples in the afflicted countries have begun to make comparisons between their current miserable situation where they lack security and suffer from displacement, refugees and sectarian wars, while their situation under the former tyrants like Saddam, Gaddafi, and others was that they were not facing such horrifying scenarios.
In Egypt a tweet # bring Mubarak back” has gone viral in the social media. Although the situation in Egypt is much better than Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen, they still feel that they are disappointed because they thought that they had got rid of dictatorship, unemployment and poverty.
Anyone who seeks to end violence, must promote the idea of democracy as the only solution for countries with multiple problems. This may not be possible without convincing the influential regional powers that it is impossible to restore the former traditional regimes.
When the Yemenis met last year in Riyadh, and the Syrians, they made it clear that democracy is their preferred option, and described the desired state as democratic.
It is a mechanism for power exchange, but such words were already included in the former regimes’ constitutions. The Iraqi constitution was a model for the establishment of democracy, but it did not offer real democracy or respect of the rule of law or even basic human rights. Therefore, there is a need for Arabic initiatives to spread democracy that are sponsored by the stable Arab stable countries. It is controversial idea but no one has alternative suggestions except chaos or restoring of the former regimes.
One day the wars in these Arab countries will stop but to prepare for that moment we need to start projects for development and that help these countries to maintain stability and peace during the transition period.
War will leave behind destroyed towns, disunited societies, refugees, sectarian and race tensions, a lack of a united national army and the spread of weapons among militias. There will not be a strong dictator who can enforce law or unite the people by force and so democracy will be the only solution to cure the differences and regulate relations between components, and pave the way for the establishment of a central government.
The Libyan case is good example, where all attempts have so far failed to bring stability and peace to the country without democracy. Election results were rejected and force used for exclusion or to bring back the traditional form of Arab regimes. After two years of destructive wars, Libyans were persuaded that there could be no solution without real democracy, based upon agreements, with UN support. This understanding has made them go back to square one to negotiate and settle their differences. It is a step they missed with the ousting of the former regime of Gaddafi.
This is the solution that the collapsed Arab states needs, and it is futile to support one side to take power and control all the country, if we assume that there are other parties remaining. Availability of modern weapons for all parties have made it difficult for any of the disputants to achieve a decisive victory, in addition to the involvement of many regional and global actors in the conflicts, escalating wars and widening the gap in differences.
In Yemen for example, the greatest support that Saudi Arabia and the other GCC countries could provide after the war is not membership of the GCC as some demanded, or even a Marshall Plan or donations of billions of dollars, but to help the country to establish a real democratic system for peaceful power exchange and bring all its components and the regional actors to an agreement on this solution.
The same could also happen in Syria and Iraq, regardless of the details of the differences as, at the end of the day, there is only one democracy.
It is not necessary to choose the best at the beginning of the democratization process, but the most important thing is to end war, and bring peace, and make people believe in democracy as a solution to maintain peace and stability. Then people can smoothly move towards the election of the best rulers, and start the reconstruction of their countries to achieve their desired development. The important thing now is to stop the bloodshed.
The writer is a Saudi Arabian journalist, columnist, author and the General Manager and Editor-in-Chief of Al Arab News Channel.