Human rights in the Arab world

On May 24 Arab League leaders or their representatives met in Tunis. At the end of the meeting, a declaration was issued in which the leaders reaffirmed their attachment to the humanitarian principles and noble values of human rights in their comprehensive and complementary dimension as well as the content of the various international pacts and the Arab pact on human rights adopted at the same summit.

The Arab states have frequently been criticised for the lack of progress on human rights by many international organisations and NGOs, lately even by Arab civil society. The 1994 Arab Human Rights Charter is not yet ratified and we have to wait to see what concrete steps will be taken in the next few years to turn it into a binding commitment.

Last year and the year before, two reports prepared by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) singled out the lack of progress on the human rights/democracy front as being one of the main obstacles to a fuller development of Arab societies.

The EU has been constantly harping on the need for developing countries, including the Arab states, to achieve more rapid progress on this front. From 1989 the EU started to include so-called "human rights" clauses in its agreements with non-member countries.

However it was not made clear what kind of sanctions would be applied in case these partners transgressed the provisions of this clause. Nor did the EU show any marked enthusiasm of applying the stick where need be.

In 1995 the EU launched its Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) in Barcelona. One of the main pillars of the Barcelona Process was the development and enhancement of human rights and democratic principles. Admittedly the measures subsequently proposed to achieve this aim were rather timid and the results obtained predictably dismal.

Last year the Commission appeared to be beginning to turn the heat on again following the publication of the UNDP reports just mentioned. But now that it has an Arab League Declaration to work on it can turn the screw even harder.

Our choice of words may seem to confirm what many Arab spokesmen have said that the EU and the West want to interfere in the internal affairs of the Arab countries and impose their values.

Indeed, most Arab governments fear democratic reforms because they think they will destabilise them. Their opponents clamour that human rights and democratic principles are a Western imposition. Much ground here for an unholy alliance.

That alliance is however in trouble because it has led to stagnation and the Arab societies are not delivering what their citizens expect from them. When compared with other developing regions the Arab world is losing its competitive edge vis-à-vis Latin America, China and India and barely keeping ahead of sub-Saharan Africa.

The Arab people, the so called 'Arab street' have become aware, through the international media and the satellite dish, of the human rights enjoyed in the democracies and rightly desire that they enjoy them as well.

Whatever course the Arab governments may take, something has to snap. At the G-8 meeting on Sea Island, Georgia (USA) approval has been given to an American initiative baptised as the "Greater Middle East Initiative" which seeks to support reform in the Middle East and North Africa.

We will be commenting more on this initiative and the implications for the EU in it in future editions of this page. We do think however that there is a grave danger that this initiative may undermine the EU's Mediterranean Partnership.

One hopes that, following the approval of the latest UN Security Council resolution on Iraq, not only would trans-Atlantic relations be strengthened but also that a fresh leaf can be turned in the ME region which will see the EU-USA co-sponsoring and supporting political reform.

It is going to be a hard challenge whose chances of success will diminish further if President George Bush is re-elected, given his tendency to gallop ahead of his allies despite their contrary advice - and then to call them in when he finds himself chin-deep in the mud.

Iraq will not stabilise easily after the handover of power at the end of this month and Washington's current proper behaviour may change in 2005 either because a new President introduces new policies or because the incumbent will have freed himself of the need to be re-elected.