Filed under: Foreign Policy, History, Middle East, Terrorism | Tags: A Freedom Agenda, Despotism and Privation, The Arab Middle East
David Pryce-Jones wrote in National Review, of the violence spreading throughout the Arab world. He feels this is something big and probably historic. The world does not know how to respond to this violence. The root of the problem is that every Arab state is a despotism. Nobody is ruling with the consent of the governed. There is no freedom, no progress, even food must be subsidized by the government.
The ruler of Tunisia flunked. The ruler of Egypt tried to survive through cunning but his military colleagues wouldn’t let him get away with it. The rulers of Bahrain and Yemen are calibrating how much violence is needed to keep control; small numbers of the dead may be enough. The ruler of Syria began by bribing his people, but in the face of their desperation he is preparing for the bloodbath that may occur any day now. Carrying the logic of despotism to the bitter end, Qaddafi will either kill enough people to subdue the population and baffle the West, or be killed. We’ve been here before. Invading Iraq, President George W. Bush installed a rule that has the consent of the ruled. However long and difficult, that’s how to be rid of despotism. Reluctantly, almost accidentally, Obama could introduce in Libya the pluralism Bush deliberately gave Iraq. That’s marvelously ironic, or maybe the course of history is determined after all.
David Pryce-Jones is author of the highly regarded The Closed Circle which deals with the tribal nature of Arab despotism.
I have frequently recommended in these pages, many of the Hoover Institution’s “Uncommon Knowledge” videos. This week’s version features Victor Davis Hanson and Peter Berkowitz, scholars at the Hoover Institution, in a fascinating discussion on the violence in the Middle East. It is just over 30 minutes long, and worth every minute. I cannot recommend it highly enough.
We have spent a long time with “stability” as the rationale for supporting Arab despots. That time has ended, but it is extremely unclear just what will replace them. The people want freedom and opportunity, and not the chaos that the Shia/Sunni divide provides. Egypt, for example, is home to 85 million people who have no experience of democracy ever.
The Obama administration policy is, at best, unintelligible. The battle in Libya is not a war, but a “kinetic military exercise.” The Caliphate is a very real aspiration for the restoration of a pan Arab state, borderless, composed of the nations from Spain beyond Iran. Unlikely, says Berkowitz.
The correct approach for America has been handed down from Truman, Reagan and Bush — a Freedom Agenda. We forget that at our peril.
Filed under: Capitalism, Developing Nations, Economy, Foreign Policy, Freedom | Tags: A Freedom Agenda, Middle East North African States, More Than Democracy
“Arab nations lag behind rest of world economically, despite oil and natural gas,” read the headline in The Washington Post.
“The nations of the Arab Middle East sit atop perhaps half of the planet’s oil and a third of its natural gas reserves, yet the economies of the region are among the most stagnant.” Growth per-capita ranks behind Asia, Latin America and even the rest of Africa.” Unemployment, particularly among young people, remains high, and the size of government remains high. IMF officials estimate that Egyptian government agencies or state-run enterprises account for upward of 77 percent of the non-agricultural employment in Egypt.
Public-sector wages are kept artificially high, and encourage workers to seek public sector jobs. As a result, growth rates don’t keep pace with the population. The UN’s 2009 Arab Human Development Report found that Arab states as a whole were less industrialized than they were in 1970. Governments used revenue from oil and gas, and in the case of Egypt tourism and the Suez Canal, to maintain a large public workforce and cheap goods.
David Warren takes us back to 1952 in Egypt, in a short column, and reviews a bit of Egyptian history, with the overthrow of various kings and potentates, and resulting disorder. Is the overthrow of Mubarak just another in a long list of failed leaders?
Americans are apt to sympathize with the downtrodden, and with popular revolts, remembering our own colonial rebellion. But few countries have had our fortuitous path to democracy.
At the eve of the Revolution our population was around 4 million, widely scattered. We had enjoyed 156 years of relative freedom and little government, with plenty of opportunity for free land and freedom to do business. The people who came to settle in America were perhaps genetically selected (if that is possible) for courage, spirit and self-reliance. And many came to get away from some kind of government regulation or oppression. Philadelphia was our largest city, and the population in 1776 is estimated as somewhere in the vicinity of 35,000 to 40,000. Though there were English governors, the British government was across the Atlantic. And perhaps, above all, we were fortunate in our first President, who resisted all pressure to become a King, a president for life, or anything but a citizen temporarily elevated to office, and when he completed his term, he went along home.
Contrast that with the situation of Egypt now. Egypt is the 15th most populous country — at 82,079,636 according to 2011 estimates. Cairo has a population of an estimated 10.902 million, and the median age in Egypt is only 24. Around half the population lives on less than $2 a day, and a spike in food prices leads to trouble. Egypt is the world’s largest grain importer in most years — or to rephrase that, they can’t feed their own population. In 2009, Egyptian imports were $55 billion against $29 billion of exports. Subtract billions of tourism, and current news probably doesn’t have a lot of people going to see the pyramids, and they are in real trouble.
The general conversation suggests that it’s either democracy or the Muslim Brotherhood, so everyone is enthusiastic about Arab democracy. But democracy is more than just elections. It requires the freedom to organize, the gradual development of political parties, and the peaceful transfer of power. It requires the rule of law, but our notions of the rule of law include things like property rights, the ability to start a business, to borrow and lend, a free market. It requires a free press, or at least the free exchange of ideas. Perhaps in today’s world Twitter and Facebook must be a sort of substitute.
The U.S must support a freedom agenda. Our only agenda should be to help protect new nations against totalitarian parties. We can offer guiding principles. That’s what Americans do. We can be a firm voice standing for freedom and democracy. We should be clear-eyed about what we stand for.
The real terror that is eating away at the Arab world is socio-economic marginalization. A report by Hernando De Soto, the Peruvian economist, noted that 92% of Egyptians hold their property without normal legal title. The largest employer in Egypt is the extralegal sector.They do not have access to ordinary business organizational forms that would allow them to grow in the way that legal enterprises do. To open a small bakery in Egypt, they found would take more than 500 days. Legal institutions fail the majority of people. To get title to a vacant piece of land would take more than 10 years of dealing with red tape.
To empower the people, and allow economic growth from the bottom up for an aspiring people requires reform of existing legal institutions. A freedom agenda is not supported by dithering and uncertainty. It requires a firm voice standing up for American Principle. That really isn’t so hard, it just means knowing what American principles are.