October/November 1995, pgs. 72-73

Waging Peace

By Shawn L. Twing

National Democratic Institute Discusses Jordanian Elections

The National Democratic Institute For International Affairs (NDI) held a roundtable discussion about the July 11 Municipal Elections in Jordan and their implications for Jordanian democratization during a Sept. 6 meeting in Washington, DC. NDI sent a 13-member delegation to Jordan for the elections, with members from Yemen, the West Bank and Gaza, Lebanon, Bulgaria, Estonia and the United States. Two of the delegates, Olga Milosavljevic and Khaled Elgindy, spoke about their experiences during the visit to Jordan. The discussion was moderated by NDI senior associate Thomas Melia.

The two delegates explained that the latest round of elections in Jordan was different from previous attempts to democratize for four reasons: there were direct elections for members of the 259 municipalities in Jordan (260 including Amman), political parties were allowed, all 260 elections were held on the same day, and one-half of the Amman municipal council was elected (previously the entire council was appointed). Despite these changes, both Elgindy and Milosavljevic noted that there was a general feeling of apathy and lack of enthusiasm for the elections.

Describing his personal observations during elections in the Jordanian town of Madaba, Elgindy said that on the positive side he noticed a significant presence of female voters who, according to unofficial estimates, represented 49 percent of the voter turnout. Also, these elections marked the first time that women were elected as mayors in Jordan. On the other hand, he noticed some irregularities with the voting procedures that included inconsistent handling of illiterate voters and boxes of votes without official seals.

Milosavljevic discussed similar experiences and added that the Jordanian political experiment is still dependent on familial, clan and tribal loyalties. The overwhelming majority of the candidates did not announce their party affiliation until after the elections, relying instead on these other sources of political influence. Milosavljevic argued that "there was no pretense that primordial ties were not the basis of these elections."

Center Hosts Palestinian Democracy Researcher

The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine hosted Dr. Khalil Shikaki for a Sept. 8 discussion entitled "Elections and the Transition to Democracy in Palestine." Shikaki, the director of the Center for Palestine Research and Studies, an independent research organization located in the West Bank town of Nablus, is a member of the Independent Palestinian Election Group that seeks to foster and sustain emerging democratic movements in Palestine. During his presentation Dr. Shikaki assessed three important aspects of democratization in the West Bank and Gaza: the peace process, efforts at nation-building by the Palestinians and trends toward democratization within Palestinian society.

The peace process, according to Shikaki, has had both positive and negative aspects for the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. On the positive side, it has started the process toward the end of Israeli occupation and decreased anti-Israel violence. Negatively, however, it has become the focus of outside involvement in the Arab-Israeli conflict elevating Yasser Arafat and the peace process above all else, eclipsing some of the legitimate concerns of the territories' Palestinian residents.

Shikaki described nation-building and trends toward democratization in Palestine as being in their nascent phases, and he expressed concern about the role of the international community in framing the pending outcome of the peace process. On the upcoming elections in Gaza and the West Bank, Shikaki commented that "the man on the street isn't completely thrilled that the European Union countries are creating our electoral system." He argued, however, that the notion that Arab and/or Islamic societies are inherently biased against democracy is inaccurate. Shikaki maintained that "Palestinian society, the rank and file, is liberal," and that "public opinion is ready if the government is ready."

CSIS Discusses Islam, Economics

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, DC hosted Dr. Alan Richards, a professor of economics at the University of California, Santa Cruz and leading expert on the political economy of the Middle East, for a Sept. 7 examination of the primary causes of instability in the contemporary Middle East. Richards spoke extensively about the dismal economic situation confronting Arab countries in North Africa and the Middle East, arguing that poor and ineffective economies are more likely causes of instability than the resurgence of reactionary Islam in the region.

Among the economic problems cited by Richards were the fluctuation in oil prices during the last two decades, high population growth combined with stagnated or declining job opportunities, rapid urbanization, misuse of the region's limited water supplies and constraints to foreign direct investment and private investment in the region. Utilizing numerous charts and graphs, Richards made it clear that an already dismal situation will only get worse in the coming decades if the status quo is maintained.

Joining Richards was Anthony Cordesman, co-director of the Middle East Studies Program at CSIS, who also emphasized the role played by economics in the region's domestic difficulties. Adding to the visual information supplied by Richards, Cordesman presented statistical information about the individual Arab countries that added to the overall argument that economics, not radical Islam, is at the heart of social and political upheaval in the Arab Middle East.

Shawn L. Twing is the news editor of the Washington Report.