Arab world can’t endlessly take its cue from the US

Arabs should stop waiting for the US to do something for them. But to be effective Arab societies need to reform, argues HA Hellyer

Mourners grieve over the coffin during the funeral of policemen, killed by a tank rigged with explosives, during a funeral in Najaf, south of Baghdad. Reuters

Every year, the Brookings Institution holds a gathering called the US-Islamic World Forum. Invariably, it is an intriguing assembly of personalities from Muslim communities primarily within the Arab world and the US. Conferences such as these are valuable in order to facilitate the exchange of ideas but all too often, it seems that the expectations are wholly different. The Arab world has its own set of priorities and the US has another and the sooner this is realised, the more quickly will both be able to move forward to a genuinely common agenda.

The wonders of modern technology meant that I was able to listen to some of the discussions at the forum, although I was unable to attend in person this year. The expectation that the US will – or even ought to – share the Arab world’s specific priorities about the future of the region was implicit in many of the interventions. But there was a refreshingly different angle offered by the likes of the former foreign minister of Jordan, Marwan Muasher, who also serves as vice president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. It is a perspective that many more in the region should share.

That the US has its own strategic interests in the Arab world has been clear ever since it became a superpower in terms of foreign policy impact in the Arab region. Otherwise, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict would look entirely different. The Iraq war may never have happened in 2003. The region would be very different.

One can argue that American values should dictate its policies in the region. Yet powerful countries have historically followed their own short-term interests when crafting foreign policy even though they might hope that their principles generally inform the longer-term vision. The US is no different and there shouldn’t be any surprises in that regard.

Yet, so many in the Arab world wait for the US to take more of a forward role in the region, whether it is in the Syrian conflict or the promotion of good governance. While one can certainly make the argument that both of these would be congruent with American values, and arguably more beneficial to American national interests in the long term, this does not make for much impetus in a short term calculation. Indeed, in the short term, the main concern of the US lies within a security paradigm, with the spread of ISIL.

It is in the Arab world’s short term, medium term and long term interest to focus on human security. That frame of security was defined by the United Nations Development Programme more than 20 years ago as covering a number of areas, including political security and community security. Yet good governance, which provides political security, is hardly the norm in the Arab world. And sectarianism, which reduces community security, is the norm for many state and non-state actors in the region.

This is why it was refreshing to hear Jordan’s former foreign minister tell the forum that solutions to the region’s problems should come from within. He was making a genuine and honest point. But all too often, when the banner of autonomy is raised in the region, it’s not to focus the energies of Arab governments and states on a sustainable way of providing human security. On the contrary, autonomy is used as a code word to escape international accountability – from the West or otherwise – for abuses within the Arab world in various areas.

It would be a mistake to do the same again and disregard what the minister said. The security challenges that face the Arab world right now are, first and foremost, the result of failings within the Arab world. Part of that has to do with ideology, one that is Arab-born and Arabgrown. A large part of it has to do with how states have forced civil society to function – or not function – across the region. Extreme groups function best when other, more reasonable alternatives, are marginalised. They function best of all when such alternatives are simply not allowed.

With the revolutionary uprisings that began in 2011, the Arab world had an opportunity to provide a series of alternatives. Apart from Tunisia, those opportunities seem like a distant memory. But in allowing the opportunities to languish, the main beneficiaries have been, as always, far-right radical groups. It should be the Arab imperative to address that – not because of any impetus from external forces – but because it is an Arab strategic necessity.

There are many reasons why the Arab world should strive to be more autonomous and forward thinking in its own region, rather than relying or waiting for leadership from beyond. But real autonomy will not simply be about forging a new path, distinct from the West as a whole or the US in particular. Real autonomy will be about leadership and forging the best path for every citizen in this region by protecting and safeguarding their fundamental rights. The Arab citizen, whether in Syria, Palestine, or anywhere else, deserves that just as much as anyone else anywhere in the world. The Arab world will never be truly free unless every Arab citizen is too.

Dr HA Hellyer is an associate fellow in international security Studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London, and the Centre for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC

On Twitter: @hahellyer