Middle East Policy

Here is the chairs' summary of the Forum for the Future 2005: The Forum for the Future 2005 Official website FORUM FOR THE FUTURE 12 NOVEMBER 2005 KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN CHAIRS' SUMMARY Ministers of the countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa (BMENA) together with their G8 counterparts and other partners met together in Bahrain for the second Forum for the Future, to review progress made since the inaugural meeting in Rabat in December 2004, and to reaffirm our determination to work closely together to achieve our shared goals. Ministers gathered on the eve of the Forum for the Future to discuss a broad range of issues of particular importance to the region; Ministers were appalled by the horrendous attacks against innocent people in Jordan on 9 November. They strongly condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and reaffirmed that terrorist acts cannot be justified or legitimised by any cause or grievance. They agreed on the importance of unity, cooperati

Some dictators in the Middle East are really afraid these days. That became very obvious. Mr. Mubarak has surprised the world and stalled the final declaration of the Forum of the Future. He needs to create some cards to play in front of the pro-democracy U.S. considering the fact that he has the strongest pro-democracy opposition in the Arab world. Mr. Mubarak has refused the NGOs to get a direct funding from the international community. Reportedly, he had support from some Arab governments in doing that. Here I have some evidences of my hypothesis that the reform in the Middle East needs both the indigenous civil society and the international effort as the indispensable pillars. The Middle East despots clearly believe in that, then, they are doing their best to prohibit the connection between the two parties to stall the entire process of reform and change. I hope also this incident to make it clear to the international community and interested scholars and researchers, what many ref

I previously illustrated my viewpoint of the Forum for the Future in principle. What the Forum for the Future has yielded – the two foundations-- are good but our primary problem is still the authoritarianism and somewhere the totalitarianism. To reform the Middle East we have primarily to change the political system of the Middle East. This objective needs to be accomplished an international effort rests on the international standards which normally compiled by the international order. Considering the fact that the post-cold war international order is neither designed nor provided for this task. Any change at the level of the international norms and conduct needs to be preceded with preliminary and justifying thought and discourse supported by the international powers, here, the international power. This process is what I think is under way in such international occasions like the Forum for the Future. Hence, I see the primary importance and effect of the Forum for the Future is

The "forum for the future" constitutes an unprecedented and significant opportunity to address the Middle East reform at the international level. It is very important to consider the Middle East reform as an item on the international agenda and make advantage of any available international effort. I need some time to evaluate the "forum for the future" comprehensively but there are some points I want to highlight. The U.S. has succeeded in putting the Middle East reform on the international agenda to be an international objective, in the wide meaning. Highlighting this subject internationally is very helpful in prompting related course of action in the Middle East and helpful too, in initiating the real international commitment. The international commitment and related efforts are still a matter of policy, the single policy of each state, which normally motivated by interests. The international order is still lagging to tackle this objective. Promoting democracy as

Here is a recent policy watch of the U.S. efforts, stances and statements concerning democracy promotion worldwide: (Source: International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State ) U.S. Aid Agency Names 23 Countries Eligible for FY 2006 Funding Millennium Challenge Corporation bases decision on countries' policies By Kathryn McConnell Washington File Staff Writer Washington -- The United States' Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) has named 23 countries eligible to apply for funding during the fiscal year that began October 1 (fiscal year 2006). The selected countries from the “low income” category are: Armenia, Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, East Timor, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Honduras, Lesotho, Madagascar, Mali, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tanzania and Vanuatu. The MCC Board also selected three countries as eligible for the new “lower middle income” category. Two of the countries, El Salvador and Namibia, are new to MCC projects.

The international community, which was divided over the Middle East policy in the stage of Iraq war, has achieved a historic unity over the "new deal" concerning the Middle East. The differences about liberation and democratization of Iraq were, in my view, due to narrow national interests besides the state of powers—including military--, which did not enable France and Germany to play a leading role at that global and delicate level. Iraq war is not something affects just Iraq; it is a core of new reality would affect the entire Middle East. The democratization of Iraq represents a course of action accompanied by a comprehensive strategy and a new vision of the Middle East. It is to make a new reality and to reshape the geopolitics of the region. That resulted in a political phenomenon, many scholars called it the Arab spring. At this stage, the defiant European powers have found a new context in the Middle East they have no share in neither prompting nor managing it. Hence,