Posted on 10/09/2006 7:45:04 AM PDT by Valin
SEPTEMBER 2006 brought an unprecedented development in the Middle East: The government of Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh held open, contested presidential elections. Candidates were able to rally and campaign freely, each of the five candidates was given equal airtime on state-run television, and the international press and elections monitors were welcomed to Yemen to observe. This homegrown move toward democracy represents a remarkable political experiment that, if successful, will provide the region with a model of a state that is Arab, Islamic, genuinely democratic, and untainted by American interference.
Of course, the incumbent won. As the second-longest serving head of state in the Middle East, behind Libya's Mu'ammar Qaddafi, it is not surprising that Saleh was elected to serve another seven-year term. What is surprising is that, as an editorial in the Yemen Times put it following the elections, Yemen has "removed the 99% victor stereotype." Saleh got 77.2 percent of the vote, while his chief rival, the charismatic oil magnate Faisal bin Shamlan, received 21.8 percent. This is in sharp contrast to Yemen's previous presidential "elections," in which Saleh received 96 percent of the vote. Recent "free elections" elsewhere in the Middle East have resulted in votes for the authoritarian incumbent of 88.6 percent (in Egypt) and 94.5 percent (in Tunisia). Leslie Campbell, Director of the National Democratic Institute's Middle East Program, which assisted in monitoring Yemen's elections, says that in this year's elections, Saleh's campaign managers "actually were worried. I think that for an Arab incumbent to only get 70-some percent of the vote would be pretty hard for him to take. This wasn't just a showpiece election."
The Yemeni elections were not perfect. Following Saleh's victory, his rivals alleged vote-buying and other forms of fraud at the ballot stations. There was election-related violence, including the deaths of 51 people in a stampede at a Saleh campaign rally. Still, the E.U. Election Observation Commission declared the election "an open and genuine political contest." While there is much room for improvement, Yemen's presidential election "blows the other Gulf countries out of the water," says Campbell. "Having watched democratic developments for 10 years in the Middle East, this may have been the most significant election so far. This is the first time in an Arab country that a head of state has actually created the situation where there was a possibility, albeit a remote possibility, of defeat. The fact that somewhere between 20 and 25 percent of the population felt free to go out and vote for the opposition candidate is quite incredible."
Yemen's cutthroat presidential campaigning is an anomaly in the Middle East, where the idea of having a military general who has ruled for over a quarter-century mount a campaign for reelection would sound preposterous to many. But Saleh campaigned vigorously to subdue the mounting threat from bin Shamlan, a popular former MP who ran under the slogan, "A President for Yemen, not a Yemen for the President." Bin Shamlan, who ran as a member of the Joint Meeting Parties, a coalition of five parties including Islamist and socialist groups, made oil-price stabilization and decentralization of authority focal points of his presidential platform. Meanwhile, Saleh's party, the General People's Congress, attempted to portray the 28-year incumbent as "the Knight of the Arabs" and an "Achiever of National Miracles" who was committed to combating terrorism and corruption.
After nearly 30 years being dogged by accusations of cronyism and mismanagement of Yemen's oil resources, why did Saleh decide to hold competitive elections now? Many authoritarian leaders hold sham elections in an attempt to improve their image, but the Yemeni elections were not just political theater. In an interview with Al Jazeera reporter Ahmad Mansour a week before the elections, Saleh said, "I am proud that I have established this experiment. It was not imposed on me. Nobody imposed it; not the street, not the political powers, and not the West or the United States."
The reasons for the move toward democracy are twofold. First, Saleh has realized that a decentralization of power is necessary to govern his country's refractory population. Yemen is a tribal society, with mountainous regions that are home to numerous armed groups, including jihadist militants, which the Saleh regime has found increasingly difficult to control. This security threat was highlighted when, just five days before the election, officers foiled a group of would-be suicide bombers who had planned to attack two of the country's oil facilities. Officials in Sana'a are also faced with a sometimes violent secessionist movement from the formerly Communist south, as well as tensions between the Sunni majority and the Shiite elite. The best way to manage this instability may be to incorporate the schismatic groups into a competitive political system.
A second reason for a democratic transition is Yemen's extreme poverty. It is the poorest country in the Middle East, and its small oil reserves are expected to run dry within the next decade. Yemen is in desperate need of foreign aid, which has been curtailed by the World Bank and the IMF in response to the Saleh regime's corruption. Genuine efforts to democratize could lead to an increase in aid from overseas, which will be increasingly essential for Yemen's burgeoning population of 21 million, nearly half of which lives below the poverty line.
For the Bush administration, which has made democracy promotion central to its fight against terrorism, Yemen is a reminder of the effectiveness of financial incentives. Scott Carpenter, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, believes that Saleh is pursuing democratic reforms partially in response to sanctions from the Millennium Compact Corporation. The MCC, created by the Bush administration in 2004, provides development aid to nations that practice "sound political, economic, and social policies" based on annual evaluations. Yemen's MCC eligibility was revoked in 2005 after it failed to meet minimum requirements for 14 of the MCC's 16 indicators, including "Control of Corruption" and "Fiscal Policy." Carpenter stresses that, while Yemen still has a long way to go in order to meet MCC thresholds, the 2006 elections, "are going to be seen as a substantial improvement . . . and will improve their scores" in next year's MCC evaluations.
Though Yemen's 2006 elections were flawed, they are also evidence of unprecedented progress toward political liberalization in the Middle East. Reforms in Yemen could potentially serve as a catalyst for change throughout the region. Leslie Campbell of the National Democratic Institute envisions a situation where neighboring countries say to themselves, "'Look at Yemen! If this poor little country can actually run a decent election," then why can't we?
The enemies of democracy (even in America) applaud all of these contested elections. It is the only way they can build up distrust in the system.
George Soros has said that the electorate (the voters) are the problem in America.
Interesting article except for the glaring omission that democracy is in fact Mob Rule.. Tribal law.. Sharia Law "IS" democracy..
George Soros has said that the electorate (the voters) are the problem in America.
He's absolutly correct, we refuse to listen to him and do what he wants. So in his world that's a problem.
(this is also a good thing)
Theoretical you're correct. Practically speaking you're wrong. When most people hear/see the word democracy they think free open elections. (IMO) way to many people here nitpick on this word.
Another little known Bush program that is producing results as opposed to much balleyhooed Democrat programs that are all sizzle and no steak. The same will be true of our efforts in Iraq if the Democrats don't regain power.
It's the carrot and the stick.
FYI
Yemen to seek $10 billion in aid over five years
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=17775
Total investment of $25 billion be needed in 2006-2010 plan to begin bringing Yemen to level with GCC states.
DUBAI - Yemen is to ask donors for 10 billion dollars in aid over five years to help prepare the impoverished republic for membership of the oil-rich Gulf Cooperation Council, a government minister said in comments published Monday.
Planning Minister Abdel Karim al-Arhabi told the London-based Arabic-language daily Al-Hayat that the appeal would be made at a donors' conference in the British capital on November 15-16.
(snip)
Thats because most have no idea theres a difference on the meaning of "A" Democracy and the word democracy.. One is a political system the other voting mechanism..
Also, there are three words found NOWHERE in the American Constitution.. 1) democracy.. 2) democratic.. 3) democrat.. Its by design.. its not an oversight.. The founders knew "A" democracy was the source of "socialism".. which is Slavery by Givernment.. They didn't know the word socialism(invented later) but they knew what it was and is.. Marx and Lenin knew too..
------------------------------------
"How do you tell a Socialist:- It's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an Anti-Socialist someone who understands Marx and Lenin" -Ronald Reagan
Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
Democracy is indispensable to socialism. The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin
The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.- Karl Marx
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.