| |
Viewpoint
Democracy needs freedom of speech
Atrocities against the poor
2/2005 |
|
Democracy needs freedom of speech
The UNDP’s third Arab Human Development Report is complete. But the United States and Egypt are blocking publication. They do not want to be criticised in an official UN paper. The United Nations Development Programme is caught in a dilemma – but it will not let the authors down.
[ By Tillmann Elliesen ]
The first two Arab Human Development Reports (AHDR) were among the most important publications on development in recent years. The first report, in 2002, mercilessly listed the main shortcomings that cause the Arab world to regularly trail among the back markers in comparative statistics on political, economic and cultural matters. But the paper did more than just recount a tale of woe; it also made practical proposals for reforms, which were to be set out in more detail in three later reports. And to cap it all, the report was not drafted by a group of Western professors; it was written by intellectuals from all over the Arab world. Finally, authors from a region not normally known for self-criticism were tackling this region’s problems.
Volume 2 dealt with the role of knowledge in development and was published in autumn 2003. It attracted just as much attention among experts and in the media as the first report. The third and penultimate volume, on political reform, was due for publication in October 2004. But it failed to appear. Instead, rumours started spreading – and have now hardened into certainty: as the report does not suit the US government, President Bush and his advisors want to prevent its publication as an official UN paper.
This is a remarkable situation. The United States promises to bring democracy to the Arab world, but is not interested in Arab proposals on how freedom and good governance could be promoted in the region. Why not? Apparently, the foreword of the report is critical of the USA. The authors state that neither the war in Iraq nor Israeli occupation policy is conducive to democracy in the Middle East. Egypt’s President Hosny Mubarak seconds American objections – his autocratic leadership is said to be lambasted in the report as well. Other Arab despots can heave a sigh of relief.
The US administration, unsurprisingly, denies everything. But the New York Times, several news agencies and some respected Arab papers have carried reports, stating that editorial consultation between the authors and the UNDP proceeded as normal until autumn 2004 and then suddenly ground to a halt. Nader Fergany, the Egyptian scholar who coordinates the report series, says the authors made concessions to the USA and Egypt. But they evidently did not go far enough. According to Fergany, the US threatened to cut off nearly all its contributions to the UNDP if it publishes the report. Even last year, he says, the Bush administration penalised the Development Programme for critical remarks in the AHDR 2003 and reduced contributions by 12 million dollars.
The UNDP is caught in a dilemma – but, so far, its response is astute. First of all, it denies that Washington is applying pressure or threatening financial cuts. What else should the UN agency do? Relations between the super power and the world organisation are so strained that another row could have dire consequences – for the UN. Moreover, the UNDP makes it quite clear that, as one press release put it, “concerns have been raised by some governments about the content of the forthcoming report.“ According to the UNDP, however, “no formal discussions” have taken place. The agency does not comment on informal ones.
In late January, it was impossible to tell how this story would end. But the UNDP was certainly reluctant to drop the report. For a while, it worked on creating a new organisation with the authors to publish the paper. Later, however, Fergany announced that the UNDP might not back down after all. “The report will come,” a UNDP spokeswoman confirmed in January – without saying whether that meant with or without the UN logo. For the UNDP, it would be sad to lose the Arab Human Development Report. But for the authors and their message, things might actually turn out well. As Fergany points out, the United States and Egypt have unintentionally given them publicity. “The report is now more eagerly awaited than ever.”
And what about the US administration? It has, once more, discredited its policy for the Arab world. Democracy simply does not work without freedom of speech.
Tillmann Elliesen
is managing editor at D+C Development and Cooperation / E+Z Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit.
euz.editor@fsd.de
|
