|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 9 February 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Gulf "democracy dividend" could be hard slog By William Maclean KUWAIT, Feb 7(Reuters) - For U.S. officials seeking a quick "democracy dividend" from war in Iraq, neighbouring Kuwait offers a reality check on the obstacles to reform in a volatile region. The tiny country, whose occupation by Iraq led to the 1991 Gulf War, has long been the most politically open of the conservative states that line the waterway's Arab western shore. Kuwaitis prize their all-male parliament, a feisty body that often takes painful bites out of government prestige, notably by long-running probes into alleged corruption and misgovernment. But many Kuwaitis say the potential of the 40-year-old assembly remains hobbled by the weight of tribal tradition and a culture of entitlement fostered by half a century of oil wealth. As a result, analysts say, the assembly's most effective operators are tribally-minded MPs bent on milking a nanny state for more handouts in preference to addressing national problems. "Democracy is a two-edged sword. If you use it well it brings benefits. If you do not use it well it can create chaos," parliament speaker Jassem al-Kharafi told Reuters. "What applies to Kuwait applies to all Third World democracies." U.S. President George W. Bush said last September that a turn to popular rule in Iraq could inspire reforms "throughout the Muslim world". Secretary of State Colin Powell launched a drive to promote democracy in the Middle East in December. But even in the small Gulf Arab states - much simpler and richer societies than Iraq's - the problems are formidable. In Kuwait, oil wealth and cradle-to-grave welfare means electoral politics often becomes a scramble for state largesse. "For democracy to work in this part of the world there has to be a modernising coalition at the helm," said political scientist Shafeeq Ghabra. "That coalition needs to envision a process of evolution that pushes against tribalism, favouritism and corruption and focuses on merit, independence and self-reliance." Whatever the outcome of Kuwait's men-only elections, the prime minister is by tradition a member of the 250-year-old Sabah dynasty, although his cabinet choice reflects in some measure the 50-seat assembly's political complexion. Political parties officially are barred but in practice have freedom to organise, campaign and meet government ministers. But opposition leaders say that immigration of tribal people from the desert hinterland in the 1960s and 1970s and the encouragement of tribal loyalties by some officials in elections has stymied the growth of modern democratic instincts. The government dismisses the accusation. Its supporters point out that princely rule is not absolute and that the constitution says sovereignty resides in the people. But some say the influence of favouritism remains, blocking any effort at reforms fostering meritocracy and initiative. "In Kuwait, tribal bonds have become stronger than they used to be because of the awareness of the benefits of the political process," said opposition liberal MP Abdullah al-Naibari. "The liberal trend in parliament is less radical than it used to be." "We cannot continue paying for everything," said Kharafi. "The time will come when we have to face serious decisions and the government and parliament will have a problem because the decisions will not be popular with those who elected us." Some Kuwaitis, including Kharafi, expect that party-based democracy will some day evolve out of the country's current compromise between popular participation and hereditary rule. "Is there a chance for the party system in Kuwait? It will come. Democracy cannot work without a party system with the government being in the majority," Kharafi said. "Unfortunately our parliament is still based on individualism or on tribalism, and this will take some time until it is corrected." The opposition-minded parliament, a mix of Islamists, conservatives, independents and liberals, was shut in 1976 and again in 1986 amid heightened political and security tensions. In early 1990 popular pressure for its revival resulted in pro-democracy riots cited later by Iraqi occupiers as evidence that the 250-year-old ruling Sabah dynasty had been unpopular. Kuwaitis ridicule that accusation. What the riots showed, they say, was simply the attachment of a naturally talkative and argumentative people to having a parliament. The assembly's relations with the government range from the coolly correct to the openly adversarial but no one questions the hereditary rule of the Sabah enshrined in the constitution. The topsy-turvy fortunes of the 50-seat chamber are watched closely around the Gulf as a potential model for other states. In November Bahrain revived its parliament after a 30-year break and Qatar has plans for a similar assembly. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
