Obama administration to focus on internal, local reform versus external regime change.

Today, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace held a panel discussion of the progress made by the Obama Administration of addressing human rights in Arab countries. The panel, “Human Rights and Obama’s Policies in the Arab World,” demonstrated a consensus in favor of focusing on reform driven from within each nation versus external intervention and regime change, albeit revealing a disconnection between Washington and the Middle East regarding the effectiveness of government-based reforms.

The panelists each addressed human rights abuses that continue to occur in recent years, with a particular focus on Egypt and Yemen. The diverse audience was reminded of the recently arrested Egyptian bloggers, the police brutality against Khalid Said from an internet café, the torture of Egyptian woman Mona Thabet, the Kuwaiti man who was jailed for criticizing the Amir, and Yemen’s security challenges and lack of dialogue and equal opportunity. Secretary Michael Posner of the Human Rights bureau at the Department of State, highlighted the significance of joining the United Nations Human Rights Council, as it promotes a universal standard on human rights, and end to torture, and a commitment to helping societies from within. Additionally, Secretary Tamara Wittes of the Near Eastern Affairs bureau spoke of working with the Yemeni government to eliminate police brutality as well working with NGOs to develop a more meritocratic system less based on tribe and patronage and more based on the empowerment of local youth and adults.

Although the panelists from the region generally agreed with the long term goals of the Washington panelists, both Bahey el din Hassan of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights and Amal Basha of the Yemeni Embassy agreed that a large gap exists between what is written on paper in an agreement between the US and any Middle Eastern nation, and what actually occurs in reality. Firstly, the negative US contributions have taken a toll on credibility in the Middle East, even under the Obama administration. Hassan cited the current administration’s failure to investigate Israeli crimes in Gaza despite opposing continued Israeli settlements, and Basha mentioned American unconditional support to the Yemeni government in power. Both policies are examples that are perceived as negative by the resident population. Another point made by Basha was the fact that Yemen has five different institutions of “Security”, yet ongoing human rights violations and denial of the right of assembly have led citizens to feel less secure. Overall, the support for the Obama administration’s more locally-driven methods of engaging the people of the Arab world was unanimous, but skepticism remains regarding agreements made between governments.

Written by Safadi USA Intern Helen Burns

Spotlight Series: Association for Development of Rural Capacities

Developing Lebanon's Spotlight Series is back! Send your compliments to this week's spotlight, the Association for the Development of Rural Capacities!

The Association for the Development of Rural Capacities (ADR) was founded in 1996 as a Lebanese NGO having no political, religious, or familial affiliations. Its mission is to empower and integrate marginalized people living mainly in South Lebanon through sustainable economic and social development.

The objectives of ADR are:

• Improve access to financial services, training, tools, and information.
• Facilitate access to the labor market and develop income generating projects in rural and semi-urban communities.
• Promote partnerships and decentralized cooperation.

ADR's cherished image is that of an institution with a team of professionals in the field of development economics. While recognizing the importance of relief and advocacy, ADR's focal theme is socio-economics and its primary means of intervention is through development with the spread of financial services, the dissemination of technical formation, diffusion of agricultural services, and support decentralized processes.

Working with street vendors, market workers, craftsmen, farmers, small entrepreneurs, women, youth, refugees, and local authorities and stakeholders from the most impoverished areas of Lebanon has strengthened ADR’s position as a leading developmental NGO in Lebanon.

Since its creation and through the continuous private and institutional support allowed ADR to design and implement projects according to the communities' wants and needs made available through its four key programs:

• Micro Credit
• Vocational Training
• Agriculture
• Social services & decentralized cooperation

ADR's values are:

• Commitment to the principles of equity, gender equality, youth, environment, good governance, and social cohesion.
• Commitment to poverty reduction through the dissemination of knowledge, technology and sources of empowerment.
• Dedication to creating synergy between NGOs, donors, partners, volunteers, local civil societies and local authorities for the purpose of socio-economic sustainability.
• Commitment to efficiency, transparency and accountability to ensure the implementation of international standards at every level of operations.
• Commitment to micro-credit as a reliable, self sustainable financial service to alleviate poverty in Lebanon’s urban and rural areas.
• Commitment to the expansion and improvement of education, vocational training and social conditions.
• Commitment to agricultural advancement and innovation for financial, social and environmental sustainability.
• Dedication to decentralized cooperation and good governance to promote development.
• Commitment to the progress and solidarity within the Euro-Mediterranean partners.
• Commitment to population assistance in the face of unforeseen circumstances, crises or economic change.

Oh the wonders of the world!

Once again the Jeita Grotto is up to become one of the 7 Wonders of Nature. You can vote on the Grotto among other natural wonders.

But I have to ask, does Lebanon deserve it?

I can already hear the blood boiling in the minds of some who read that question, but listen to this example: Lebanon is in danger of losing its UNESCO World Heritage status on the Qadisha Valley because of the way Lebanese treat the site. Not only has it become overdeveloped thanks in part to a lack of enforcement of building codes and development laws (and rampant corruption to boot), but garbage from family picnics is strewn across the area, showing an utter lack of respect for the area.

Qadisha is just one example of this. Uncontrolled and unplanned growth has ravished natural and historic sites across the country and has contributed to deforestation, inadequate sanitation and water networks, and the illegal exploitation of quarries and coastline. Even when licenses are secured, companies do not comply with their terms. Violations of building permits is the norm, which has resulted in the eradication of natural resources and the conversion of agricultural and forest land into unplanned built up areas.

These laws should be enforced. A 1999 report by the Ministry of Finance entitled “Programme for Financial Reform” acknowledged the damage inflicted on the country’s natural resources and the potential devastating consequences the country faces if this continues, yet a decade later the government has largely been ineffective in acting upon the findings of this and other reports.

And so I ask again - does Lebanon deserve to have the Jeita Grotto or other natural or historical sites on any kind of international awards list?

Well, yes. But it's going to take a lot of effort and changes in behavior to make sure these great places stay great. It's up to civil society to fight for the rule of law, combat corruption, and to raise public awareness about the consequences of over-development and littering.

Increasing the Effectiveness of U.S. Foreign Aid

The House Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing last week entitled "Human Rights and Democracy Assistance: Increasing the Effectiveness of U.S. Foreign Aid."

Witnesses were:

Ms. Jennifer L. Windsor
Executive Director
Freedom House

Thomas Carothers, J.D.
Vice President for Studies
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Elisa Massimino, J.D.
President and Chief Executive Officer
Human Rights First
[Press Release on the Hearing]

The Honorable Lorne W. Craner
President
International Republican Institute
(Former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor)

The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 separated military and non-military aid, unified existing aid efforts, and established USAID. The United States government is in the process of reviewing and rewriting the act to make foreign assistance more effective.

The United States foreign assistance program really began after World War II when the U.S. funded reconstruction projects in Europe and Asia. The aftermath of the war saw the creation of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. World War II ended 65 years ago, and foreign assistance programs and organizations have had a bumpy ride ever since, as most U.S. aid programs focused on fighting the spread of communism. The 1980s saw the creation of the National Endowment of Democracy and its four core institutes: National Democratic Institute, International Republican Institute, Center for International Private Enterprise, and Solidarity Center. NED and its core institutes focused on fighting communism in Eastern Europe and Latin America during the eighties. When the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union collapsed, there was much confusion in the foreign policy world, as no one knew what the future held. Francis Fukuyama even went as far as to proclaim the "end of history." Foreign assistance declined in importance in the nineties. September 11, 2001 changed that.

One of the major problems with the way foreign assistance is awarded - and this point was brought up by all of the panelists involved in the hearing - is that foreign governments, rather than people, have too much input into where foreign assistance goes. For example, President Obama’s engagement of the Mubarak regime in Egypt has not only alienated civil society activists who had received substantial amounts of democracy funding under the previous administration, but has resulted in the crackdown on, arrest of, and even murder of many of these activists. Governments that have well-organized lobbies, like the Jordanian government, receive more foreign assistance than those that do not. In the case of Lebanon, the factionalized nature of its political system adversely affects the country’s ability to lobby for funding and has kept US policymakers in the dark about what the country actually needs, causing these policymakers to focus almost exclusively on Hizbollah and Israel in any discussion that deals with Lebanon instead of on issues that could make a difference in the lives of the Lebanese people.

That guy who was President of the United States for eight years at the beginning of this century made democracy promotion a major part of his foreign policy, and civil society organizations across the globe reaped the benefits of increased funding. Now, civil society activists like Saad Eddin Ibrahim are criticizing the Obama administration for reducing funds for democracy promotion programs and giving control over foreign assistance funding to despots like Pharaoh Mubarak, who just renewed the Emergency Law. Saad points to elections in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon, Kuwait, Jordan, Yemen, Egypt and Mauritania that took place in 2005-2006 as evidence that democracy promotion programs work.

Despite the best efforts of individuals like Ziad Baroud and Ghassan Moukheiber and of civil society organizations like LADE, political reform in Lebanon has been virtually non-existent. Very few seats in the 2009 parliamentary elections or the 2010 municipal elections were truly contested campaigns. Since gaining independence from France in 1943, the Lebanese political system has been characterized by sectarian division and corruption despite many attempts at reform. Until the confessional system is abolished, and it does not appear that will happen any time soon, the political system will continue to be just a shadow of a genuine democracy.

This doesn't mean that funding for political reform programs in Lebanon should cease. However, the focus should be on grassroots programs like NDI's Citizen Lebanon, which will help grow a new generation of active citizens who understand that real democracy is based on merit and competition, not wasta and corruption.

Grassroots programs, not large funding packages to governments, are the way to genuine reform. It remains to be seen how any rewrite of the Foreign Assistance Act will change the way aid is dished out and how effective it will be. One thing is certain, though: without the input of actual civil society activists who are the beneficiaries of such assistance, foreign assistance programs will continue to have little sustainable impact.


Read Project on Middle East Democracy's notes on the hearing.

Victory for Civil Society!

Safadi Foundation USA commends the decision by the Lebanese Parliament to postpone the vote on a draft E-transactions law. The postponement of this bill for one-month represents a victory to civil society organizations in Lebanon, who responded in an organized fashion to educate the public, politicians, and other relevant stakeholders about the possible implications of this legislation. The online campaign showed the effectiveness of social media as a popular and rising force. At the same time, the issue highlights the broader debate regarding the use of technology in advancing democratic freedoms and good governance.

The draft E-transactions law prompted concerns this week by civil society organizations and the private sector in Lebanon. If passed, the bill would have enforced unchecked regulatory measures on the internet that stifle democratic governance and reduce the country’s friendly business climate. For more info about this law please visit the Social Media Exchange website.

In addition, news about recent efforts by the Government of Lebanon to enforce a 2002 telecommunication law that bans VoIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) tools such as Skype represent a worrisome turning point and undermines Lebanon’s freedoms. Based on the reactions by Lebanese, it seems many did not even know that such modes of communication were illegal in the first place until the government installed equipment last week that blocks most VoIP programs.

The lesson learned is that public awareness, open debate, and comprehensive oversight by all stakeholders are vital to maintaining a healthy democratic government. The actions by the many groups who cooperated to get the word out about the E-Transactions law and other restrictive measures on internet freedom in Lebanon show that progress is indeed being made when it comes to strengthening the role of civil society groups in Lebanon.

Safadi Foundation USA hopes that parliament will play a positive role in engaging citizens and addressing their concerns so that a revised law is passed that reflects the open and competitive nature of Lebanon’s environment and entrepreneurial community.

The Skype's the Limited, Part II

So it's true. The Lebanese government is set to pass a very bad e-transactions law that gives the government unchecked authority over e-commerce. Remember when we wondered if Lebanon would ever HAVE a government after it took ten thousand years to form one? Perhaps it'd be better if they'd never formed it.

Remember back when the old Phoenicians made the land now known as Lebanon the center of trade and commerce for the world? Ok, maybe not. That was a long time ago. (Some of the dinosaurs in the current government may remember...) The thing about Lebanon is that it has always been a center for trade. Commerce is why the country managed to survive its 15 year long suicide attempt. Commerce is why the country continues to function even as the government drowns in its own nepotism and corruption.

But allowing the monopolistic telecomms corporations and its governmental cronies to restrict the freedom of people to talk to each other is not commerce. It's corporate fascism at its finest.

This law runs contrary to every principle of democracy and free market economy to which Lebanon claims to adhere. Passing this law would be a major step backwards in the country's democratic development.

Around the interwebs:

SMEX says ACT NOW: Stop the E-transactions law.

Qifa Nabki's Missed Call Nation.

Lebanon is stifling your freedom: Daily Star article.

Maya Zankoul nails another one.

Beirut Spring

Identity Chef

Independence 05

Trella

Beirutiyat

Sarahilal

Jad Aoun

Stop the E-transactions law Facebook page.

Al-Akhbar article

Life in Slow Motion.

POMED

@stopthislaw Twitter account

We will keep you updated on the developments...

The Skype's the Limited

Well now, this is disturbing. The Lebanese government seems intent on keeping Lebanon in the stone age when it comes to technology. This week, it activated equipment to block Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services.

Congratulations, Lebanon! You join such healthy democratic societies as China and UAE who block VoIP.

While Skype is still functional at the moment, it is in violation of the telecomms law, and if the shortsighted telecomms policies are fully enforced, Skype could go at any time.

So, who benefits from this law, anyway? Why, it's none other than Alfa and MTC, which have a virtual monopoly on the telecomms market! And don't forget the government can collect all of those taxes that wouldn't be collected when people use VoIP for free or reduced rates!

And what do the Lebanese people think about all of this? Do they even know? Probably not. The Daily Star asks:

Where do civil society groups stand on this core issue? Are they still busy creating awareness about how to lobby local municipalities for water and decent roads? This is not necessarily a call for telecoms privatization, it is high time for a digital user protest and concerted lobbying efforts by consumers, entrepreneurs, and activists alike.

I found that second question odd. I mean, are they saying that water and decent roads are not worthwhile ventures?

The truth is, many Lebanese civil society organizations are not well-versed in the art of advocacy. How are they supposed to tackle such a convoluted issue as VoIP, when most people don't understand what is VoIP?

Bridging the Divide in Lebanon

via Alternative Society Organization