9 February 2007

Without direct attribution....

So, clarification of the Chatham House rule:"When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed"). Here are some of the interesting ideas generated in the Middle East meeting.

Firstly, British policy in the Middle East is viewed within the region in the context of its prior imperial activities. Coloniser Britain acted on a civilising mission, driven by British ideals and values. Contemporary efforts are likewise driven by values-based foreign policy (democracy, human rights, etc). The latter bears more than a passing resemblance to the former. Western states need to move away from the presumption that they can 'decide what to do about the middle east'. The contemporary region is less and less amenable to the imposition of external priorities. The old 'hub and spoke' world view is outdated and delusional.

Second, there exists a perception in the Middle East that 'values' of Britain and the US are infused with Christianity - and that western countries lack self-awareness of this. Even if not embodied in the structures of state, Islam is culturally important to middle-eastern countries. The rationalisation of western foreign policy in terms of 'values' can be interpreted as a threat to the place of Islam in society. Democracy is not viewed as a universal value but western, and a trojan horse for westernisation. Further, conservative (not radical) societies support some values (human rights) but not necessarily others (democracy). This value structure is deeply embedded and must be respected.

Finally, policy makers should focus their energies on embedding human rights norms in the middle east (an attainable goal) rather than seeking to impose democracy. Iraq demonstrates that elections and parliaments are not sufficient foundations for stable societies. Further, democracy can serve to legitimise and mainstream radical fringe groups.

Interesting thoughts, appearing here in slimmed down form.

No comments: