Related Resources

Panelists discussed the challenges of promoting good governance and reform while countering terrorism in the Middle East. Participants focused on the trade-offs between security and liberty in countering terror, US attempts to promote good governance and reform in the Middle East, and the tensions between the short-term desire to combat terrorism and the long-term goal of promoting reform in the region.

Terrorism expert Edgar Brenner focused his remarks on the challenge of preserving civil liberties while combating terrorism and maintaining state security, calling the preservation of civil liberties the greatest challenge in dealing with terrorism. He questioned the degree to which a society will accept impingements of civil rights to ensure its security. He pointed to the case of Turkey as a successful attempt by a state to battle terrorists without encroaching on civil liberties. Turkey has a long history of addressing terrorism, specifically with regard to the PKK, the separatist Kurdish Worker’s Party, and Al-Qaeda. Despite the threats against Turkey’s security, the state has managed to harmonize its laws with European Union (EU) standards in order to gain acceptance into the EU. Despite continued security threats, Turkey has adopted many EU civil rights standards. A prime example is Turkey’s capturing and sentencing, but not executing, of former PKK leader, Abdullah Ocalan. Brenner called Turkey’s success an amazing story of our time. He also discussed how various countries are dealing with terrorist threats and cited recent trends in law schools to ‘globalize’ their teaching methods, which could have a significant effect on global governance. Lastly, Brenner touched on the PATRIOT Act and its progress in bridging the gap between intelligence and law enforcement, which increases US national security. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the act, Brenner called for a periodic legal audit of the bill.

Alina Romanowski discussed US efforts to promote good governance and reform in the Middle East. She put US efforts, particularly the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI), in the context of the war on terror, and cited it as an example of long-term reform efforts. MEPI represents the challenge of promoting reform from the outside and striking a balance between internal and external efforts at reform. The US hopes to support reform elements in Middle Eastern societies while also promoting other changes in the region, such as the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and a successful move towards democracy in Iraq. The political reform component of MEPI emphasizes basic freedoms, rule of law, good governance and democratization. In practice, this includes promoting elections, a democratic culture, citizenship, training for potential and current government officials, volunteerism, and an independent judiciary, which is primarily done through NGOs and grassroots organizations. Reform in the Middle East, according to Romanowski, will be a long and continuous process that must be coupled with other policy measures, such as improvements in trade and education. In discussing the tension between internal and external reform efforts, she concluded that change imposed from the outside would not have lasting benefits.

The final panelist, Ellen Laipson, discussed the tension between the short-term and long-term goals of the US for the Middle East. The US wants Middle Eastern governments to fight terrorism, which requires a strong and secure state, while also increasing long-term reforms, which requires the empowerment of individuals and civil society. Often, these goals clash, and Laipson questioned whether the US is sending mixed signals by simultaneously promoting these objectives. People in the Middle East may become increasingly cynical of US aims if the war on terror continuously takes precedence over reform. Laipson agreed with Romanowski that reform was the most strategic way to deal with terrorism in the long-term because it increases state confidence in law and order, provides for positive public engagement in support of the government, and can lead to a higher quality of education. Reform efforts and the war on terror are not incompatible, but the trade-offs must be recognized and discussed. Lastly, Laipson discussed how the Middle East perceives US power and its own power, focusing on how the US’s use of hard power could threaten internal reform efforts in the Middle East.

Questions focused on the pace of reform in the Middle East, how the US will engage Iran in the reform process without diplomatic relations, the risk that internal reformers will be tainted by MEPI support, and the role of religion in the reform process..