Straw democracy speech in full

Jack Straw: Reform is needed for the Middle East to meet its challenges

Here is the full text of UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw's speech to the Fabian Society, "Promoting Democracy: A Progressive Foreign Policy Agenda".

Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to talk today about the emergence of democracy in the Middle East.

It's clear that something very important is going on.

Ten days ago, the new, democratically-elected Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, came to London and set out his plans for reform and for building a democratic state of Palestine.

In Lebanon, we have seen the power of people in action, particularly the young; and we have seen the diversity of views on the street.

The international community is united in calling on the government of Syria to comply with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559 and withdraw from Lebanon.

We want to see a new government chosen without foreign interference, and acting in the interests of the Lebanese people in preparing for free and fair elections in line with the Lebanese constitution.

In Iraq, 8.5 million people defied terrorism and intimidation to vote in their country's first democratic elections for more than a generation - a turnout of 58%, comparable, despite the enormous risks, to that in the UK at the last election.

In Afghanistan, President Karzai, himself newly-elected through a democratic process, is preparing for legislative elections later this year.

Saudi Arabia held municipal elections last month - a small but important step on a process which the Saudi Government has said it will expand, most importantly to women.

Countries such as Morocco, Qatar, Algeria, Jordan and Bahrain are moving ahead with reform.

Egypt is debating an amendment to its constitution that would allow contested and direct Presidential elections, potentially opening up political life to a degree unprecedented in its national history.

It will be for historians to judge - at greater distance and detachment than I can offer - just how much the end of the Saddam regime in Iraq, and the free elections there in January, have contributed to what is now happening.

But I do not buy the claim that all this has nothing to do with Iraq, or America, or the west; or that, as some seem to be arguing, it could even be the dawn of a new dark age.

A combination of factors is clearly at work, amongst which are also the changes in the Palestinian leadership, and the explosion of information through stations such as Al-Jazeera and through the Internet.

Protests in Beirut have been calling for a Syrian withdrawal

But more important than the question of what is behind this wave of change, is that of how best we can support it.

For this is a process which is greatly in the interests of the Middle East, of the UK and of the whole international community.

Reform is urgently needed if the Middle East is to meet the enormous challenges which it faces.

The World Bank has estimated that the region needs 100 million new jobs by 2020, as young and rapidly-growing populations move into a labour force which by that date will be almost twice as numerous as it is today.

Despite its oil wealth, the Middle East has one of the lowest regional rates of foreign investment in the world.

To turn that around and promote domestic growth will require both political and economic reform, so as to entrench stability, transparency and the rule of law, and to reduce corruption.

This is a security challenge too.

Terrorists and extremists exploit any sense of disenfranchisement and discontent to win new recruits for their hideous violence in the Middle East and around the world.

They thrive where people's faith in politics based on dialogue is weak.

So political reform in the Middle East is the best long-term recipe available for allowing the people of an enormously-important region to realise their potential; and for defeating the threats to their and our security.

In other words, realism and idealism coincide.

It's a reflection of the inter-dependent world in which we live, where others' security and prosperity directly affect our own.

Realism and principle came together in this government's decision to take action against ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, civil war in Sierra Leone, and tyranny in Afghanistan - because those situations both outraged our morality and threatened Britain's interest.

They coincide in our doubling of the UK's aid to the poorest nations, for poverty is both a scar on the world's conscience and a brake on its progress.

And realism comes together with Labour's strong internationalist tradition in the powerful imperative of supporting the emergence of democracy in the Middle East.

So let me return to the question which I posed at the outset: how best can we support that process of change? Let me make five points.

First, we must come to this with a good deal of humility.

Change is rarely quick, or simple.

We know well from our own history that the constitutional arrangements which we have today in the United Kingdom are the result of a long and often passionate struggle.

Many Labour supporters opposed sending troops to Iraq

And it is in the nature of democracy to be always a work in progress.

We cannot come with a model to impose.

Democracy comes from within, and the shape it takes will depend on the circumstances and traditions of the country concerned.

That is clear from the variety of arrangements in democracies around the world today.

In supporting change, we must respond to the needs and aspirations of the governments and people of the Middle East themselves.

I have set up in the Foreign Office a special unit to do that - engaging with the Islamic World and promoting reform.

I am doubling its budget for the coming year, to support projects focussing on the rule of law, good governance and the advancement of women.

And we have put human rights and democracy at the centre of our dialogues with the countries of the Middle East.

Humility and responding to the needs of the region are vital.

But they are not to be confused with a misguided angst about what some caricature as the "imperialism of ideas".

We're sometimes told that democracy is a Western value; and that promoting it reflects a Western agenda which we are seeking to impose on others.

I utterly reject that.

My second point is that the aspiration for democracy is universal; and the benefits which it brings should be open to all.

The claim that Arabs don't want democracy simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Many of those Iraqis at polling stations attacked by terrorists on 30 January simply helped the wounded, and then went back to their place in the line.

There could be no more powerful and moving sign of their determination to have a say in the decisions which affect their lives.

And that same enthusiasm for is clear across the region.

Those who watch on Al-Jazeera their brothers and sisters in Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq going to vote seek a share of that freedom for themselves.

Nor is there any justification in the idea that it is the Islamic religion itself which is a block on the growth of democracy.

The United Kingdom's two million Muslims play a full and energetic part in our democratic process.

Mr Bush is following the tradition of Franklin Roosevelt and JFK, said Mr Straw

Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim country, made a peaceful transition from dictatorship in 1998 and held democratic, peaceful Presidential and legislative elections last year, widely-praised by the European Union and former US President Carter.

Turkey, under an Islamic Democratic Party, has enacted a truly remarkable programme of reform leading to its opening EU membership negotiations.

It is not Islam which is incompatible with change - but rather those who use it to justify an opposition to the change which so many of their fellow Muslims seek.

The West's share of responsibility for the lack of democracy in the Middle East to date is not down to too much enthusiasm for promoting democracy, but too little.

The approach has often been tactical rather than strategic, preferring a known status quo to an unknown process of change.

Today we realise that this is a false choice.

We heard the same fears about democracy in southern Europe, and in South Africa.

History has shown them to be misplaced.

Change in the Middle East won't always be easy or smooth.

Democracy involves difficult choices for governments between short-term and long-term aims.

But the West cannot go back to the days of supporting unsatisfactory stasis over unpredictable change.

We must set democracy as our compass, both in that region and with our friends and partners elsewhere including Russia and China.

For democracy is the best possible guarantee of sustainable, long-term security and prosperity there is.

No two full democracies have ever made war on each other - astonishing, but true.

And the development of democracy can create the conditions for sustained peace in even the most entrenched conflicts - as over the Falklands during the 1980s, or in Southern Africa and then Indonesia and East Timor in the 1990s.

The economist Amartya Sen has demonstrated that there are many other benefits.

Famine and similar catastrophes are far rarer in even the poorest democracies than in countries where power is in the hands of the few - as the tragic examples of Zimbabwe, Burma and North Korea demonstrate.

Moreover, democracy and the open societies which support it foster dialogue, inquiry and innovation, essential ingredients for economic success.

Greater freedom leads to better policies; allows entrepreneurs to flourish; and creates dynamism and jobs.

Those who claim that promoting democracy is a Western imposition should look to its success around the world, from Latin America to South-East Asia.

It is not democracy which is an imposition, but tyranny.

My third point is that democracy is about more than elections.

I have said that it will differ from country to country.

But there are basic tenets and values which help to foster a democratic culture - one in which democracy is not just the holding of regular votes, but a stable and strong set of institutions and norms.

Democracy must be based on the respect for individuals' basic human rights.

It requires government to be transparent and fair, adhering to international treaties and institutions, functioning courts, and police and armed forces under civilian control.

And it requires open societies, with free media, fair treatment of minorities, equal access to education and opportunity, open markets and free trade unions.

My fourth point is that to promote democracy requires the UK, and Europe as a whole, to work closely with the United States.

Here is where some on the Left start to object.

Faced with an American government of the Right promoting a vision of how to change the world for the better, many on the Left have become the staunchest advocates of the status quo.

For them, President Bush's commitment to promoting freedom and democracy is simplistic; misguided; or as simply a veil for more sinister motives.

The traditional positions of realists and idealists seem to have been reversed.

The background, of course, is the question of Iraq - which remains the subject of passionate debate and indeed of deep division.

But whatever the differences of opinion over Iraq, it would be highly dangerous for the Left to settle into a comfort zone as the opponent and critic of American power and American objectives in the world.

The Left has always believed in the power of politics to change things for the better - and in the extension of freedom and democracy.

Today we have a better chance than ever to promote that in the Middle East.

When an American president states that "the best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world", we should hear the continuing of the great tradition of Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, John F Kennedy and many others.

And we should see an enormous opportunity to work with and to channel America's will to promote change and to pursue aims which have long inspired us.

The Left should be seizing this opportunity, leading the drive to bring Europe and America together in support of democracy and freedom.

But I am not arguing that we should be tacit partners.

The UK and Europe as a whole have a lot to bring to the table, and an important role to play in shaping a common agenda.

America did not bring democracy to Europe on its own; rather American guarantees of security helped to create the conditions where Europeans could build democracy for themselves.

The spread of democracy and freedom across our continent, a process continuing today in the Turkey, Ukraine and the Balkans, has come about not least through the magnetic power of Europe's values and achievement.

The challenge of spreading those values to the Middle East is perhaps as important, though different, as Europe's mission to entrench democracy to the East in the 1990s.

Europe brings strong practical links with the Middle East through a common history, and through the ties of trade, of aid - 1 billion Euros a year from the EU alone - and of political cooperation today.

We need to be using those links and those resources better to support a commitment to democracy, good governance and human rights.

As we review the EU's relationship with the region under the UK's EU Presidency, at the tenth anniversary of the Barcelona Process later this year, we will look to strengthen that emphasis further.

Already Europe, with France in the lead, is working closely with the US on Lebanon.

Through the G8, which the UK chairs this year, we will be building on the partnership for reform in the Middle East agreed last year which involves not just governments but civil society and business.

I am determined that the United Kingdom play our full part in uniting Europe and the United States in a single common purpose, supporting modernisation and reform in the Middle East.

My fifth and final point is in the form of a challenge.

I have spoken a good deal about the Government's views.

But democracy is not built by governments from the top down.

It is achieved and supported by people themselves, by the society which they shape and the institutions which they create and maintain.

Civil society, politicians, parties, and the media in the Middle East are crying out for nurture and support.

My challenge to progressives everywhere is to offer that support - by building networks and dialogues, by explaining our own political frameworks and processes, by offering your own experience and support as the Middle East seeks to build the culture in which democracy can flourish.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Change and reform in the Middle East will not happen overnight.

And, as in Lebanon, they must be led from within.

But progressives know better than anyone the power of democracy as an instrument of social justice, and as a tool for the realisation of human potential.

And we know the Middle East's importance to our foreign policy and to the international community as a whole.

Supporting the emergence of democracy in the Middle East and around the world must be a central part of a progressive foreign policy, and a task for all of us.

This is the time to re-affirm our commitment to that.