Safe Democracy Foundation - Safe Democracy

How to change track and move forward

Dan Bavly writes on the multiple missed opportunities for peace in the Middle East due to a general trend of indifference in the Israeli government for long-term negotiated solutions. Still stuck in the 1948 War of Independence mentality, the Israeli government, military, and population as a whole have been unable to adapt to the changing reality of the Middle East conflict. From the current Saudi Initiative, to the dozens of proposals and openings over the last forty years, Israel has failed to seize countless opportunities for peace, insisting instead on the use of military might to end wars. But in Bavly’s opinion, modern wars cannot end without negotiation. It is time to change track and move forward.

Proposal for peace in the Middle East

Walid Salem presents the Bring Peace Together Project, whose summit was held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on March 28th in order to discuss a comprehensive solution to create peace in the Middle East. The following is a formal letter and call to action of the Bring Peace Together Project, presenting its plan for the recognition, normalization, and security of Israel by 22 Arab countries in exchange for a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194. Read on to find out how you can become involved in this unique opportunity to create peace in the Middle East.

Contradictions in the Middle East peace process

Walid Salem writes about the growing contradiction within European, American, and Israeli decision-making since the West dropped its sanctions-regime against Hamas. In Salem’s opinion, while some States favor gradual diplomacy to legitimate Hamas and establish a five-year ceasefire, others are seeking the negotiation of an immediate permanent status solution with Abu-Mazen. And as the complexity of the contradiction grows, one thing has become clear: Abu-Mazen’s hope lies in a permanent peace agreement. Continuing partial agreements will only damage Abu-Mazen’s Presidency, increase tension between Hamas and Fatah, and weaken the possibility for an eventual reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians.

A failed political party system

Sohail Mahmood details the history of democracy in Pakistan since its independence in 1947. After half a century of a corrupt, self-serving, and authoritarian political party system, the public outcry for democracy, accountability, and social justice can no longer be ignored. In Mahmood’s opinion, no single leader can rescue Pakistan from its current political crisis, nor should the baby be thrown out with the bathwater. Reform is needed, not revolution, in order to build a solid democratic foundation for the future of the country. Only by respecting democratic norms, reconstructing the political party system, and promoting national reconciliation can Pakistan find its way out of its current, multidimensional crisis.

Why Israel should negotiate with Damascus

Mario Sznajder questions Ehud Olmert’s policy decisions in relation to the Palestinians, and Syria, noting that Olmert’s leadership has taken on new levels of uncertainty that are uncommon to Israeli politics. In Sznajder’s opinion, Prime Minister Olmert must define a clear political strategy and move forward in negotiations with Damascus. The following article explains why.

The comeback of Iran’s reformist and centrist movements

By Arshin Adib-Moghaddam (for Safe Democracy)

Arshin Adib-Moghaddam writes on the recent rise of the neoconservative movement in Iran’s increasingly diversified political spectrum. Unlike the neoconservative movements of the US or the UK, Iran’s neoconservatives have advocated social welfare, capital redistribution, anti-corruption measures and have pursued a pragmatic foreign policy agenda. Yet, in Adib-Moghaddam’s opinion, their traditionalist preference for preservation over reform, and their combination of the repressive tendencies of the Shah, with the revolutionary rhetoric of Khomeini, has not convinced the Iranian electorate, thus instigating the comeback, in the recent elections, of the reformist and centrist movements.

Tehran ’s Nuclear Challenge

By Arshin Adib-Moghaddam (for Safe Democracy)

Arshin Adib-Moghaddam describes three reasons that would explain why the international community should not be surprised that Iran continues to say no when it comes to any compromise of its rights under the NPT. First, Iran’s grand strategic preferences accentuate radical independence, both political and economic. In the second place, Iran’s foreign policy elites are deeply suspicious of the international community in general and the Western block organised around the United States in particular. The third reason is related to the modified strategic context in West Asia after the demise of Saddam Hussein and the invasion of Lebanon. Adib-Moghaddam writes that the international community in general and the United Nations in particular have thus created their own weakness vis-à-vis Iran and unless the latter does not emancipate itself from the dogma of a new Middle East it will continue to fail in its mission.

Jordan and the reconfiguration of the Middle East

Ricardo Angoso and Miguel Angel Benedicto explain how Jordan could play an essential role in the reordering of the Middle East. Jordan’s good relations with its neighbors (Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the monarchies of the Gulf) are key to resolving the conflicts of the region, including the confrontation between Israelis and Palestinians. Angoso and Benedicto believe that Jordan’s moderate regime continues to be stable, and one of Washington’s most faithful allies in the region, despite its poor economic situation, and the threats of Islamism and international terrorism. Read on to see why King Abdullah II could have a tremendous influence in pacifying the Middle East.

The changing dynamics of Palestinian politics

Walid Salem writes on the three different strategies that can be taken in order to deal with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict: negotiating with Abu-Mazen, negotiating with Hamas, or opening dialogue with both. Due to recent success in convincing the Arab and Muslim world to lift their sanctions, the Hamas-led Palestinian government has become emboldened, and begun to circumvent Abu-Mazen’s authority. Hamas‘ new policy positions also include the opening of direct dialogue with the Israeli government, negotiations with the governments of Jordan and Egypt, and the organization’s slow transformation from a fundamentalist group into a legitimate political force. In Salem’s opinion, neither Abu-Mazen nor Hamas can be ignored in handling the conflict, and the best solution would be to choose the third strategy.