North Africa’s stumbling transitions

On Wednesday, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) launched North Africa in Transition: The Struggle for Democracies and Institutions. The panel discussion included editor Ben Fishman, Haim Malka, contributing author and Senior Fellow and Deputy Director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and John Desrocher, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Egypt and Maghreb Affairs. Mark Fitzpatrick, Executive Director of IISS, moderated.

Fishman kicked off by explaining the premise of North Africa in Transition. He aimed to show the differences between the states of the Maghreb, including Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya, after the 2011 uprisings. Institution building should be the key lesson learned from the Arab Spring. The US should devote more time to North Africa. Fishman focused in particular on Libya, where he thought the US should be more assertive, interacting with the Libyan government, coordinating with the international community, and empowering local governments in Libya by implementing decentralization.

Malka urged more investment in the Maghreb, which requires greater understanding of regional politics, economics, and society. Malka predicts 2016 will be a turbulent year for the region. He explained four factors that brought him to this conclusion:

1. The continued appeal of radical groups. Radical ideology entices youth as it presents solutions to them that they have never been offered before. The counterterrorism response has contributed to increased radicalization. With intelligence communities remaining uncoordinated and erratic arrests, radicalization has spread even more throughout the region.
2. Failure to address economic and social grievances. Reforms of privatization, banking laws, etc., are too slow and prolonging the challenges countries face.
3. The four main states are shaky. They lack strong institutions.
   
4. The 2011 uprisings did not satisfactorily change the status quo for most people. For instance, in Morocco the monarch contributed to stabilizing the country by instituting constitutional reforms, but failed to grapple with socio-economic issues. Injustice, favoritism, and corruption endure.

Desrocher believes the US has to examine each country’s case separately and carefully. Morocco has a high rate of youth unemployment, relies mainly on Europe for trade, and worries about extremism. Tunisia has its internal economic challenges and unmet expectations of the Arab Spring. Washington wants to build partnerships with the Maghreb by assisting with security issues and boosting economies.

As its instability makes it difficult for the other regional countries to accomplish their goals, Desrocher identified the Libya as key to stability in the Maghreb, . He nevertheless has a positive outlook and believes much has been accomplished in the past four months. He thinks that there are fewer divisions among the international and regional partners on how to address the problems in Libya.

Malka also expressed an overall positive sentiment. Popular pressure on governments now carries significant weight. People in the Maghreb are willing to express their grievances in a public manner and to the governing body. Malka’s advice regarding US policy in the Maghreb is to take the long-term approach and not to overact to any small sign of instability. Change in the region will ultimately take time and much effort.