The need for dialogue across the Mediterranean

Published on Tue 29th Aug 2006

If further proof were needed of the imperative of dialogue across the Mediterranean, this summer has supplied it. Europe now risks developing or having imposed on it the kind of 'dialogue of the deaf' with countries across its southern sea that the US had in the 1970s and 1980s with Central America, at similar cost in terms of human lives, human freedom and human development. The EU must not allow politics in its backyard to be defined by the tribal or religious politics such as those influencing US politics: rather it must bring its own brand of secular democracy to the fore.

The challenges of peace and harmonious development on the shores of the Med are not beyond the wit of our political leaders to meet. Nor are they without electoral benefit. TV images of the vicious circle of poverty, war and seabound migration from North Africa stir Europe's voters, as the mailbags of our politicians this summer testify.

Moreover, Western Europe finds its own political development mirrored in the Middle East. The long struggle by Liberals to promote the ideas of the European enlightenment (many of which emerged from the harmonious, multi religious Islamic Umayyad society in Spain (711 - 1130)) against the backlash of the Christian church are reflected in the efforts of secular democrats in Islamic societies today, struggling through bodies such as the Arab International Women's Forum to fight their religious fanatics. The only democratic alternative now to religious-based Islamic democracy is secular democracy of the type promoted by Liberal Democrats and some Social Democrats in Europe, emphasising the separation of church and state. Ideas of pan-Arab Socialism are now the preserve of history. And the failure of Europe's Christian Democrats to find common cause with Turkey's ruling AK Party - a party of conservative, broadly faith-inspired democrats in a secular state - risks setting back the cause of consensual democracy across the Near East.

The North American (Christian fundamentalist-inspired) idea of democracy - in which democratic election results in Algeria, Palestine or the Lebanon are disrespected if the West does not like the outcome - must lead either to disillusion with such 'democracy' or to conflict with its promoters.

Democratic dialogue is more urgent than ever where the tectonic plates of the world's three great monotheistic religions currently grate against each other. The ground for it is more fertile than a glance at newspaper headlines would suggest: recent democratic constitutional advances in Islamic countries have been impressive, particularly in Morocco and some Persian Gulf states; and the number of citizens now recognising that such reform is needed has grown rapidly. However such dialogue must be based not merely on the shifting will of political fashion, but anchored in institutions designed and resourced to promote it over the medium to long term.

Ideas are not lacking. During his time as President of the European Commission, Romano Prodi argued forcefully for the creation of a Euro-Arab Development Bank, financed and managed jointly and equally by countries to the north and south of the Mediterranean basin. It is therefore hardly surprising that Prime Minister Prodi was the first to convene a conference to bring peace to the Lebanon (in Rome in early August, when others were relaxing on holiday) and has since led EU efforts where others have appeared surprisingly absent (Solana) or infuriatingly unpredictable (Chirac).

The lack of any North-South security structure also exacerbates tensions. This is giving NATO a new lease of life, creating a task for the OSCE and leading to a confusing plethora of trade agreements, immigration control agreements and other bilateral agreements. The best security institution might be something designed along the lines of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), the multilateral institutional dialogue which melted the ice of the Cold War. Why not engage the EU and its southern neighbours in a Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Mediterranean (CSCM)? An initiative from the Arab and Islamic countries in this respect would help to strengthen the recognition that we are all part of the same family.

Beyond an interim peace keeping force we need the concerted and jointly financed policy for development that a Development Bank could bring.

The EU's MEDA programme, despite some achievements, suffers the ills of bureaucracy and government to government stasis so often associated with classic development aid.

Other institutions could be established to promote tolerance and mutual understanding. The foundation of two Euro-Arab universities - one in Cordoba and one in Constantine, for example - would create a space for greater inter-cultural understanding and allow a resolution of some of the thornier episodes of history between religions. A border control agency, bringing together Mediterranean basin countries, should be complemented by a genuine EU migration policy which would no longer leave migration to the laws of supply and demand so expertly exploited by internationally organised criminal gangs. Overseeing such policies could be done by an institution already up and running - the Euromed Parliamentary Assembly in which EP President Josep Borrell Fontelles has invested considerable political and appropriate financial capital.

Time is short. Military adventures in Iraq combined with an irresponsible nonchalance towards Israeli and Arab aggressivity throw up the spectre of a wider conflict. Europe must act to secure what only Europe can secure for the innocent victims of current woes. Europe must find the political courage to intervene more effectively, rather than leaving a gap to be filled (or not) by others.