Watch

Now that I’ve had a bit more time to peruse the full translation, I will note a few additional concerns:

- Voter Registration (Part 4, Article 5): voters must register to vote and get a voter card. This posed some difficulties in Tunisia and will likely pose logistical challenges in Libya, too.

- Procedures for Libyans abroad to vote (Part 5) have not been defined, although expats are allowed to vote. How/where their votes will be allocated remains to be seen.

- Restrictions on campaigning (Part 9, Article 35) seem a bit onerous: there is to be no campaigning in “places of worship, public and/or private educational institutions, public roads, and public and/or governmental buildings.” As one Libyan reader complained via email to me: “This leaves us, I suppose, the Rexus and Corenthia hotels to hold a campaign rally. A room that holds 200 people goes for about $3,500 for few hours. Even these may not be available since I believe they’re partly owned by the Government!”

Reactions from other readers echo my concerns about curbing women’s rights and excluding Libyans who have lived and worked abroad. Some worry that the law will favor those with money and organizational skills (although that is hard to legislate against anywhere—check out the U.S. presidential election). One reader from Libya, who has lived and worked in the West, complains about a “Salafi mindset within the NTC leadership responsible for appointing the drafting committee” and fears that they are “working behind the scenes to impose a sharia-based constitution, curb women’s rights and individual freedom, and exclude foreign-educated liberals whom they see as potential rivals.” Comments posted on Libya’s electoral commission’s Facebook page reiterate many of these themes: many people have posted requests that those holding dual nationalities not be excluded; men and women have asked that there be a larger quota for women; one person on the Facebook page bemoaned that too many experienced people will be excluded: “Simply any person with leadership or who has practical or political, social, or managerial experience either lived abroad and has another citizenship because of the long time that he lived there, or participated in a conference or in some committee, but wasn’t necessarily a member of a revolutionary committee… Most of these people participated in the revolution either with their money, their work, or their lives… how we can wrong them like this when we also lose so much by not benefitting from their experience?”

On a more positive note, the Economist Intelligence Unit predicts that Libya’s economy in 2012 will be the fastest growing of any, with GDP growth exceeding 20 percent this year as the country rebuilds. To sustain robust growth, the country needs to be able to attract and retain the large pool of foreign-educated Libyans who make up some of its most capable human capital. Let’s hope that whatever new government comes to power leads the country in a pragmatic direction.

Listen

1) mHealth and mGovernance

Applying mobile phone technology to global health challenges has huge potential to improve health outcomes. In previous blogs I’ve given a few examples of how mHealth is making a difference: in remote areas of Afghanistan, health workers are getting training through SMS; in South Africa, Project Masiluleke sends text messages with important information about HIV; in South Asia pregnant women are receiving important maternal health information also via text messages. Here are few more instances: FrontlineSMS, a free online text messaging system that sends texts between groups of people and online mapping systems like Google Earth, allows health workers in Cambodia to report cases of malaria in real time. This has permitted the government to track outbreaks and allocate resources more effectively. Previously, it took up to a month for cases to be registered. On the horizon are handheld analyzers that would allow community health workers to diagnose the strain of malaria a patient has using just a drop of blood. A reliable and speedy diagnosis would save hundreds of thousands of lives by accelerating the timetable for effective treatment. MHealth is still in its infancy, but the potential is there for some transformative improvements to health care delivery in rural areas.

MGovernance is also an area to watch. Mobile phones are becoming a tool for governments to communicate information, build connections with citizens, and receive feedback, particularly in countries with little infrastructure. Mobile phones are already being used in crisis management, in health campaigns and to facilitate cash transfers to the poor. Their spread is allowing governments to reach citizens who were previously outside of service areas. More than this, mobile phones offer a potential counterweight to corruption and an aid in resource management. They also allow citizens to put pressure back on governments to follow through on development projects. In Tanzania, for example, citizens are using their phones to report broken water pumps and push the government to make repairs.

2) Agricultural Productivity

As competition for resources becomes more intense in the coming decades, dramatically increasing how efficiently we use available resources – in particularly, energy, food and water – will be a critical part of the solution to closing the gap between supply and demand. For example, as much as a third of food grown in Africa rots before it reaches consumers due to poor infrastructure. Moreover, less than 5 percent of agriculture in Africa is irrigated, and much of that irrigation is large-scale, with an efficiency rating of under 50 percent, versus small-scale irrigation with an efficiency of more like 80–85 percent. Introducing simple, affordable technologies in small-scale agriculture has tremendous benefits in terms of productivity, empowering women, and increasing food security. Another area of unfulfilled potential is genetically modified organisms. USAID administrator Rajiv Shah has advocated for greater innovation and leadership in exploring how genetically modified foods can be used to feed the world’s growing population. In the horn of Africa, poor governance and climate conditions have combined to create chronic food shortages and famines. Genetically modified crops such as drought resistant or drought tolerant crops can play a crucial role in combating food insecurity in water poor areas. As drought spreads to West Africa, innovations in this field will be another important trend to watch in 2012.

3) Establishing Identity

Registering minorities and women allows them better access to legal channels to claim their rights, whether that is to report a crime, dispute ownership of land or other property, or gain access to social services and education. Gaining state recognition is certainly the first step for the 12 million stateless people in the world, but it is also the first step to citizenship for billions of people in developing countries that have no official identity. India is leading the way with its Aadhaar program. This voluntary and free program aims to digitally register India’s 1.2 billion citizens. The system is expected to undermine corruption by allowing citizens to collect benefits, open a bank account, or buy a mobile phone anywhere in the country, rather than relying on local bureaucracy. Additionally, it will make workers mobile, allowing them to migrate to where jobs are located and keep their money in a bank account. Although the program is costly, and could allow the state to erode civil liberties, it has the potential to be a transformative step in poverty reduction. Other countries with millions of unregistered citizens, who in some places are disproportionately women, should watch closely.

Egypt stands to gain by in multiple ways by investing in its agricultural sector. First and foremost, given that agricultural laborers represent such a large portion of the working population, an increase in their real wages would stimulate economic growth. With 22 percent of the population living under the poverty line, equitable economic growth remains one of Egypt’s most pressing priorities. Secondly, Egypt continues to face food security issues. The portion of the population that is food-insecure relies on government fuel and food subsidies that are a persistent drag on the Egyptian economy. Interestingly, while poverty has, in fact, decreased in recent years, Egypt is unique in that rates of child malnutrition have actually risen at the same time. While the cause of this rise in child malnutrition requires further research, it reveals the extent to which Egypt is dogged by insufficient social services, especially in rural areas, which are both the poorest and the most reliant on agriculture for their livelihoods.

Beyond food security, Egyptian agriculture is failing to allocate its resources in efficient ways to be competitive in the global market. Farmers still focus on crops with low returns, or ones which consume large quantities of water, or both. Farmers also face poor access to credit, are reliant on out-of-date technology, and dependent on farm workers with low skills. There are some more modern farms emerging, ones that are focused on selling higher margin products like flowers, fruits and vegetables, with some for export. But in general, most farms are less than one-acre plots along the Nile that struggle to be competitive. Only rice, cotton, and sugar are regulated, which perhaps is a good thing since regulation seems to double-down on inefficiency. Take cotton, for example. Production of cotton is up 37 percent from last year because in December 2010, the government indicated that prices would be high. Growers responded by planting more acres of cotton. But in fact, cotton prices have tumbled, and now are 40–50 percent lower than expected. Growers are stock piling their harvests and waiting for prices to rise or for the government to intervene. Yet the government cannot, at this time, purchase the cotton without bank financing, which has been hard to attain. Moreover, Egypt is a member of the World Trade Organization, and is thus limited in the responses it can take to relieve growers.

To promote economic growth, reduce poverty, and improve food security, Egypt’s new government should make improving the agricultural sector a high priority.

The incident highlights the military’s brutal crackdown on protesters, when many in the country have wondered if the ongoing sit-ins at Tahrir and the cabinet building were more obstructionist than revolutionary. Nonetheless, the military’s response has rightly drawn criticism from around the world. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday, “This systematic degradation of Egyptian women dishonors the revolution, disgraces the state and its uniform, and is not worthy of a great people.” Today, Fayza Aboul Naga, Egypt’s minister of planning and international cooperation and a hold-over from the Mubarak era, slammed Secretary Clinton’s remarks, saying that Egyptian women did not need foreigners to demand their rights and that they are capable of defending themselves.

As I wrote here, women have struggled to find entry to decision making bodies in the new political climate, despite their significant and crucial participation in the transition. The outpouring of rage sparked by the devastating beating of the still anonymous young woman has prompted the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces to apologize for the mistreatment of women protesters, and affirm their right to political participation.

However, their apology comes as little comfort to the victims. Azza Hillel Suleiman tried to come to the aid of the beaten women as can be seen later in the same footage. She approaches the beaten women, covers her body, and stands up to yell at the soldiers. Seconds later, they descend upon her, beating her savagely. Ms. Suleiman is still hospitalized. This video is graphic and disturbing.

Egypt’s short-term solutions to its economic troubles are limited and include substantial commitments of foreign aid that have yet to materialize. Egypt had hoped to obtain nearly $8 billion in assistance pledged by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, though this now seems unlikely. So far, Egypt has received just $1 billion, a funding lag linked to Saudi Arabia’s displeasure with Mubarak’s ouster and subsequent trial, according to statements made by Western diplomats. In the coming months, Egypt’s funding from the United States (totaling about $1.8 billion in the FY2012 budget request) also stands to suffer as members of Congress are wary of an Egyptian parliament dominated by Islamic political parties. As CFR’s Ed Husain noted, it is easy for U.S. lawmakers to “build up a case against the Muslim Brotherhood,” not to mention that budget constraints at home present a further disincentive.

The bottom line is that without getting the basics of the economy right, Egypt’s budding democracy will have no legs to stand on and no energy to propel it. At the heart of protesters’ demands in January were economic complaints: a lack of opportunity, poor standards of living, inadequate education, and rampant corruption. While this economic dissatisfaction was a major factor in overthrowing the regime, it will also be a major inhibitor to democracy consolidation.

An interesting book from Jan Teorell last year, Determinants of Democratization, argues that poor economic performance under autocracies can set off transitions to democracy, while strong economic performance under democracies helps them avoid reverting to authoritarianism. Based on this assessment, without an economic improvement, Egypt’s prospects for sustainable democracy look slim.

As I have written previously, Tunisia has always been an outlier in the region, but its preliminary successes through this transition are notable (90 percent of registered voters cast a ballot), and important for the trajectory of the uprisings in its North African neighbors. As Islamist parties are included in formal political life for the first time in Tunisia and Egypt, a competition between different ideas and visions of political Islam is unfolding. The outcome of this competition will determine the future of the relationship between states and their citizens in the region, and it is far from clear what vision will win out.

On the one hand, Ghannouchi, in his first visit to the United States in twenty years at the end of November, spoke about pluralism, women’s rights, and creating an environment conducive to international investment. He met discretely with the Israelis, during his visit as well. At a talk at CFR’s Washington, DC offices, Ghannouchi explained Al Nahda’s success at the polls, saying, “the message that [Al Nahda] sent to the people is that it does not interfere in their personal religiosity… because the state or the government has no business in people’s personal choices.” This emphasis on individual autonomy and pluralism is welcome; however, it will need to be followed through on with effective and responsible policies.

The other side of this conversation is best represented by the Salafist parties in Egypt, who won 20 percent of parliament seats in the first of three rounds of voting. In many cases, their fiercest competition came from Muslim Brotherhood candidates running with the Freedom and Justice Party, who the Salafists cast as both condescending and insincere. It should be noted that the Salafists (Al Nour is the largest party that falls under this loose affiliation of ultra-conservative leaders) faired much more poorly in runoff elections, in part, perhaps, because their extreme views gained greater media attention with their initial success. These views include calls for a total ban on alcohol consumption, restrictions on beach tourism, and the implementation of harsh punishments for criminals. Salafist leader, Abdel-Moneim El-Shahat, (who lost his bid for a seat in parliament), said that the novels of Egypt’s most revered writer, Noble Prize winning Naguib Mahfouz, incited “prostitution and atheism.” On Saudi television today, the former deputy Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Sheikh Mahmoud Ashour, called these statements by Islamic extremists, “ignorant and lacking [in] responsibility.”

The most important aspect of the debate unfolding within Islamism will be over the protection of minority rights. Whether believers of all religions are free to practice their faiths, whether secularists are equally free to express their world view, and whether women’s rights are protected will define the difference between a moderate Islamism compatible with democracy and religious authoritarianism. Interestingly, Ghannouchi, urged the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to form a governing coalition in parliament with secular parties, rather than aligning with the Salafist movements. He warned that ignoring influential minorities, whether secular or Christian, is not a sustainable or responsible policy. Let’s hope that Islamists movements across the region follow Ghannouchi’s advice.

I recently hosted Ambassador Don Steinberg, Deputy Administrator of USAID, at an on-the-record CFR meeting to discuss the broad transformation underway at USAID. (You can view above a brief video interview that was filmed after the meeting.) This ambitious reform effort, called USAID Forward, is intended to reposition USAID as an “innovator” in global development, and also to establish a “relentless focus on results.” After years of decline (declining staff, declining expertise, declining reputation), USAID is adding personnel (850 new hires in the past 2 years), bringing experts in-house, gaining clarity around seven core priorities (food security, global health, climate change, sustainable economic growth, democracy promotion, humanitarian assistance, and conflict prevention), and introducing better measurement and evaluation (M&E) systems. Steinberg was optimistic about USAID’s ability to succeed in this transformation, although he spoke candidly about intensifying budget pressures, the imperative of convincing Americans that USAID can be “good stewards,” the rise of new actors in development (US official development assistance last year was roughly $30 billion, but private philanthropies donated some $36 billion to international development), and the ongoing cultural challenges involved in shifting the mission of this large bureaucracy (frankly, it’s hard to push innovation and risk-taking in a structurally risk-averse organization).

The strategic changes at USAID are welcome and in line with the grope toward better results in global development that is under way in many quarters. Last week in Busan, South Korea, the High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness wrapped up its 4th meeting. These High Level Forums (HLF) emerged from the realization that ever greater sums spent on aid were not yielding desired outcomes. The major donors, at the time the United States and European nations, largely coalesced behind the idea that increased coordination and accountability (among donors and between donors and recipients) were necessary to changing this. The entry of new players in development, such as Brazil, India, and China, makes agreement on alignment, transparency, and accountability all the more important. Many were surprised that these countries, even though they themselves have large populations of very poor people, signed on to the Busan Outcome Document. Although they are reluctant to call themselves “donors,” they recognize that they have an increasingly important role to play in global poverty alleviation efforts.

USAID’s transformation is taking place against a background of global economic woes, a host of new private and public players, and rising expectations of development. Steinberg emphasized that global development aligns not only with our national economic interests (10 of the top 15 export markets for the U.S. goods today are former developing countries), but also our strategic interests. He noted that not a single fragile state will meet the Millennium Development Goals, and stressed that development assistance is far cheaper than troops on the ground. USAID just marked its 50th anniversary. I doubt it will be out of a job another half century from now, but let’s hope it will be working more effectively with a wide range of public and private partners and with a smaller number of countries in need.