New U.S. Strategy in the Middle East

With nearly 30 percent of the total population of the Middle East and North Africa lying between the ages of 15 and 29 the mindset and perspective of this segment raise critical questions regarding the future of the region and its interactions with the West. In the hopes of discovering, understanding, and presenting where the future may bring the Middle East, the Brookings Institution hosted a panel discussion on Monday, Nov. 10, to discuss the topic. Moderated by the director of the Middle East Youth Initiative at Brookings, Navtej Dhillon, “Arab Youth Between Hope and Disillusionment: Toward a New U.S. Strategy in the Middle East” brought together speakers Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, Tamara Cofman Wittes, and Ahmed Younis to discuss a recent Gallup Poll on Middle Eastern youth and its implications.

Panelists

Navtej Dhillon co-founded the Middle East Youth Initiative at Brookings and currently serves as its director. He is a fellow at the Wolfensohn Center for Development at Brookings, and also works as an adviser and speech writer for James D. Wolfensohn on international development issues. As an associate for the East Asia region at the World Bank Dhillon co-founded the Youth Innovation Fund, the first of its kind to expand World Bank aid to youth-led developments around the world.

Ahmed Younis serves as a senior consultant for Gallup and senior analyst for the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and the Muslim-West Facts Initiative. He recently authored the book American Muslims: Voir Dire [Speak the Truth], which looks at the post-September 11 debate about the status of American Muslims in the U.S. He is a member of the Advisory Committee on U.S.-Muslim World Relations of the United States Institute of Peace and regularly speaks on issues affecting Western Muslim communities, identity and integration, terrorist financing and public diplomacy.

Tamara Cofman Wittes is the director of the Middle East Democracy and Development Project. She has previously served as a Middle East specialist at the United States Institute of Peace, as well as the director of programs at the Middle East Institute and professor of international relations at Georgetown University.

Djavad Salehi-Isfahani is an economics professor at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University who focuses on the economics of the Middle East. He also serves as a research fellow at the Economic Research Forum and as a visiting fellow at the Wolfensohn Center for Development in the Brookings Institute. He was formerly a member of both the board of trustees for the Economic Research Forum in Cairo and the board of directors for the Middle East Economics Association, as well as a professor at the University of Oxford and the University of Pennsylvania.

Dhillon began the discussion by introducing the goal of the panel, stating his hope that it would provide a better understanding of the changing economic situation within the Middle East and its effect on Arab youth. He described the Middle Eastern economy as being akin to a three-legged stool with the development leg being the shortest, thereby creating an oft-unstable system.

Methodology

Introducing the statistics discovered by the Gallup Poll, Ahmed Younis established the base from which the discussion would derive its focus. Conducted by the Gallup Center World Studies, the poll utilized face-to-face interviews with at least 350 individuals, aged 15 or older, from Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, the Palestinian Territories, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen from June 2006 to September 2007. The poll questioned only Arab residents of the countries, and it is worth noting that the statistics for Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates included citizens of those nations as well as non-citizens. Additional data was taken from interviews with 302 adults in the United States in August 2007 and interviews with at least 240 people in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom in December 2006.

Poll highlights

Younis introduced important statistical information derived from the poll that exemplified the average mindset of Arab youths in the region. According to the poll, the average resident in the Middle East held a slightly negative outlook on the quality of life five years prior, rating it as 4.9 out 10, and a slightly positive outlook of the present quality of life, with a rating of 5.2 out of 10. However, the average youth reported an expectation of life in the next five years to be rated at 6.6 out of 10, reflecting an optimistic outlook for the future.

Younis also noted that the vast majority of youth in the Middle East believe that their life held an important purpose or meaning. At the lowest end of this spectrum, 80 percent of youth in the Palestinian Territories responded yes, while 97 percent of those in Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates responded yes. The regional average settled at 92 percent. Younis noted that this signified an avowed optimism for the future of the region.

Despite the expressed optimism for the future, many youth noted their dissatisfaction with the economic situations within their countries. Across the region, Younis stated, 62 percent of Arab youths found job opportunities to be limited, which negatively affected their chances for upward growth. Additionally, only 30 percent said that they currently held a job, paid or unpaid, marking the apparent lack of opportunity for employment. Furthering their economic despair, only 39 percent of youths across the region were satisfied with their nations’ efforts to increase job numbers and quality.

Younis also addressed the issue of youths’ perspectives on the U.S. and its role in the Middle East. He pointed out three major issues that contributed to an overall negative image of the U.S.: an apparent cultural disrespect toward the Middle East, political domination of the region and long-lasting acute conflicts – with Iraq and the Israel-Palestine issue being the most concerning. But when asked whether they believed the attacks of September 11 to be justified, only seven percent said yes. This portion of the population, Younis said, set them apart as political radicals within the Gallup Poll’s statistics.

Changing U.S. policies

The program then shifted to allow all three panelists the opportunity to express their observations on the implications of the Gallup poll. Included in these reflections were views on the roles Arab youth should take in directing their governments and suggested policies to be adopted by the new U.S. administration.

Tamara Cofman Wittes broke down the aspirations of Arab youth into three categories: political, economic and social. She contended that two of the three, political and economic, had long been shaped by external forces, contributing to a decline in Arabs’ confidence in their governments’ ability to initiate effective domestic action. As such, the youth in the region had developed an increased faith in individuals’ actions over those of the government. This perception is supported by the poll, which suggested a higher opinion of individuals’ abilities over states’.

In order to improve U.S. relations in the region, Wittes argued that the new administration must work to address the issues facing Middle Eastern youth and subsequently bring them into the process. She believes that aside from addressing the major issues within U.S. priorities, such as stabilizing Iraq and countering Iran’s growing influence, the administration should recognize that the youth provide a critical opportunity for a broad view of peace and prosperity. Wittes said gains within the youth should be supported through long-term investments into diplomacy, utilizing the ongoing Arab-Israeli peace process for greater levity to address important issues in the region.

Three step plan

Wittes continued by outlining three issues that the administration should attempt immediately to achieve the goal of incorporating the youth into its plans. According to Wittes, the U.S. should promote advances in the Middle Eastern educational system, thereby recognizing its relative importance to the aspirations of the region’s youth. By supporting a reshaping of Middle Eastern educational efforts to include more liberal-arts-oriented programs, the youth would be opened to ideas of self-empowerment and the roles of the citizenry. This restructuring, Wittes contends, would elicit the input of U.S. universities, expanding opportunities for interaction between American and Arab students and institutions.

As the second step, Wittes promoted an increase in exposure to American culture and society. She noted that in the post-September 11 environment there existed difficulties in achieving this, but, if accomplished, it would allow greater openness and opportunities within Arab societies.

The final measure Wittes suggested was improving the ability of U.S. foreign to affect progress and growth in the region. A significant aspect of this would be reshaping the relationship between aid and governments, in order to secure its proper usage and direction toward its intended population. Referring specifically to Palestinians, Wittes believes that providing the appropriate aid direction would increase the opportunity for greater advancements and improvements within the population. However, according to the poll, 80 percent of Palestinians did not believe U.S. policies would change following the election, perhaps a reflection of their discontent and frustration with U.S. policies of the past.

Transplanted Americanism

Djavad Salehi-Isfahani agreed with many of Wittes’ arguments for improving the standing of the U.S. in the Middle East, but questioned the methods to do so. He recognized the importance that educational advancements play in reshaping the Middle East, arguing that a diversification of studies to include greater emphasis on writing and mathematics are necessary for improving the youths’ potential.

In regards to the U.S., though he believes that the U.S. needs to take a more active role in engaging the region’s youth, he argued that many Middle Easterners have grown increasingly wary of foreign powers’ efforts. This, he contends, is a result of the history of their actions in the region, which has forged a negative perception of the U.S., creating a difficult situation for the U.S. to sell its policies to the populace. Further, he argues that many efforts of the U.S. have been viewed as attempts to “transplant” American values onto the region, taking little into account for the realities of the region.

Great game vs. Quiet game

Isfahani contended that the growing role of what he termed the “great game” – the major policies of states – overshadowed the “quiet game” – the role of families and communities in shaping society. In order to combat this, he argued that the U.S. should understand how the two overlapped and ensure the preservation of both. By focusing on the quiet game, Isfahani said, the U.S. would “gain insight into the realities of societies.” Doing so, according to Isfahani, would allow the U.S. to contribute to building up societies and villages from the bottom up.

Wittes, though, disagreed with Isfahani’s assertion that the quiet game had been largely ignored. Instead, she argued that the U.S. has spent much effort in growing the quiet game, particularly in Egypt. However, she recognized that such endeavors still required additional growth in order to be fully successful. Wittes stated that the quiet game is inherently more complex than the great game and that future efforts necessitated recognition of the limited resources provided to accomplish such goals.

Agreeing with many of the assertions of his colleagues, Younis contended that the U.S. should take an active role in promoting job creation throughout the Middle East. Citing the poll, he argued that the issue exists as one of the foremost concerns amongst Arab youth. By contributing to the youths’ economic growth and expansion, he believes that the U.S. would be able to improve its standing throughout the region as a worthwhile partner.

تقرير واشنطن