HOME / foreigners: Opinions about events beyond our borders.

Moroccan RouletteWhat happens if you hold an election and nobody comes?

Moroccan King Mohammed VI  
Click image to expand.Morocco's political elite—and Washington's—are both eagerly anticipating the country's Sept. 7 parliamentary balloting, which promises to be the freest and fairest in the history of this North African monarchy. The Bush administration loves to highlight Morocco's political progress as a bright spot in an otherwise unrepentantly autocratic Middle East—and Morocco's young king is basking in the glow. Next month's election will be a multifaceted test. Among other things, it will gauge the popularity of Morocco's Islamist Party of Justice and Development and reveal whether top-down reforms, emanating from a centralized monarchy, can produce meaningful democratization. The burning question, though, is how many Moroccans will even bother to vote. What if you build a democracy and nobody comes?

These elections are the latest step in a gradual process launched by King Mohammed VI after he ascended the throne in 1999. Since then, he has loosened press controls, opened registration for political parties, and even launched an Equity and Reconciliation Commission to examine human-rights abuses during the regime of his father, Hassan II. In return, President Bush has lavished attention on the North African country: sending old diplomatic hand Margaret Tutweiler and Harvard chum Tom Riley as ambassadors, signing a free-trade agreement that gave Moroccan farmers coveted access to U.S. markets, and even bending the rules of the Millennium Challenge Account so that Morocco might qualify for extra foreign aid. Even with Iraq sucking up a huge portion of America's foreign-aid budget, Morocco's economic assistance has increased by more than 300 percent since 2004.

For American policy-makers keen to encourage democracy without risking Islamist takeovers, Morocco is an unusually attractive model. Mohammed VI is widely popular, and he uses the D-word with abandon. But he clearly controls the pace and nature of political change, keeping a firm hand on the rudder to prevent any messy unpredictability arising from this presumed transition to democracy. Morocco also boasts what is arguably the most moderate—at least on its face—Islamist party in the Arab world, one that consciously models itself on Europe's Christian Democrats and the pro-European Union Justice and Development Party of Turkey. There are hard questions to be asked about the sincerity of the PJD's commitment to pluralism—but if Islamism and democracy can ever be proved compatible, it might well be in Morocco.

Furthermore, Morocco boasts a more conducive climate for democratization than perhaps any other Arab country. Over the last several years, major social reforms have helped cultivate a more liberal culture there—notably an overhaul of the family code that enhances women's rights in marriage, divorce, and citizenship; and an agreement among political parties to reserve slots on a special national parliamentary ballot for women. Morocco also has a history of peaceful pluralism so firm that the population still includes several thousand Jews, who enjoy genuine freedom of worship and close ties to Israel. It also generally takes a relatively mellow approach to Islam, wherein veiled women and those wearing tank tops dine comfortably together in the many sidewalk cafes of the capital.

So why, then, wouldn't Moroccans be lining up at the polls? In fact, voter turnout has been trending downward in every election since the democratization push began in 2002; even in that year's landmark parliamentary race, just more than half of registered voters turned out—and 17 percent of those reportedly cast blank protest ballots. Moroccan officials express a near-universal concern that voters will show up this time in embarrassingly small numbers. The government is so concerned about citizen participation that it launched a nationwide effort to sign up new voters—but the campaign achieved barely half its goal of 3 million new registrants. About 79 percent of the eligible population is now signed up and able, in principle, to vote.

There's a good reason why Moroccan citizens keep their distance from their political system. Complicated electoral laws ensure that parliamentary seats are fairly evenly distributed, regardless of who wins the largest share of the national vote, and parliamentary powers are so overshadowed by the king's own legislative authority that most members of parliament (with the notable exception of the Islamist opposition) don't even bother to show up when the body is in session. Instead, some use their parliamentary status and the legal immunity it grants them to advance their own narrow interests and sometimes to cover criminal activity. In this environment, the most rational Moroccan voters may well be those who give their ballot endorsements in direct exchange for the cash or food some candidates all but openly offer.

Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
Tamara Cofman Wittes is a senior fellow in the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. Her book Freedom's Unsteady March: America's Role in Building Arab Democracy will be published in 2008.
Photograph of King Mohammed by Adelhak Senna/AFP/Getty Images.
COMMENTS

Remarks from the Fray:

Erich Fromm comments in The Forgotten Language: An Introduction to the Understanding of Dreams, Fairy Tales and Myths, the psychological and sociological reasons the Jews of Exodus were not allowed to enter the Promise Land was they would be unable to adapt to the new freedoms; they were slaves, not only because they were under the rule of others, but because they also had learned to think of themselves as slaves. The Exodus generation had no way to expunge from themselves what they were existentially. This held true for the Moses and his generation and it holds true for many citizens of emerging democracies.

Many of the people who made for peaceful and semi-peaceful revolutions in East Europe (a.k.a. Soviet satellites) have allowed or called for less than democratic leadership for which they strove. Russia hoisted Boris Yeltsin onto their shoulders and demanded freedom for all, but without any leaders who truly understood freedom and democracy, the people and the nation stumbled. Now they have a rather strong (dictatorial?) leader in President Puttin, and while they have lost much freedom, they seem more contented than when they were freer. Muslim countries will have to go through the same apoplexy; the current generation that has known nothing but strong and unyielding authoritarianism will have to die away before a new generation will be able to bring freedom and democracy to fruition.

Morocco is one of these countries. The current administration is correct in supporting King Mohammed VI gradual transition to democracy. No party, not the people, the government, nor the monarchy are ready to make a clean break from the past, but with guidance, they can move closer to the ideals of freedom and true democracy. In time, with great efforts and expenses, monetary and moral, the seeds of justice, freedom, capitalism and democracy can be spread throughout the Muslim and Arab territories. We cannot, as seen in Iraq, simply free a people and expect them to find their way without a strong (but temporary) hand to guide them. If we fight for freedom, we must be prepared to nurture that freedom. Once we win the war, logic and experience demand that we are prepared to maintain the peace. Before we press fresh wine, we must clear the vineyard of old grapes. The process is not an easy one, but once it is brought to fruition, all are better for the effort.

--IMKessel

(To reply, click here.)

(8/27)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
TODAY'S DOONESBURY
TODAY'S VIDEO
On the move.61/091110_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on Barack Obama.77/091110_TC.jpg
With a capital I.80/091110_TD.jpg