Powell said that "the Middle East is a region of vast importance to the American people," and one in which the US had a long-standing commitment. "We have for half a century and more devoted our blood and our treasure to helping peoples and governments of the Middle East," he added.

And now, the US wants these countries to move towards democracy. Saying that the idea began in March, just as President Hosni Mubarak was visiting Washington, Powell explained that the new initiative was "a continuation, and a deepening, of our longstanding commitment to working with all the peoples of the Middle East in their efforts to meet these challenging and pressing human needs."

The program–for which $29 million has been earmarked, with more in the future–will rest on three pillars: fostering economic reform towards free trade, partnership with civil society with particular attention to women’s rights, and "bridging the knowledge gap" to provide better education. These, however, are hardly new aims–focus on trade, civil society and education already exist in US aid programs for the region. Rights activists, however, were hoping that the initiative would introduce new methods of implementing democratization.

"We were disappointed with the speech," Neil Hicks, the director of the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights’ Middle East initiative, told the Cairo Times. "It was very thin on the question of exactly how the US would go about promoting democratization in the Middle East specifically. The administration has made a lot of noise about this issue for several months now, [but] it really doesn’t tell us anything more than what we’ve been hearing from other officials. There are no clear mechanisms for how this is going to make a difference."

Hicks’ organization has advocated that any initiative establish "clear human rights benchmarks for recipients of democratization assistance" and that all governments be held to a common standard. Powell’s speech, however, does not mention any criteria the US would want allied states to meet.

"We expected that there would be more specific talk about the need for US allies in the region to make hard choices," he said. "This is not something that should be painless for governments in the Middle East. They have to do things differently if they are going to become more democratic."

Hicks contrasted this with another US democratization program announced late last month, the Millennium Challenge Account, which would set up a competition among the world’s poorest countries to get part of a $5-billion fund if they meet American free trade and democracy standards. The program, which has yet to be approved by Congress, will operate over three years. But because it targets poor countries specifically, there is still little indication of how much it would apply to the Middle East, where living standards are not necessarily low even if democracy is lacking.

In the region, reactions have also been mixed, particularly as local anger at US policy in Palestine and Iraq has fuelled distrust of America’s intentions.

Foreign Minister Ahmad Maher said on 13 December that the initiative did not address fundamental questions in the region.

"The real problem in the Middle East is the Israeli occupation of Palestine," he said. "Until this problem is resolved there can be no lasting peace or security." That was echoed by rights activists in the region, for many of whom the issue of Palestine or Iraq is more important. They accuse Washington of double standards when it tries to promote democracy but continues to support Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.

Although Powell mentioned America’s "deep and abiding national interest in bringing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to an end," he said that would "require from the Palestinians a new and different leadership." He added that "Israel will also be required to make hard choices, including an end to all settlement construction activity."

Nader Fergany, the director of the Al Mishkat Center in Cairo and the lead author of the Arab Human Development Report–a document Powell referred to several times as a recognition by Arabs themselves that they suffer from a lack of democracy–also decried US double standards (see page 9).

"Intervention from outside deprives Arabs of their fundamental right to self-determination," he said, arguing that Arabs are better left to solve their problems by themselves–particularly considering the US’s track record in supporting authoritarian regimes in the Middle East.

Saad Eddin Ibrahim, whose controversial trial over the past two years has been seen by activists and foreign governments as a test of Egypt’s commitment to democracy, also warns that Powell’s initiative could potentially backlash against activists.

"If the policy is to lend moral support to indigenous forces, it will be welcomed," he said. "But if it is imposed in an arrogant fashion it will be counterproductive. As an advocate of democracy and political reform, I welcome any support I get from any place in the world, as long as it’s not with strings attached. There is enough sophistication in Washington to recognize the sensitivity of our people to foreign intervention."

Ibrahim also denounced another double standard that makes it hard for democracy activists such as himself to operate.

"The government accepts [aid] money for itself, but denies it for NGOs," he scoffed. "We have to look at our own double standards."

The US’s current "democracy and governance" program in Egypt, for which $8 million has been earmarked for 2002, has focused on capacity-building for NGOs and reforms of administrative justice, particularly in commercial law. But critics say that it had hardly been successful so far.

"Egypt has had a program and has had a lot of money spent on it over an extended period of time, but the experience has not been a positive one," said the Lawyers Committee’s Hicks. "Despite all the money that has been spent over many years, we haven’t seen an increase in democratization–arguably we’ve seen a decrease in democratization."

Nader Fergany responds