EU Policy Impact and Public Perception in the MENA Region

P. Abbott, A. Teti
{"title":"EU Policy Impact and Public Perception in the MENA Region","authors":"P. Abbott, A. Teti","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2903487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This working paper considers relations between the region and the European Union, something on which the ArabTrans survey was specifically designed to offer information. We supplement the ArabTrans survey by drawing on data from Waves II (2010/11) and III (2013) of the Arab Barometer and from the Gallup World Poll for 2011 and 2014. The Report considers what impact the policies pursued by the EU and its member countries have had on the lives of people living in four countries in the region - Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia - and how they view the EU and its involvement with their countries. It considers ordinary people’s attitudes to the EU and its policies but also discusses what ordinary people want and the extent to which EU policies address these concerns. In 2010-11 an unprecedented wave of popular protests and demands for regime change spread across the MENA region. In the media and in scholarly literature it was frequently explicitly or implicitly assumed that what people were demanding was Western-style democracy, understood as free and fair elections and the rule of law alone. In the wake of the ‘Arab Spring,’ many called for a ‘paradigm shift’ in the EU’s approach, to place greater priority on encouraging democratic transformations in the region rather than tacitly supporting authoritarian rulers seen as essential bulwarks against instability in the region. However, analysis of EU policy documents published in the wake of the Uprisings shows that in practice it remained much as it had been before 2011. It tends to assume that what the EU has to offer is sufficient to encourage authoritarian rules to undertake democratic reforms, while failing to acknowledge that in the past it has failed to implement conditionality clauses designed to provide incentives for reform, nor had it imposed sanctions for lack of progress on democratisation and recognising human rights. Beyond this the type of economic reforms it is clearly envisaging are the very neo-liberal reforms that created the economic conditions that drove people to revolt in 2011. The EU, along with its allies and the media, continues to misread the causes of the Uprisings as popular demands for liberal democracy rather than as a revolt against the negative social and economic impact of neoliberal economic policies. Public opinion surveys in the region, including the ArabTrans survey, show that people’s priorities were and remain decent jobs, economic security, adequate public services and the rule of law rather than solely the narrowly defined civil and political rights characteristic of ‘democracy promotion’ policies by Western governments. What the people were expressing was deep dissatisfaction with the effects of the economic policies which the EU and its Western allies had encouraged, cajoled and incentivised the MENA countries to implement from the 1980s. Given this context, it is not surprising that the EU is seen by respondents as complicit in creating the very conditions against which protesters in the Uprisings revolted. The EU’s pursuit of policies which do not recognise or adapt to popular needs and demands have predictably produced considerable disenchantment with the EU and particularly with its claim to be a ‘normative power’ committed to democracy. Few respondents wanted the EU to promote its brand of ‘thin’, procedural democracy in which civil and political rights remain uncoupled from social and economic rights. Few respondents thought the EU had done a good job of facilitating transitions to democracy in their country, and few had much appetite for EU leadership. A majority of respondents were not aware of what support the EU is actually providing to their country, but a majority of those who had heard about EU programmes were positive about development assistance. Their preferred targets for development aid, however, were job creation, economic development and the improvement of basic services.","PeriodicalId":306154,"journal":{"name":"AARN: State & Non-State Political Organization (Sub-Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AARN: State & Non-State Political Organization (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2903487","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This working paper considers relations between the region and the European Union, something on which the ArabTrans survey was specifically designed to offer information. We supplement the ArabTrans survey by drawing on data from Waves II (2010/11) and III (2013) of the Arab Barometer and from the Gallup World Poll for 2011 and 2014. The Report considers what impact the policies pursued by the EU and its member countries have had on the lives of people living in four countries in the region - Egypt, Jordan, Morocco and Tunisia - and how they view the EU and its involvement with their countries. It considers ordinary people’s attitudes to the EU and its policies but also discusses what ordinary people want and the extent to which EU policies address these concerns. In 2010-11 an unprecedented wave of popular protests and demands for regime change spread across the MENA region. In the media and in scholarly literature it was frequently explicitly or implicitly assumed that what people were demanding was Western-style democracy, understood as free and fair elections and the rule of law alone. In the wake of the ‘Arab Spring,’ many called for a ‘paradigm shift’ in the EU’s approach, to place greater priority on encouraging democratic transformations in the region rather than tacitly supporting authoritarian rulers seen as essential bulwarks against instability in the region. However, analysis of EU policy documents published in the wake of the Uprisings shows that in practice it remained much as it had been before 2011. It tends to assume that what the EU has to offer is sufficient to encourage authoritarian rules to undertake democratic reforms, while failing to acknowledge that in the past it has failed to implement conditionality clauses designed to provide incentives for reform, nor had it imposed sanctions for lack of progress on democratisation and recognising human rights. Beyond this the type of economic reforms it is clearly envisaging are the very neo-liberal reforms that created the economic conditions that drove people to revolt in 2011. The EU, along with its allies and the media, continues to misread the causes of the Uprisings as popular demands for liberal democracy rather than as a revolt against the negative social and economic impact of neoliberal economic policies. Public opinion surveys in the region, including the ArabTrans survey, show that people’s priorities were and remain decent jobs, economic security, adequate public services and the rule of law rather than solely the narrowly defined civil and political rights characteristic of ‘democracy promotion’ policies by Western governments. What the people were expressing was deep dissatisfaction with the effects of the economic policies which the EU and its Western allies had encouraged, cajoled and incentivised the MENA countries to implement from the 1980s. Given this context, it is not surprising that the EU is seen by respondents as complicit in creating the very conditions against which protesters in the Uprisings revolted. The EU’s pursuit of policies which do not recognise or adapt to popular needs and demands have predictably produced considerable disenchantment with the EU and particularly with its claim to be a ‘normative power’ committed to democracy. Few respondents wanted the EU to promote its brand of ‘thin’, procedural democracy in which civil and political rights remain uncoupled from social and economic rights. Few respondents thought the EU had done a good job of facilitating transitions to democracy in their country, and few had much appetite for EU leadership. A majority of respondents were not aware of what support the EU is actually providing to their country, but a majority of those who had heard about EU programmes were positive about development assistance. Their preferred targets for development aid, however, were job creation, economic development and the improvement of basic services.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧盟在中东和北非地区的政策影响和公众认知
这份工作文件考虑了该地区与欧盟之间的关系,这也是ArabTrans调查专门为提供信息而设计的。我们利用阿拉伯晴雨表第二波(2010/11)和第三波(2013)以及盖洛普世界民意调查2011年和2014年的数据补充了ArabTrans调查。该报告考虑了欧盟及其成员国所奉行的政策对该地区四个国家(埃及、约旦、摩洛哥和突尼斯)人民生活的影响,以及他们如何看待欧盟及其与他们国家的关系。它考虑了普通民众对欧盟及其政策的态度,但也讨论了普通民众想要什么以及欧盟政策在多大程度上解决了这些问题。2010年至2011年,前所未有的民众抗议和要求政权更迭的浪潮席卷了中东和北非地区。在媒体和学术文献中,人们经常或明或暗地认为,人们所要求的是西方式的民主,即自由公正的选举和法治。在“阿拉伯之春”之后,许多人呼吁欧盟的做法发生“范式转变”,将鼓励该地区的民主转型置于更加优先的位置,而不是默认支持被视为抵御该地区不稳定的重要堡垒的专制统治者。然而,对起义后公布的欧盟政策文件的分析表明,实际上,它与2011年之前的情况大致相同。它倾向于假设,欧盟所能提供的东西足以鼓励专制政权进行民主改革,同时却没有承认,过去欧盟未能实施旨在为改革提供激励的条件条款,也没有因民主化和承认人权缺乏进展而实施制裁。除此之外,它所设想的经济改革显然是新自由主义改革,正是这种改革创造了经济条件,促使人们在2011年起义。欧盟及其盟友和媒体继续误读起义的原因,认为这是民众对自由民主的要求,而不是对新自由主义经济政策对社会和经济的负面影响的反抗。该地区的民意调查,包括ArabTrans的调查,显示人们最优先考虑的是体面的工作、经济安全、适当的公共服务和法治,而不仅仅是西方政府“民主促进”政策中狭隘定义的公民权利和政治权利。人们所表达的是对经济政策的影响的深切不满,这些政策是欧盟及其西方盟友从20世纪80年代开始鼓励、哄骗和激励中东和北非国家实施的。在这种背景下,欧盟被受访者视为同谋,创造了起义抗议者所反对的条件,也就不足为奇了。欧盟所追求的政策不承认或不适应大众的需求和要求,这可以预见地导致了对欧盟的相当大的幻灭,尤其是对欧盟自称致力于民主的“规范力量”的幻灭。很少有受访者希望欧盟推广其“单薄”的程序性民主,在这种民主中,公民和政治权利与社会和经济权利是分离的。很少有受访者认为欧盟在促进他们国家向民主过渡方面做得很好,也很少有人对欧盟的领导地位有多大兴趣。大多数答复者不知道欧盟实际向他们的国家提供了什么支持,但大多数听说过欧盟方案的人对发展援助持积极态度。但是,它们比较喜欢的发展援助目标是创造就业、经济发展和改善基本服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Arithmetic of Climate Change The Constitution of Ambiguity: Is the Link between Economic Freedom and Constitutions Weaker than Thought? Explaining Variation in Challenges to Social Conventions: Black Political Leadership and 'Contraband Camps' in the U.S. Civil War Using Name Standardisation to Track Candidate and MP Performance over Time in Papua New Guinea The Historical Legacy of (Pre?)Colonial Indigenous Settlements in Mexico
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1