Human Rights Developments

Defending Human Rights

The Work of Human Rights Watch

The Role of the International Community

The Role of the International Community

European Union

Human rights abuses in the Middle East did not occasion much in the way of public diplomacy by the European Union or member states, despite visits to European capitals by Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Iranian President Mohamed Khatami, King Mohamed VI of Morocco, and Shaikh Hamad bin Issa Al Khalifa of Bahrain, and visits to the region by Chris Patten, the European Union's commissioner for external affairs, Javier Solana, the E.U.'s high representative, and the foreign ministers of France, the United Kingdom, and other European countries. The E.U. at the U.N. General Assembly in October sponsored resolutions on the human rights situation in Iraq and Iran. The E.U. speech on October 26 on "the human rights situation in the world" mentioned Syria as a country "where the expression of opposition or dissidence is systematically repressed" and expressed concern about the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia, "in particular by restrictions on fundamental freedoms." The speech welcomed Algeria's invitation to several international human rights organizations but said that the E.U. "remain[ed] concerned by the persistence of violence and by the fate of missing persons."

The year also saw little movement in the "Barcelona process" of establishing a Euro-Mediterranean free trade and cooperative security zone. The European-Mediterranean Association Agreement between the E.U. and Israel, signed in 1995, went into force in June 2000 after completion of ratification by all E.U. member states. Israel thus joined Tunisia and Morocco as countries with operational association agreements. A draft agreement with Egypt was completed in July 1999, but as of this writing Egypt had not yet taken steps to sign it. There was no public discussion of how the human rights practices of these countries, especially Tunisia and Israel, could be reconciled with the stipulation in article 2 of each agreement that the agreement was premised on "respect for human rights and democratic values." There were no indications that the year had seen progress regarding negotiations over association agreements with Algeria, Lebanon, and Syria. Signed agreements with Jordan and the Palestinian Authority remained to be ratified by some E.U. member states before coming into force.

External relations commissioner Patten, speaking in Cairo in early April on the E.U.'s Mediterranean policy pointed to human rights along with drugs, terrorism, immigration, and conflict prevention as areas where "we need some practical results." "Our handling of these crucial topics needs to be sufficiently flexible to allow the partners who wish to advance ahead of others to do so without prejudicing the right of all Barcelona partners to participate in the discussions," he said.

In his Cairo speech Patten observed that Europe "now" accounted for 47 percent of total "Mediterranean imports," amounting to 30 billion euros (U.S. $25.1 billion). E.U. countries took 52 percent of all "Mediterranean exports," he said, worth 63 billion euros. (U.S. $52.7 billion). Europe, he said, "is by far the largest donor of non-military aid in the region, " amounting to 9 billion euros (U.S. $7.5 billion) in grants and loans.

According to a U.S. Congressional Research Service study of transfers of conventional arms released in August and covering the 1996-1999 period, 85 percent of United Kingdom arms deliveries to developing countries were to the Middle East, while the comparable figures for France, Germany, and Italy were 43 percent, 40 percent, and 12.5 percent respectively. European countries accounted for just over 48 percent of all arms deliveries to the region in this period. According to the study, the bulk of the sales comprised tanks and self-propelled guns, other armor, supersonic aircraft, and naval vessels.

United States

The Middle East-especially Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and conflicts and Iraq-occupied much of the Clinton administration's diplomatic energies over the year. In a June speech to the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee devoted to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and Iraq, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering identified the components of U.S. policy in the region as achieving a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace, ensuring regional stability, stemming the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, creating free market conditions, encouraging sustainable development, and "expanding political reform and adherence to international norms for human rights."

In his presentation to Congress in March of the Near East segment of the Administration's foreign operations budget for fiscal year 2001, Assistant Secretary of State Edward S. Walker, Jr. said, "Advancing vital U.S. political and economic interests in the Middle East is complicated by a legacy of ethnic conflicts, border disputes, economic dislocations, ecological disruptions, and human rights abuses-all of which have contributed to terrorism and violence." Walker also stated that the Administration was "pursuing a strong program for developing civil society in a region that often lacks the most rudimentary institutions for peaceful transition of leadership, freedom of expression, or respect for women's rights."

In its budget presentation the Administration requested military and economic assistance grants of U.S. $2.8 billion for Israel, nearly U.S. $2 billion for Egypt, and U.S. $228 million for Jordan. The request for democracy programs in the region, "particularly in Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, and Oman," was $4 million. In requesting allocations for individual countries, Walker's presentation mentioned human rights or support for democratic institutions as issues of concern in Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, and Yemen, though there was no such mention in the presentations for Bahrain or Jordan. Surprisingly, Tunisia was characterized without qualification as "a stable democratic country," raising serious question about the ability of the U.S. government to recognize, let alone encourage or support, democracy in the region. The U.S. was a key convener of a conference of foreign affairs ministers in Warsaw in June entitled Towards a Community of Democracies, to which Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Qatar, and Yemen were invited. In a press briefing on June 19, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Harold Koh said that the list of countries invited "was an inclusive one which included not just countries that wereestablished democracies, but those that were striving for democracies and those that had made a commitment on the democratic path." He added that "those countries that have experienced backsliding, we hope that the conference will itself be an occasion to engage them and press them aggressively on the extent to which we found their recent progress to be lacking."

Koh visited Tunisia in June-the first visit to any country in the region by him or his predecessor since 1993 (see Tunisia chapter below). In October 1999, Koh's deputy, Bennett Freeman, visited Israel and also met with Palestinian officials and human rights activists.

The State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1999, released in February 2000, continued to provide comprehensive coverage of the human rights situation in each country in the region. Koh's introduction to the report, however, which set the tone for much of the media coverage, avoided citing abuses by Middle Eastern allies of the U.S., with the exception of Saudi Arabia regarding religious freedom, and Egypt, Oman, and Yemen with regard to the practice of female genital mutilation. Inexplicably, the introduction referred approvingly to Tunisia's presidential election, where President Ben Ali won with an official 99.4 percent of the vote, as "a modest step forward," and pointedly failed to include Tunisia in a discussion of Middle Eastern countries where dissidents and human rights defenders face arbitrary arrest, unfair trials, and intensive surveillance.

In September, the State Department released its second annual congressionally-mandated report on international religious freedom, which also included chapters on each country in the region. The report cited Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia for intolerance towards religious minorities, and Egypt, Israel, and Jordan for discriminatory policies. The report also noted limited improvements in Egypt, Iran, Israel, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. According to the report, Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations David Welch met with Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, to discuss religious freedom and human rights issues. In the Saudi Arabia chapter, the report's authors wrote that "the overwhelming majority of citizens support an Islamic state and oppose public non-Muslim worship," without any indication of how this conclusion was reached concerning a country where freedom of expression is severely restricted.

The Congressional Research Service report on arms transfers released in August noted that "the high value of U.S. arms transfer agreements with developing nations is attributable to major purchase by key U.S. clients in the Near East, and to a lesser extent in Asia, together with a continuation of well- established defense support arrangements with such purchasers." For the most recent period covered, 1996 to 1999, Middle East countries accounted for more than 65 percent of total deliveries of U.S. arms to developing countries, and the U.S. accounted for nearly 50 percent of all arms purchase agreements by Middle East states. The principal Middle East purchasers of U.S. arms in this period were Egypt ($5.8 billion), Saudi Arabia ($5.5 billion), and Israel ($4.2 billion). The report listed tanks and self-propelled guns, armored vehicles, naval vessels, supersonic aircraft, helicopters, surface-to-air missiles and anti-ship missiles as the main categories of weapons systems purchased.

The U.S. signed a wide-ranging free trade agreement with Jordan on October 24 similar to agreements already concluded with Canada, Mexico, and Israel. U.S. and Jordanian officials expressed hope that the agreement would attract international investment to Jordan. The Clinton Administration promoted the agreement with Jordan as a model for future trade pacts on the grounds that its provisions mandated compliance of both parties with international labor and environmental standards.