Party pluralism in Yemen [Archives:2008/1137/Local News]
By: Khaled Fattah
Doctoral candidate
University of St. Andrews, U.K.
kf62@st-andrews.ac.uk
While political parties in the Middle East differ widely in terms of their ideological packages and goals, most of them share the dilemma of operating under political and military stresses.
Ironically, such stresses have only increased following the departure of European colonial troops from the region. Arab political parties were instrumental in leading the anti-colonial struggle, e.g., the National Liberation Front in Algeria, Wafd in Egypt, Dustur and Neo-Dustur in Tunisia, Istiqlal in Morocco and South Yemen's National Liberation Front.
In the post-independent Arab state, national forces and parties that were once in the same trench directly clashed with each other regarding the path of modernization, which the post-colonial Arab state should follow.
This clash has created deep inter- and intra-party divisions, which benefited the post-independence regimes. Through their monopoly over resources and coercion, the latter were able to impose their logic and ideology.
The outcome of this unfortunate situation was the establishment and consolidation of unitary political institutions “whose function was no more than the mobilization of the masses.”
Clearly, it's not the Arab cultural environment that hampered the emergence of effective post-independence political parties; rather, it was the repressive political conditions imposed by Arab regimes.
However, over the past two decades, many Arab regimes, under external and domestic pressures, have been forced to reactivate political party work. For the purpose of projecting a desirable image to the outside world, with minimal internal political concessions, Arab regimes adopted the following two approaches:
First, supporting the emergence of new parties, mostly illusionary ones that are either one-man parties with almost no existence on the political scene or a carbon copy of Western parties, such as environment-focused parties like the Green Party. Ironically, the latter was established in one of the least green regions in the world.
The second technique is sowing the seeds of inter- and intra-party divisions and disputes. Today's numerous offshoots from mother parties in the region illustrate the success of this approach.
A closer examination of Yemen's party pluralism mirrors the achievements and shortcomings of political parties in this corner of Arabia. Regarding achievements, Yemeni scholars highlight the following positive contributions by such parties.
First, such pluralism has contributed to creating a degree of political awareness among various segments of Yemeni society. Secondly, it has contributed to creating new traditions among political parties, the most important of which is establishing dialogue between parties that previously refused to even sit next to each other.
A third important contribution can be detected in such parties' attempt to propagate a national frame of reference that overcomes traditional socio-cultural frameworks of identification, such as tribal and regional affiliations.
Fourth, party pluralism has contributed to breaking down the decades-long wall of fear in Yemen's political arena. As a result, political voices and citizens' economic demands have become louder.
Fifth, such parties' exit from the tunnel of secret work to participate in competitive pluralism has contributed to producing constant pressure upon parties to adjust their positions in such a way that enables them to compete with others.
Sixth, public political activism has made it possible for parties to build bridges with the masses, and therefore, be in touch with their daily needs, concerns and problems, and then to consider solutions.
Seventh, such parties' participation in elections has been an educational experience providing them new skills and visions. Finally, Yemen's experimentation with party pluralism has planted the seeds of conviction that political objectives should be achieved through peaceful and democratic means. This achievement is of considerable importance to Yemen's the political arena, which formerly was an arena of violence and instability.
To this list, observers include achievements made in the area of partisan press, which not only has deepened the sense of freedom of expression, but it also has acted as a watchdog over political and administrative systems.
However, Yemen's party pluralism suffers from several serious limitations and shortcomings. To begin with, the pre-unification legacy of secret partisan work continues to cast its long shadow over the decision-making process within parties. Decisions within many Yemeni parties are made by a very few top members who instruct rather than involve their fellow party members.
In other words, there's an absence of transparent democratic structures within parties and concentration of power in the hands of party leaders. Ironically, this is the exact situation in those parties calling for decentralization of power and more democracy in governing the nation's sociopolitical life.
Another factor behind such absence is attributed to the clutching of power by the old guards within parties, which has resulted in leadership crises, resignations and divisions.
The second major shortcoming is many parties' reliance either on external funding sources or support from Yemen's governing elites. The latter source have become quite lucrative following unification when northern and southern elites were co-opting leaders of parties, unions and tribes in an attempt to strengthen their positions against each other.
In post-1994 Yemen, the political administration began manipulating the state's annual subsidies to parties in such a way that allowed state authorities to reward and punish opposition parties.
The administration also adopted a method of 'buying' elements within the opposition parties. This is reflected well in the migration of opposition party members to the ruling party in the search of financial gain and higher social status.
Several Yemeni authors have noted that the outside funding of parties has become a jeopardizing source, not only to Yemeni parties and the process of democratization, but also to Yemen's national interests. Others have gone farther, labeling parties' financial dependence on external sources as a stigma that has turned political activism in Yemen into mercenary work.
The third limitation of party pluralism can be found in the unfair competition between opposition parties and the ruling General People's Congress. In addition to pro-GPC constitutional and legal changes, the GPC participates in elections, relying on the power and resources of the state's executive and administrative apparatuses, including the media. According to the opposition parties, the GPC's victory reflects the capacity of the state, rather than that of the GPC.
The fourth important limitation presents itself in the failure of political parties to introduce a qualitative institutional alternative to the strong tribal structure. From a theoretical viewpoint, this means that Yemen's party pluralism is neither modern nor traditional.
Fifth, the mass-based activities of many parties are limited, formal and implemented only on a seasonal basis, mostly during election time. For instance, despite its large number of members and the availability of financial resources, GPC activities are almost nonexistent once elections have ended.
Sixth, voting during elections occurs on the basis of the influence of individual candidates, rather than on party programs.
The seventh limitation is Parliament's weak performance, which in turn de-motivates electors. This weakness is attributed both to the GPC's dominance in Parliament and the nature of post-1994 Yemen's political system, which is neither a full presidential system nor a parliamentary one.
Another clear shortcoming is the absence of clear and well-researched economic reform plans in opposition parties' programs.
Finally, party pluralism system in Yemen suffers from the low representation of women and it's a system negatively affected by the high percentage of illiteracy, which is estimated to be as much as 46 percent of the population.
This high illiteracy rate reduces the effectiveness of the partisan press in performing its role as a modern agent of political mobilization and socialization. Without overcoming the aforementioned limitations and restrictions, democracy in Yemen will remain crippled and a lame duck.
——
[archive-e:1137-v:18-y:2008-d:2008-03-13-p:ln]
