2 The Arab Spring uprisings
The causes of the Arab Spring
7. There was general agreement among witnesses
as to the long-term causes of the Arab Spring revolutions. It
is clear that the protests as a whole were not ideological, in
that they did not seek to impose a particular set of beliefs or
order. Instead, they united discontented citizens from across
political, economic, class and religious divides in opposition
to their autocratic governments. The figures that united the protestors
were not political leaders but ordinary people who had suffered
at the hands of the authoritarian systems. In Tunisia, this figure
was Mohammed Bouazizi, a street vendor frustrated by police harassment
and humiliation who set himself on fire in protest on 17 December
2010 and later died of his injuries. In Egypt, momentum for the
protests was nurtured in part by a movement called 'We are all
Khaled Said', dedicated to a young Egyptian who had died in suspicious
circumstances in police custody in June 2010.
8. Although there were some differences in emphasis,
all of the evidence we received agreed that protests were spurred
by a potent combination of economic, social, and political grievances
that created "fertile grounds for dissent" and united
disparate groups in opposition to their autocratic systems. Our
witnesses described chronic economic underperformance across the
region, drawing particular attention to unemploymentespecially
youth unemploymentwhich averaged 20% across the region
and reached 30% in Libya in 2011; poverty; widening inequality;
rising food prices; and increasingly visible evidence of corruption
and the enrichment of elites. The food riots that took place in
the region in 2008 also contributed, demonstrating existing discontent,
as well as the people's ability to protest. Witnesses also highlighted
a huge and unsustainable demographic expansion that had seen the
population of the region double since 1980 with 60% of that population
under 25 years old, which exacerbated the existing problems produced
by economic mismanagement. Several of our witnesses considered
these growing economic problems to be the main driving factor
behind the outbreak of the revolutions.[5]
9. The social and political causes of the Arab
Spring included resentment of authoritarian rulers that had denied
freedom of expression and limited opportunities for participation
in civil and political life; long-standing 'emergency laws'; a
malfunctioning or absent justice system; and a repressive security
state apparatus that was responsible for myriad human rights abuses,
including torture and killings.[6]
This was particularly true in Libya, where public hangings and
instances of collective punishment loomed large in recent memory.[7]
A number of our witnesses were also struck by a desire to re-assert
individual and national pride that characterised the protests.[8]
Bell Pottinger Public Advocacy and Dr Claire Spencer, Head
of the MENA programme at Chatham House, both spoke of a feeling
of a lack of dignity or an insult to one's dignity that spurred
individual participation in the protests.[9]
The Middle East Monitor (MEMO), a media research organisation,
saw this on a national scale, speaking of "a visceral sense
of national humiliation and lack of self-esteem", stating
that "In Egypt, a popular slogan was written and chanted
everywhere: 'Raise your head, you're an Egyptian.'"
[10]
10. Social media has been widely recognised in
media commentary as an important platform during the uprisings
for the expression of dissent and to organise and connect protest
movements. The BBC World Service noted in its evidence that "the
use of social media by demonstrators played a pivotal role in
developments", although Intissar Kherigi considered that
social media was "just an enabling factor" that highlighted
underlying problems.[11]
Globalisation, as well as a greater ease of travel, was also highlighted
as a contributory factor, [12]
as frustrated young people became "acutely aware" of
their relative deprivation and understood there existed alternatives
to the repressive governments under which they lived. [13]
Could the FCO have anticipated
the Arab Spring?
WERE THE UPRISINGS PREDICTABLE?
11. The underlying frustrations that contributed
to the outbreak of the Arab Spring were evidently well known before
the uprisings. Many of the factors listed above had been recognized
in successive United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) reports
on Arab Human Development from 2002 onwards. However, almost all
of those who provided evidence to the Committee agreed that the
scale and success of the protests took most people by surprise,
including close observers of the region and even those who participated
in the uprisings.[14]
The FCO argued that:
While we were aware of the fundamental underlying
frustrations of people in the region, and were orientating our
policies to address them, we did not predict that a spark in Tunisia
in December 2010 would trigger such an outpouring of protest.
No other international player, academic analyst, or opposition
group within the region foresaw this either.[15]
12. It is true that none of our witnesses claimed
to have predicted that revolutions would occur either in the manner
or at the precise time that they did. A number of witnesses also
agreed that the FCO was well aware of the problems in the region.
Dr Claire Spencer stated that the Foreign Office "certainly
knew" about them, and Dr Eugene Rogan, Director of the Middle
East Centre at St Anthony's College, University of Oxford, argued
that Ambassadors displayed a "depth of knowledge that comes
with a long history of engagement with the region", and that:
"I think it is asking too much of diplomatic officials to
be able to predict with [a] degree of precision [when uprisings
would occur]."[16]
13. However, some of the same witnesses identified
particular factors that they believed ought to have warned observers
of an imminent outburst. Dr Eugene Rogan suggested that the loyalty
of the military to the governments in Egypt and Tunisia could
have been monitored more closely.[17]
A number of witnesses noted that the growing inequality and corruption
was becoming very visible in the time leading up to the revolutions,
with a construction boom and "more flagrant displays of wealth"
in Tunisia, for example.[18]
Dr Rogan considered that the growing inequality "should
have alerted people across the region to the risk of revolution".[19]
WERE THE FCO'S RESOURCES AND APPROACH
AT FAULT?
Information gathering
14. Some evidence questioned the FCO's methods
of information gathering, including criticism of the FCO for failing
to consult more widely. Dr Rooney suggested that the FCO should
have consulted with "articulate" members of the public
(such as intellectuals and writers) to understand better the societies
in which they worked;[20]
while Christian Aid suggested that FCO staff should have prioritised
travel to areas outside Cairo, and should have engaged with more
civil society organisations to deepen their analysis of the region.[21]
Lord Malloch-Brown was particularly critical, noting that:
Whereas the world of Whitehall was fairly blind to
the imminence of change, if you talked to civil society types
in Egypt in 2010, they were telling you that things were getting
close to blowing point, and it was the same with good, astute
investigative journalists.[22]
15. These criticisms are not new. In our 2011
report on The Role of the FCO in UK Government, we noted that
a number of witnesses argued that the FCO needed to improve its
skills in "basic diplomatic technique", and reflected
on the recommendations of the FCO's internal report on its failure
to foresee the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran. The FCO's report
listed various requirements for UK posts in countries where important
UK interests would be at risk in the event of political upheaval,
including the recommendation that posts should have at least one
officer working full-time on internal political affairs, knowing
the local language, ideally with previous experience of the country,
and with time to travel outside the capital.[23]
16. In its written submission the FCO robustly
defended its approach, stating that:
In any regime where people are not free to express
their concerns or opposition to the policies of their governments,
there is a risk of frustrations bursting out suddenly and with
potentially dramatic consequences. No amount of intelligence effort
or further consultation with oppositionists or youth groups could
have forewarned us or others of the actual outcome.[24]
Staff numbers and expertise
17. Lord Malloch-Brown also said that the UK
had lost its previous Arabist "touch and feel" for the
region, and criticised the diminished staff resources in post,
stating that: "although the British Ambassadors I met in
the region were still of a very high calibre, they had much smaller
political teams per country than in the past. In that sense, it
is correct to say that they could not dig down deep enough".[25]
18. We have previously mentioned the reduction
in the number of FCO staff and resources. Our 2011 report on FCO
Performance and Finances noted that the 10% cut to the FCO's core
budget came on top of previous budget cuts which our predecessor
Committee had considered a threat to the FCO's effectiveness.
In our 2011 report, we commented:
We conclude that reductions in spending on the FCO,
if they result in shortfalls in skilled personnel and technical
support in key countries and regions, can have a serious effect
in terms of the UK's relations with foreign countries, out of
all proportion to the money involved, especially in relation to
the UK's security and that of its Overseas Territories.[26]
19. It is not reasonable to
expect diplomats to have predicted the advent of the uprisings
with precision. Successful uprisings are, by their very nature,
somewhat unpredictable. However, it is concerning that the UK
appears to have been taken so completely by surprise and little
comfort that other states suffered the same problems. In its response
to this report, the FCO should respond to criticisms that it did
not have a sufficiently broad base of contacts from different
social groups and geographical regions from which to draw information
about approaching crises and set out what steps it is taking to
improve its ability to anticipate such events in the future.
20. We conclude that the decline
in staff numbers in post in the MENA region may have contributed
to a lower information gathering capacity but it cannot be conclusively
drawn that such a decline had affected the FCO's ability to predict
the Arab Spring uprisings. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to believe
that had there been more emphasis on political reporting and larger
political teams in post, this would have improved the FCO's information
gathering before the uprisings, and its ability to respond once
they had begun.
Did the FCO have the necessary
skills and knowledge to respond to the Arab Spring?
21. Without claiming that they were in direct
anticipation of the Arab Spring, in its written submission the
FCO highlighted various programmes established in 2009-10 that
enabled it to respond better to the events as they occurred. Most
notably, in late 2009 the Middle East and North Africa Division
(MENAD) commissioned the FCO's strategy unit to examine whether
'Arab Human Development' should be an FCO policy priority. It
concluded in 2010, making a number of recommendations for a more
strategic approach toward human development in the region. The
Foreign Secretary approved the creation of a four-person Arab
Human Development team in MENAD in summer 2010 and a £5 million
fund for the programme at the end of 2010. This team was later
re-named the Arab Partnership Initiative and went on to form a
key part of the FCO's response to the Arab Spring. However, by
the time that uprisings had broken out in Tunisia in December
2010, only the team leader was in place; the three other staff
posts were filled in January 2011.[27]
22. The FCO claims that this policy work "placed
the UK in a strong position to respond strategically and rapidly
to the Arab Spring, both bilaterally (including with strategic
partners such as the British Council) and through the multilateral
mechanisms of the EU and G8".[28]
Christian Aid was more sceptical about the FCO's long-standing
commitment to addressing the region's problems, stating that its
creation of the Arab Partnership Initiative before the revolutions,
although welcome, was "a rather isolated case of the FCO
making efforts to engage in addressing long term issues of poor
governance and accountability in the region".[29]
23. The FCO also highlighted certain communications
programmes it had established that proved effective during the
Arab Spring, including 'Partners for Progress'a communications
programme which focused on the FCO's internet presence and ensured
that each embassy in the region had a website in both English
and Arabic, and developed the use of Facebook, Twitter and Ambassadors'
blogs. The FCO cited comments by US
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Advisor for Innovation, Ben
Scott, in support of its efforts. He reportedly described how
"when the Arab Spring broke, and the role of social media
came into focus, we had to pedal very hard just to get close to
where the Brits were".[30]
LANGUAGE SKILLS
24. We have already placed on record our concern
at evidence that the FCO's specialist geographical expertise,
including knowledge of foreign languages, has weakened. During
this Committee's inquiry into The role of the FCO in UK Government,
Sir Oliver Miles, a former British diplomat, told the Committee
that:
By the time I retired from the service in 1996 I
felt (and I said as much to the then head of the Diplomatic Service)
that we had compromised our traditional position of strength by
allowing deep understanding of the world outside Britain to be
sacrificed in favour of peripheral objectives. A symbol and more
than a symbol of this is the fact that in the region I know best,
the Arab world, too many key positions at home and abroad are
now occupied by non-Arabic speakers. This is sometimes unavoidable,
but it is nonetheless deplorable.[31]
Lord Malloch-Brown voiced similar concerns during
this inquiry, asserting that: "Whatever they tell you, Foreign
Office languages are in crisis. [
] Even with a mainstream
language such as Arabic, the cutbacks that have occurred are key."[32]
25. In response to questions about the MENAD's
resources and expertise, MENAD Director Dr Christian Turner told
us that just prior to the outbreak of the Arab Spring, in November
2010, the FCO had launched a "MENA Cadre" initiative,
a key part of which is a renewed effort on language skills. As
part of this programme the FCO would:
a) restore the length of training for Full Time
Arabic Training to 18 months;
b) provide more opportunities and encouragement
to staff in London to learn and maintain foreign languages, with
weekly conversation classes for existing Arabic speakers, a 12-month
beginners Arabic class (to which over 60 FCO staff have subscribed),
and French classes, and
c) re-classify approximately 20 existing jobs
at MENA Posts overseas as speaker slots, i.e. posts which have
a language requirement. The FCO told us that once trained staff
were in place, this would represent an approximate 40% increase
in Arabic speaker capacity in the network compared to 2010 levels.[33]
The MENA Cadre initiative would also seek to enhance
expertise by hosting in-house seminars and roundtables with outside
experts, including think tanks and retired Diplomatic Service
staff.[34] Dr Turner
reported that there were now approximately 70 speaker slots in
the overseas MENA network (out of over 155 UK-based staff). In
MENAD in London, there are "over 30" officers who speak
Arabic, Farsi or French to operational standard[35]
(about a quarter of the directorate), but the FCO provided no
further breakdown as to which of those 30 members of staff speak
which of the three languages specified. [36]
We conclude
that the work done by the FCO in its Middle East and North Africa
Directorate in 2010 to improve Arabic language skills and to revise
its strategic approach showed some foresight and demonstrates
that the Department had recognised the need for improvement. However,
the fact that the Department considered it necessary to plan a
40% increase in the FCO's Arabic speakers implicitly acknowledges
that it had significantly degraded its language capacity by 2010.
At the outbreak of the Arab Spring these programmes had yet to
have a demonstrable impact in raising language skills or significantly
changing the Department's approach.
5 Q 4 [Intissar Kherigi], Q 24 [Eugene Rogan], Q 103
[Lord Malloch-Brown] Back
6
See Ev 147 [Christian Aid], Ev 155-156 [Redress Trust], Ev 164-165
and Ev211-212 [Amnesty International] Back
7
Ev 107 Back
8
See, for example, Ev 174. Back
9
Q 40 and Ev 207 Back
10
Ev 174 Back
11
Ev 217 and Q 4. See also Ev 142 [Professor Caroline Rooney]. The
FCO also considered that the growth of social media in the last
two years was a "striking phenomenon", see Ev 68. Back
12
Ev 206 and Q 103 Back
13
Ev 207 Back
14
See, for example, Q 4 and Ev 174 [Middle East Monitor]. Back
15
Ev 61 Back
16
See Q 32 and Q 25 Back
17
Q 25 Back
18
Q 41 Back
19
Q 24 Back
20
Ev 142 and Ev 143 Back
21
Ev 147 Back
22
Q 117 Back
23
Foreign Affairs Committee, Seventh Report of Session 2010-12,
The Role of the FCO in UK Government, HC 665, para 180 Back
24
Ev 67 Back
25
Q 106 Back
26
Foreign Affairs Committee, Third Report of Session 2010-11, FCO
Performance and Finances, HC 572, para 25 Back
27
Ev 126 Back
28
Ev 61 Back
29
Ev 147 Back
30
Ev 68 Back
31
Foreign Affairs Committee, The Role of the FCO in UK Government,
Ev w47 Back
32
Q 121 Back
33
Ev 58 Back
34
Ev 58 Back
35
FCO language exams are aligned to the Common European Framework
of Reference for Languages (CEFR). The FCO operational exam is
equivalent to CEFR level C1. Back
36
Ev 58 Back
|