The Iraq war – so runs one argument put forward by the current US administration – should not only bring democracy and freedom to Iraq but also introduce democratic reforms into the Middle East as a whole. The situation one and a half years after the war commenced, however, confirms the arguments of those who have always doubted the applicability of the democratic domino theory to the region. Furthermore, the security situation in the region, a crucial factor for the prospects of internal political transformation, has if anything worsened since the war.

Nevertheless, reforms are very much on the regional agenda, not only because of the political initiatives of the EU and the US, but also due to the reform steps undertaken by the governments of some countries and increasingly pressing demands from within the societies of the Middle East and North Africa. The part played by the Arab Human Development Report in this process is not to be underestimated. Its concise and self-critical presentation of development deficits has given rise to critical and lively debate in the Arab countries. The emergence of an »Arab knowledge society«, connected with more individual freedoms and an opening up to the outside world, is – according to the most recent report of 2003 – one condition of making up the region’s development lag. It is therefore good timing that the Arab countries are the »guest of honor« at the Frankfurt Book Fair this autumn. It is also a reason for INTERNATIONAL POLITICS AND SOCIETY to focus on the development prospects of the Arab countries, as well as of the other states in the Middle East, and to examine the central points of conflict from both the internal and the external perspectives: the role of outside actors in the transformation process, the solution of regional security problems, and the relationship between democracy and Islam.

The engagement of Western countries in the Middle East, justified on the basis of the fundamental values of democracy and freedom, has been criticized not only for lacking in credibility and effectiveness, but even for being counterproductive. To the extent that so-called »Western interference« is linked to oppositional criticism from within Arab countries, or that the West even uses the latter for its own purposes, the forces of reform are at risk of being labeled »agents of the West « and of losing influence.This dilemma is brought to the fore in the clearest terms by the contributions of Nader Fergany and Hoda Elsadda. Fergany, lead author of the Arab Human Development Report, in his introduction to this focus issue criticizes the instrumentalization of the Report by the USA and calls for an »Arab renaissance« which must be driven and shaped primarily from within. The Egyptian scholar and women’s rights activist Elsadda asserts that Arab women and their organizations have been fighting for more rights for decades. In this they have had to struggle not against the Islamic tradition but against various specific social and political obstacles which have not yet been overcome in many Western countries either.

While Fergany points to the power of ideas and Elsadda to the influence of (female) agents of change, Christian Koch focuses on the social-structural causes of political transformation in the Middle East: not the intervention in Iraq, but rather demographic developments, increasing education, and the ending of the information monopoly of the state by means of new technologies will sooner or later overturn the status quo.

Societal impulses for change notwithstanding,the question remains whether the power structures in the rentier states of the Middle East (see also Herbert Kitschelt ’s contribution in IPG 1/2004) can be fundamentally changed from the inside alone. Andrä Gärber and Richard Youngs in their contributions take the view that properly designed international and transnational policies can by all means promote democratic transformation in the Middle East and North Africa. To be sure, the most recent G-8 Partnership initiative, as Gärber shows, is incomplete and hardly innovative, while Youngs works out the many weak points of the EU democratization policy for the Middle East.

Both authors agree that common and coordinated efforts of the USA and Europe would be advantageous. It is only in the short term that the EU can – according to Youngs – benefit from emphasizing its differences with the USA. In a similar vein, Jürgen Kocka in his commentary on current US foreign policy calls for a sensitive approach to the precious transatlantic partnership. Historical understanding and acceptance of cultural differences – such as dialogue with the countries of the Arab world requires – should also be guiding principles in the relationship with the USA.

The success of transatlantic cooperation in relation to internal political reform in the Middle East will undoubtedly depend on how far it will be possible to solve the central security-policy questions and the conflicts in the region.The stabilization of Iraq is one of the main tasks which – according to Gärber – not least because of the mistakes of the coalition forces remains difficult even after the transfer of sovereignty to the transitional government. Equally pressing is a peace solution for Israel and Palestine. Muriel Asseburg calls for a stronger international engagement since the window of opportunity for a two-state solution is threatening to close. Finally, a regional disarmament and détente process is a condition of democratic reforms in the region. Rolf Mützenich presents a concept for a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East which is to be realized by means of the patient path of »transformation through rapprochement«.

The relationship between democracy and Islam is the third strand which runs through the contributions in this issue. Eberhard Kienle puts this aspect at the center of his analysis of the political future of Egypt. Kienle warns against characterizing Islamic forces in general as a danger to or the antithesis of democratic development. There are – as Youngs and Gärber also show – a number of pragmatic movements and moderate Islamic organizations which can be partners in the democratization process. The main problem in Egypt is – according to Kienle – not the threat of »Islamization« but the structural hegemony of the regime which is blocking the formation of alternative power centers.

The indigenous attempt to promote regional integration and cooper- ation is experiencing a renaissance in Africa. Keith Gottschalk and Siegmar Schmidt examine in their contribution whether the hopes vested in the African Union (AU) and the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) are justified. The answer is also instructive because multilateral institution-building for the purpose of overcoming development deficits and security problems is discussed as a model for other regions, for example, the Middle East. According to Gottschalk and Schmidt the new organizations undoubtedly represent a remarkable break with the African past and the dominance of the sovereignty principle. To be sure, the many institutional weaknesses, lack of resources, and utopian aims call into question the credibility of the integration project. The Darfur conflict in Sudan – a member of the Arab League and of the AU – can be taken as a decisive test of the new security policy structures. However, it is also a test case for the UN and its members who believed that they had learned from the failure in Rwanda (see the review essay by Hans Mathieu in IPG 2/ 2004) – another reason why the Western donor countries should support this indigenous African initiative.