Constitutional Self-Correction and the Future of the Arab Spring
By Dr. Chris Seiple on 26 September 2011
While recent protests and sectarian violence in Egypt and violence in Libya raise concern about whether the Arab revolutions will devour their reformers—leaving authoritarian tendencies, secular and theological, to thrive—there remains room for hope as long as the desire for freedom is universal to the human condition. Look no further than the special relationship between Morocco and the United States. Americans will never forget that it was Morocco that first recognized our independence and fight for freedom. It was in Morocco that the liberation of North Africa and Europe began when American and allied troops came ashore at Casablanca in 1943. Further, Morocco's own independence in 1956 was inspired, in part, by the promise of self-determination that Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill agreed to in the Atlantic Charter.
Two anniversaries which passed almost unnoticed last week provide caution and catalyst to the Arab "springs" taking place throughout North Africa and the Middle East.
On September 17, 1939, the Soviet Union invaded the eastern part of Poland, according to a secret deal they had made with Nazi Germany. Just six years earlier, The Nazis, freely elected to a majority in the Reichstag, had changed the constitution to enable their plans.
Poland, of course, had only been re-established as a country at the end of World War I. From 1795-1918, the Prussian, Australian and Russian empires had wiped Poland off the face of the planet. Why? They had dared to have a constitution modeled after America.
Constitutions have consequences. They require a steady, intentional, and always reforming hand, that is ready for the counter-revolution, whether it comes from the inside (e.g., Nazi Germany), or the outside (e.g., Poland).
The second anniversary which passed unnoticed was also September 17. Two-hundred twenty-four years ago on that date, the United States formally adopted the U.S. Constitution. It is the second oldest constitution in the world. Two characteristics have defined the American constitutional experiment. First, America has always maintained the capacity for self-critique, and self-correction. From the abolition of slavery to the women's suffrage movement, America has continuously sought a "more perfect union."
Second, with many failures along the way, America has sought to protect and promote its minorities. For example, while it is easy to forget, Massachusetts started as a theocracy with no distinction between its ecclesiastical and civil order. When a fellow Christian, Roger Williams, decided he could not worship and preach as ordered, he fled west and founded Rhode Island. In establishing that colony, he insisted that everyone had the freedom to worship and share their faith whether they were Jewish, Indian, Quaker, or Baptist.
Such values are consistent with Islam, the Middle East, and especially Morocco. When Islam began, its adherents were a persecuted minority. Just five years after Muhammad began receiving his revelations, Sumayyah bint Khayyat, a woman, was killed simply for being a Muslim (making her the new religion's first martyr). As a result, Muhammad allowed some of his fellow believers to flee to Ethiopia where King Negus, a Christian ruler, both accepted and protected them.
During World War II, Morocco was forced to be a part of Vichy France. The Sultan of Morocco, Muhammad V—grandfather to the current King, Muhammad VI—refused to make Morocco's Jews wear the yellow Star of David, and he held public meetings with Jewish leaders. "There are no Jews in Morocco, only Moroccans," he reportedly said.
These are exactly the values that our world and the Middle East/North Africa need most: A Christian leader protecting a Muslim minority; a Muslim leader protecting a Jewish minority. All as citizens equal under the law. Indeed, the constitutional protection and celebration of minorities is the essence of a healthy and flourishing society.
And while such constitutional measures are the right thing to do, they are also in governments' self-interest. Roger Williams, for example, believed that if people, especially minorities, were allowed to live and share their faith with respect, then they would be less likely to agitate against the state. Religious freedom was a civility essential to stability.
In today's globalized world, adherents of every religion are a minority somewhere. How the majority group treats the minority in one place is easily reciprocated in another. Moreover, in a globalized economy, any country that does not educate and equip its women and minority citizens will be left behind, uncompetitive and irrelevant.
The constitution is the cornerstone to peoples worldwide living and working together, according to the best of their faith traditions and values; the constitution is also in the self-interest of their respective countries, with dire consequences if it is not done right.
As Americans continue to steward and sustain our constitutional experiment, we should encourage and support the experiments beginning throughout the Middle East and North Africa, especially in Morocco. And we should do so as Roger Williams did: unashamed and unabashed about our principles, because they are so practical and vital to our national security.
This article is based on Dr. Seiple's 17 September 2011 presentation to the "International Forum on Democratic Transitions and Constitutional Processes," in Rabat, Morocco (at the invitation of the Moroccan Ministry for Foreign Affairs).
Last updated 28 September 2011