Cairo: From Baghdad to Cairo, from Riyadh to the Gaza Strip, 2005 is the year of elections. Iraqis, Palestinians, Egyptians, even Saudis will be going to the polls. "Elections is a magic word. You have got the magic word but you don't have magic without delivering," said Saudi analyst Mai Yamani, with the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London. "I don't think there is any significance unless there is genuine intent to reform, share of power, minimize the power of the ruling elite, end corruption."

Fahmi Howeidi, ,a liberal Islamic thinker in Egypt, thought the Jan. 9 Palestinian elections were the only one where there are real political players and the possibility of change. In Iraq, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, it's just "painting the house," he said. "The results are known and there will be no fundamental change ... a soap opera, a response to American pressure, and not a result of popular demand or a strong political action. There is no political struggle."

After toppling Saddam Hussein in 2003, the United States promised Iraq would become a model for Arab democracy, and pressured regimes in the region to yield to some local demands for change. Reform, Washington holds, will make Muslim and Arab societies less fertile ground for extremists. But many question whether elections under occupation (Iraq, West Bank and Gaza Strip) or under foreign pressure (Saudi Arabia) can really prompt change in the region.

Iraqis are scheduled to vote Jan. 30 in the first elections choosing a legislative assembly to draft a constitution. "Your vote is gold; more precious than gold," reads one Iraqi poster on a Baghdad street. '^Your vote is the future," encourages another. Satellite TV ads show Iraqis proclaiming, "I am ready to vote," and outline a voter-registration process, a novelty for Arab viewers.

In the Saudi capital, Riyadh, billboard messages prepare citizens for the kingdom's first nationwide elections, for municipal councils "Participate in the decision-making. Your voice will not be heard unless you register," they say. The balloting, set to start Feb. 10, is the first since municipal elections were held in a few cities in the 1960s.

Even now, councils won't be wholly elected and women will not be allowed to vote or run for office. Saudi Arabia will remain monarchy. But authorities promote the election as a first step. Saudi men are exhorted to embrace the process out of national pride and to turn out in traditional dress white gowns and checkered head-dresses - when registering. But Ya-mani, the Saudi analyst, noted registration has been slow, Less than 40 percent of the eligible male voters turned out to register for the kingdom's first ballot in decades.

In Egypt, the Arab world's most populous country, President Hosni Mubarak is up for a fifth six-year term. Parliamentary elections are also scheduled for late 2005. Egyptians vote yes or no to a single presidential candidate presented to them by Parliament, and Parliament has long been controlled by Mubarak's ruling party. Mubarak's candidacy, although not yet official, is almost certain, with the government rejecting opposition demands for term limits.

Voters will choose lawmakers in Lebanon and Yemen, and a president in Yemen and Iran. The vote in Lebanon comes after an international uproar over a constitutional amendment that extended the term of pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud, avoiding presidential elections.

"When one looks at this elections phenomenon, one would think the Arab countries are living the spring of democracy, amid flowers of reform and change," columnist Saleh Eddin Hafez wrote recently in the Al-Ahram daily "But the obvious truth ... is that democracy can't be realised through Arab elections."

Palestinian Election

As expected, veteran PLO leader Mahmoud Abbas has been elected as President of Palestine Authority. Indeed, as far as his standing in politics is concerned, he was head and shoulders above all the other contenders. Though no match for Yasser Arafat, Mr Abbas has been generally considered as the brains behind the Palestinian Liberation Organisation.

Born in 1935 in Galilee, Mahmoud Abbas fled to Syria as a refugee in 1948 while still a young boy. In the 50’s as an exile in Qatar he had become an active worker in the PLO. Making a steady progress Mr Mahmoud Abbas who is also known as Abu Mazen, became head of the PLOs national and international relations department in 1980. In 1989 he had become the defacto deputy to Yasser Arafat in the PLO.

Interestingly, Mr Mahmoud Abbas political career suffers from a self-contradiction. He has been associated with Al-Fatah and was even elected its leader after Arafat; death in November last, but in practice, he has favoured negotiations with Israel, rather than military confrontation. He had reconciled with the existence of Israel on the Palestinian soil quite early during the struggle and has been working for a Palestine co-existing side by side with the Israeli state. It may be mentioned here that as early as 70s he had initiated dialogue with the liberal left wing in Israel. It was probably against this background that he headed the Palestinian team at the secret Oslo talks and accompanied Yasser Arafat to the White House to sign the Oslo Accords. Mention may also be made here of the Abu Mazen-Beilin Plan – the final status agreement between Israel and the PLO. In 1996 Mahmoud Abbas Arafat’s deputy and in May 2003 he was appointed Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority.

He is decidedly a moderate who believes in having one bird in the hand than two in the bush. He is a man in a hurry to settle the matter with Israel by give and take. It was perhaps this thinking which brought him into conflict with Arafat ones the issue of control of the Palestinian security forces and made him to resign from prime ministership. He was however persuade by Arafat to withdraw his resignation and come back. Because of conciliatory nature Mahmoud Abbas was the favoured candidate of the US and even Israel in the election for the PA presidentship of which the borders of the two states made no secret. All doors were thrown open to him by Israel and his campaign was facilitated by the Israeli authorities in every way. To the good luck of Abu Mazen, the hardliner elements, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad though they boycotted the elections, put no hurdles in his way.

However, his real test would begins now after taking over the office. His is the typical situation of being between the hell and the high water. Incidents of the last couple of weeks before and after his election show that neither the Islamists nor the Israeli leader are going to budge from their extremist positions. The Hamas have been carrying on their raids and suicide attacks and the Israeli check posts and Aerial Sharon in behaving as obstinate and cruel as before. After the incident of January 14, in which six Israel’s were killed in Gaza, Sharon froze all official contract with the Palestinians and gave a strong warning to Abbas to rein in the militants ‘at once’, something which he know very well is not in Abbas’ hands. Another Israeli minister Meir Sheetrit used even stronger words saying Abbas ‘cannot limit himself condemning terrorism and must take decisive steps”. US Secretary of State Colin Powell also joined in telling Mahmoud Abbas ‘at in going to be “it is going to be another tragedy if people who conduct these acts of terror… are allowed to continue to destroy the peace process and deny the Palestinian people their opportunity to have a state of their own.”

Abbas has said he would not use force against the militants as Israel demands but would try to negotiate a truce. The rhetoric is the same as during Arafat’s time.
It is now to be seen how Abu Mazen in his quest to restart the peace process is going persuade the two extremist sides – the Hamas and the Israeli’s to water down to find a way out of the impasse. The Bush administration too has a crucial role to play in this predicament.