North African state has managed to head off major unrest experienced by other regional states.
By William Shaw – The Arab Spring
Institute for War and Peace Reporting
As Morocco heads for a parliamentary election on November 25, observers say the protest movement there appears to be struggling, and radical political change looks increasingly unlikely.
Morocco was hit by large protests earlier this year, headed by the February 20 movement – named after the date of the first mass rally – and buoyed by other uprisings in the region.
In response to the demonstrations, King Mohammed VI quickly offered to curb some of his own powers with a new constitution, which was approved by a nationwide referendum in July, and brought forward the date of the parliamentary election to this month.
With turnout predicted to be low in any case, the February 20 movement has vowed to boycott the polls.
Zineb Belmkaddem, 27, an activist with the movement, was dismissive of the changes, saying the king had created the illusion of reform rather than implementing real change, and describing some of the parliamentary candidates as “corrupt dinosaurs”.
“We aren’t going to give up,” she said. “After the elections there may be very big protests.”
Experts say, however, that the concessions made by the authorities may be just enough to satisfy the majority of people, in a country which has long enjoyed a degree of liberalism absent in many of its neighbours. (See also Moroccans Want Evolution Not Revolution.)
King Mohammed’s position been further strengthened by continuing international support as other governments in the region have fallen.
A European diplomat who asked to remain anonymous said Morocco, with its evolutionary reforms, was often viewed as a model for the Middle East and North Africa.
“This is very clearly not Egypt, Tunisia – there is very little visible protest out on the street,” he said. “2011 was a big year of change for Morocco, but it’s change as part of a process that was already going on. The Arab Spring provided stimulus for the reform process to accelerate.”
And while the February 20 movement began by calling for greater democracy, the diplomat said, it had evolved to include more generalised complaints about corruption and unemployment, leaving it without a coherent set of demands.
Lise Storm, senior lecturer in Middle East politics at the university of Exeter, said, “I think it’s a tragedy. They [February 20 movement] had an opportunity to make Morocco more democratic and they didn’t do it.”
Storm attributes much of the problem to the disparate make-up of the protest movement, whose different strands had little in common besides their opposition to monarchical rule.
“They were too disjointed and the monarchy was very strong,” she said.
She believes that because of the king’s canny political decision-making, the February 20 movement will ultimately fizzle out.
“The monarchy doesn’t have to bow to anyone. It’s not going to bow to political parties, there’s no way it’s going to bow to the February 20 movement,” she added.
While the international community could have done more to push for change, the reality of Moroccan life was also an important factor. As Storm put it, “The people were not that unhappy.”
Morocco was one of the region’s less authoritarian countries prior to the Arab Spring, although the king still wielded huge power. A recent report by the United States-based democracy watchdog Freedom House noted that the king could dissolve parliament, rule by decree, and appoint and dismiss cabinet ministers.
The new constitution, endorsed by a reported 98.5 per cent of those who voted in the referendum, appears to clip the monarch’s wings somewhat, by requiring him to appoint a prime minister from the party that wins the most votes in an elections, and allowing the prime minister and his cabinet council to appoint senior officials.
However, the king still retains control of the armed forces, foreign policy and the judiciary.
Some observers say the king’s concessions to democracy are superficial, even if they suffice to outmanoeuvre his opponents and stem calls for greater reform.
“The constitution is marginally better, but apart from that the monarchy has been strengthened, and in democratic terms the situation is actually worse than before,” Storm said.
According to Belmkaddem, “We so far don’t see any changes. The king and the royal institutions haven’t given up any powers.”
Others warn that a low turnout could undermine the credibility of the new parliament, although this may be more because of general apathy than angry boycotts.
Some 30 parties are competing for 395 seats in this month’s election, with 87 per cent of candidates standing for the first time.
A Council of Europe delegation reported earlier this month that the election campaign did not appear to have excited much enthusiasm among the electorate.
In the last election held in 2007, turnout was only 37 per cent.
“The challenge for politicians is to raise that figure. It’s a challenge of credibility,” the European diplomat said. “None of that is to deny that that the election may lead to frustration, and some parts of society may feel nothing has changed.”
Morocco still faces complex long-term problems. Literacy rates are lower than in Tunisia or Algeria, and limited economic activity makes the country vulnerable to instability.
Quite how much power the king will cede following the election also remains to be seen.
“The interesting point is what he will do in practice. Will he intervene in picking ministers, or step back?” the diplomat said. “That is the big test.”
William Shaw is an IWPR editorial intern in London.
