By Peter Graff
LONDON (Reuters) - The Middle East is more secure than a year ago because of positive developments both in Iraq and the Arab-Israeli conflict, one of the world's top think tanks said Tuesday in its annual survey of global security.
But the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said Iraq remained an inspiration for Islamic militants, helping al Qaeda to recruit and continue to pose a threat to countries around the world.
The annual Strategic Survey of the IISS, whose experts have sometimes been skeptical of U.S. policy under President Bush, gave credit to the United States for measures that appeared to bear fruit over the past year, notably in Iraq.
"If May 2004 was marked by widespread despair over burgeoning insurgency in Iraq ... the watchword for May 2005 was guarded hope," it said in the 384-page report.
It pointed to progress in the Arab-Israeli conflict, the promise of multi-party elections in Egypt and popular uprisings against Syria in Lebanon as examples of U.S. policy successes.
"On balance, U.S. policy in 2004-2005 appeared fairly effective in emboldening regional actors in the Middle East and Gulf to rally against rogue states and implement gentle political reforms," the IISS said.
"But the inspirational effect of the Iraq intervention on transnational Islamist terrorism remained the proverbial elephant in the living room," it said.
"From al Qaeda's point of view, Bush's Iraq policies have arguably produced a confluence of propitious circumstances: a strategically bogged down America, hated by much of the Islamic world and regarded warily even by its allies."
"TIPPING POINT"
The report said the reopening of dialogue between Palestinians and Israelis after the death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat marked a "tipping point" in the peace process.
"Stark changes have been heralded not only by Arafat's death, but by (Israeli Prime Minister Ariel) Sharon's conversion and Bush's commitment to use American influence to achieve a final status accord," it said. But success depended also on militant groups like Hamas that have rejected the peace process.
In an unusual chapter on international law and the "war on terrorism," the report described how courts over the past year had rolled back many new anti-terrorism powers claimed by governments, especially in the United States and Britain.
It said Washington and its allies had yet to resolve key legal issues, such as whether war could be justified against threats that were not imminent.
But it blamed the White House for the "shocking" abuse of prisoners in U.S. custody. An "amateurish official legal debate" in the Bush administration "incorrectly suggested that certain prisoners were 'not legally entitled' to humane treatment."
"Such illegal practices made the achievement of any broad international coalition in Iraq even more difficult than it already was, and strengthened the cause of the insurgents."
