AMMAN: With the collapse of the Iraqi government in Baghdad, Arab governments are warily confronting citizens angered by their leaders’ impotence during the war in Iraq and emboldened by the war to speak out, often bluntly, about their governments.

The lesson being taken from the war is that the rulers of the Middle East — whether they be kings, emirs or dictators — must change their ways of governing or they could meet the same end as former president Saddam Hussein, according to political analysts in the region.

After a conflict widely described in the Arab media as a defeat, intellectuals and government officials are speaking of the need for more democracy and human rights at home, reforms that could temporarily spell their survival but ultimately hasten their end. They also warn that a greater openness could result in governments that are more hostile to America and Israel.

“The Arab regimes are trapped,” said Mustafa Harmarneh, director of the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan. “Structures that are incapable of reforms will gradually wither away. But once they open up, how much transparency can they stand?”

In words that may come back to haunt them, officials in Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan insisted this week that the Iraqi people must be free to choose who will lead them, making the point that the United States should bow out of Iraq as soon as possible. But it only underscored that almost every Arab country has a head of state who cannot be turned out of office through elections.

“All the regimes that toppled monarchies to become republicans are now acting like monarchies,” said Labib Kamhawi, a Jordanian political analyst and member of the country’s parliament. “They’re all evaluating their position now. The Arab masses have learned they should not tolerate regimes, and a democratic transition should come from within.”

Many Egyptians did not miss the irony of President Hosni Mubarak’s call for Iraqis to choose their own government.

Egypt has been under “emergency rule” since the October 1973 war with Israel. People can be detained without charges, and no protests are allowed without permission. While Egypt holds elections, Mubarak, who has been in power since 1981, won his last election in 1999 with 93.7 percent of the vote. He is said to be grooming his son to succeed him.

“I think several Arab leaders feel their time is nearing its end, including Egypt’s,” said an Egyptian opposition party leader who asked not to be named. “It might not be right away but I think the message is clear: People want democracy and they would prefer it came by Arab leaders handing over power (rather) than American bombs wounding Arab children. There is no question that leaders are shaken, shocked and awed. They are worried their own strong armies might abandon them just like Saddam’s Republican Guard left him.”

Many Egyptians fear speaking out against Mubarak. But with a sagging economy, anger over Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and fury over Egypt’s permission for the United States to transport troops and material through the Suez Canal, analysts said, many Egyptians want a change in leadership.

Open criticism of governments is not hard to find now in Arab countries whose citizens can be jailed for disparaging words about their leaders.

“We are so angry with our regimes that we would like to hit them with our own boots,” said Laith Shubeilat, an opposition figure in Jordan who was jailed three times for criticizing the late King Hussein. “I want the governments to be uncomfortable. They know they have nothing to do with their people. I don’t feel like seeing any of our government officials. I can’t stop from spitting in their faces.”

Even in Syria, where President Bashar Assad won election three years ago with 97.29 percent of the vote, there is tentative talk of reforming the bureaucracy.

In an article filed from Damascus in Saturday’s Al-Hayat newspaper, an unidentified Syrian cabinet minister was quoted discussing a “new challenge” to the Syrian government caused by the presence of US troops in Iraq. Speaking of changes in various government ministries, the official said it was “necessary to have a government representative of the public, with new faces.”

To a large degree, some of the talk of reform is spurred by fear of American intentions. Some analysts say governments may have to usher in democracy if only to keep the United States and its military at bay. The shock at watching the Iraqi regime sacrifice Baghdad without a fight also showed the emptiness of the rhetoric that had so enthralled much of the Arab street.

“This is a huge lesson for all the governments in the region, and it shows how the lack of democracy and the heavy hand of authoritarian regimes can lead to the destruction of a whole country,” said Hafez Abu Seada, secretary general of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, who was imprisoned eight months after he criticized Mubarak. “ I think all Arab leaders now see that the only way to avoid this situation is to move to democracy. I think Egypt must play a role not only to make a real progress in democratization and to lead the whole region with a new vision of democracy in Arab states which is lead by the Arabs themselves.”

Talk of ushering in more democracy is strong in Jordan, which is ruled by King Abdullah. Elections will be held in July for the 110-member parliament, in which six seats are reserved for women.

“In the whole Arab world, there should be a serious re-evaluation of the political future,” said Jordan’s information minister, Mohammed Adwan. “Political participation has to be not only encouraged but part of government policy. The world has changed, and we have to look at ways to make all people in all countries actively participate in the political process.” —Dawn/LAT-WP News Service (c) The Washington Post