That is one of the conclusions of this year’s Arab Development Report, the third in a startling series. The first, two years ago, caused shock for its damning analysis of the failures of the Arab world — and for the fact that most of its authors were Arab.

This year’s is hardly less bleak. It gives warning of “disaster” — violent upheaval — if governments refuse to reform. It offers only a glimmer of hope that this can be avoided, as well as a grudging but wary acknowledgement that foreign governments might be able to help. “The Arab development crisis has widened, deepened and grown more complex. Partial reforms, no matter how varied, are no longer effective or even possible; perhaps they never were,” it begins.

It recognises some improvements, however, beginning with Arab governments’ joint declaration on reform in May last year. In Morocco, the Government has acknowledged some violations of rights, “in particular relating to the disappearance of political opponents”.

But generally the signs of change lie in civil organisations, not governments themselves: in Bahrain, in the lobbying of the National Committee for Martyrs and Torture Victims; in Syria, from calls for the state of emergency to be lifted; in Egypt, from the reform demands of the Muslim Brotherhood.

It is no surprise that the report attacks Israel for its treatment of Palestinians. But it is barely more polite about the US-led coalition’s efforts in Iraq. “The Iraqi people have emerged from the grip of a despotic regime that violated their basic rights and freedoms, only to fall under a foreign occupation that increased human suffering.”

It argues that the global War on Terror has made the abuses worse and given governments an excuse to arrest and torture, and ignore rules on fair trials.

It concludes that “overall, there has been no sign of easing of the human development crisis in the Arab region”.

In only three Arab countries (Algeria, Sudan and Yemen) and “a fourth under occupation” (Palestinian territories), are presidents elected through direct elections with more than one candidate and with term limits, it notes.

But it dismisses the notion that Arabs do not want democracy or are unsuited to it. It bluntly blames their leaders for withholding it, as well as the “appropriation” of religion “to perpetuate tyranny”.

The leaders permit corruption and then use the threat of arrest, and intelligence services, to ensure loyalty, the report says. Corruption spreads through all parts of political and economic life and chokes off the chance of growth.

In one scenario, dubbed Impending Disaster, it says that “if the repressive situation in Arab countries today continues, intensified societal conflict is likely to follow.

“Nor would a transfer of power through violence guarantee that successor regimes would be any more desirable.”

Like many such reports, it is better on the analysis of the problem than on scripting a solution. With less detail, and what seems like less conviction, the authors do offer the view that disaster can be avoided.

But their condition for this benign future is that leaders should agree to redistribute power to their subjects. It does not say why they might do this or how others might encourage them to do so. “The process would also establish good governance as a solid foundation for a human renaissance,” it concludes blithely.

The authors are intensely wary of foreign powers’ attempts to impose ready-made models, although they do concede that co-operation can be rewarding.

They make an exception for the United Nations, believing that it could play a crucial role in the process of transformation.

An optimistic conclusion, then, does surface out of the gloom. But the report’s account of how to get there is so sketchy that it is the bleaker parts of its analysis which dominate.

Times Recommends

• Air crash: ‘Everything is burnt. It is the closest thing to Hell’
• The true story of a passionate Korean 'spy'
• I shot Lennon in the back, Chapman tells parole board