I think, I blog, I get validated by The Economist
Saturday, February 11, 2006 at 6:41PM EDITORIAL: The one thing Bush got right: For all his other foreign-policy mistakes, George Bush is right about democracy,” The Economist, 4 February 2006, p. 9.
SPECIAL REPORT (POLITICAL ISLAM): “Forty shades of green: Islam’s main political arms differ greatly in both tactics and aims. But that should not reassure America, The Economist, 4 February 2006, p. 22.
Great editorial and piece on the “dangers of democracy” that we hear so much about today from both right and left in the U.S.
So much experience and yet so little faith.
Democracy’s defining feature--the freedom to hire and fire your government--does not guarantee that countries will make wise choices, or that democracies will be good neighbors. The lesson of the 20th century is that no people is immune from falling under the spell of some hypnotic voice or pernicious doctrine. In 1933 Germans freely elected the Nazi Party, which went on to reduce Europe to rubble. But only the most twisted history could blame democracy rather than dictatorship for the depredations of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Zedong. The merits of democracy are obvious and the appeal of it seems universal. So why do the familiar arguments have to be rehased all over again in the case of the Middle East?
Hardcore left and right in the U.S. seem desperate to believe in the "Bush-as-global-conquerer” fantasy, as if Afghanistan and Iraq constitute the world as we know it. Then there are the so-called realists who like democracy in the abstract, but consider its promotion naïve.
So do we give it a go in the Middle East, or do we stick with the dictators, knowing so well what they’ve given us for the last half century?
And if the Islamists don’t wise up in power, then we cajole and punish accordingly, as this piece argues. Just because you’re democratically elected doesn’t mean you get to wage war on neighbors you hate.
Meanwhile, we show some patience. We get--dare I say it?--more realistic.
Holding elections is not a panacea. Democracy cannot at a stroke heal national conflicts, create civic institutions or modernize traditional societies. But whatever else people think of Mr. Bush, on this one thing--the universal potential and appeal of the democratic idea--he is on the side of history.
The second article is a great one that presents a lot of good historical compare-and-contrasts on Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Big point: the more the MB and wings Hamas and Hezbollah cooperate in the political process, the wider the gap between those groups and Al Qaeda, which brooks no such cooperation. No easy dreams of divide and conquer, please, but also please ditch any nonsense about these guys all being on the same side in terms of agenda. One sees a world a states, the other does not.
And please don’t confuse either with Shiites.
And for those who fear the MB and others are pursuing the classic “entryist” strategy that uses elections as the front door to dictatorship, I say we’re better off getting through that process, if it’s in the cards, faster as opposed to slower. Can’t be any worse than the dictators we have now, who export their terrorists to the West more and more. And the sooner the masses see the falsity of this strategy, the better.
Again, the Big Bang was never about obviating any of this (dealing with Islamists, terrorism, old tribal hatreds), but merely about speeding it all up (the learning curve, the killing, the burning out). Plenty of ground to cover. Only question is how long you want to drag it out.
Reader Comments (2)
But will our country have the nerve, and the will for such punitive tutorials as and when, they might be required.
I, too, find the rapid verdict on the worthwhileness of Democracy odd. How many elections have actually been held yet, and so many are off to the races eager to chalk the whole project as foolhardy, expensive, bloodsoaked etc. Patience is requied to allow the strategy to slowly unfold.
The more rapidly terrorists can be made accountable for sewers the better. They'll demonstrate their incompetence, and the disenchantment will soon follow. As it has followed in Iran. Additionally, once terrorists are in charge of the treasury, they are going to have to justify expenditure on terror, in lieu of immediate needs, such as sewage, plumbing, trash collecting, etc. Not to mention, there is a refreshing clarity introduced into the situation by the emergence of Hamas. Diplomatically, we can take advantage of it.
by mutual agreement, Fabius Maximus and i decided to delete our previous comment each here.