The Wrong Way to Sell Democracy to the Arab World

[Skaman]

The Bush administration deserves credit for its long-term commitment to democracy in the Middle East. But even a good idea can be spoiled by clumsy execution. Worse still, the idea can backfire — particularly if people come to suspect that ulterior motives are at work.

This is precisely what is happening with President Bush's "Greater Middle East initiative," which outlines steps the United States and its partners in the Group of 8 industrialized nations can take to promote political freedom, equality for women, access to education and greater openness in the Middle East. Elements of the proposal include the creation of free trade zones in the region, new financing for small businesses and help overseeing elections.

After a draft of the initiative was published last month in Al Hayat, a London-based Arabic newspaper, Arab leaders responded swiftly — and unhappily — at what they perceived to be American efforts to impose change. President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt went so far as to call the proposal "delusional."

Fortunately, there is still time for the administration to set things right and rescue this potentially worthwhile project. But it must move quickly, particularly if it wants the G-8 to sign on to the plan at its summit meeting in June.

There is no question that the administration has its work cut out for it. For starters, the democracy initiative was unveiled by the president in a patronizing way: before an enthusiastic audience at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington policy institution enamored of the war in Iraq and not particularly sympathetic toward the Arab world. The notion that America, with Europe's support and Israel's endorsement, will teach the Arab world how to become modern and democratic elicits, at the very least, ambivalent reactions. (This, after all, is a region where memory of French and British control is still fresh.) Though the program is meant to be voluntary, some fear that compulsion is not far behind.

There are other reasons to be wary of the administration's plan. Democracy, impatiently imposed, can lead to unintended consequences. If the Palestinians were able to choose a leader in truly free elections, might they not opt for the head of Hamas? If free elections were soon held in Saudi Arabia, would Crown Prince Abdullah, a reformer, prevail over Osama bin Laden or another militant Islamic leader? If not genuinely accepted and reinforced by traditions of constitutionalism, democracy can degenerate into plebiscites that only add legitimacy to extremism and authoritarianism.

Compounding the problem is the suspicion — not only among the Arabs but also among the Europeans whose support the United States is seeking — that the sudden focus on democracy has been promoted by administration officials who wish to delay any serious American effort to push the Israelis and Palestinians to reach a genuine peace settlement. That suspicion was fueled by Vice President **** Cheney's recent remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. The spread of democracy, Mr. Cheney said, was "the precondition for peace and prosperity in Western Europe" after World War II. He went on to assert that democratic reform "is also essential to a peaceful resolution of the longstanding Arab-Israeli dispute."

Mr. Cheney's argument that democracy is the precondition for peace appeared to many to be a rationalization for postponing any effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Moreover, it ignored the historical reality that democracy can flourish only in an atmosphere of political dignity. As long as the Palestinians live under Israeli control and are humiliated daily, they won't be attracted by the virtues of democracy. The same is largely true of the Iraqis under the American occupation.

For the Bush administration's initiative to succeed, it must be more in sync with regional realities. To that end, the administration should take the following steps:

First, the program must be devised with Arab countries and not just presented to them. Egyptians and Saudis will not embrace democracy if they feel that their religious and cultural traditions are being slighted. The Europeans should also be fully engaged, and they should likewise pursue a dialogue of their own with the nations of the region regarding the definition and the goals of the planned undertaking. Any differences in approach could then be reconciled at the G-8 summit meeting.

Second, the initiative must recognize that without political dignity derived from self-determination there can be no democracy. The Germans regained their political dignity in a relatively short time after the end of World War II, and that in turn helped them to revive the democratic traditions of the pre-Nazi era. The program for Arab democracy will be more successful, and find wider acceptance, if it is matched by efforts to grant sovereignty to the Iraqis and Palestinians. Otherwise, democracy will seem to many in the Arab world to be window dressing for continued external domination.

Finally, the United States must define the substance of a peace settlement in the Middle East and then work energetically to put that agreement in place. Doing so will give greater credibility to the constructive motives behind the democracy initiative; it will also show the countries of the Middle East that there is a shared basis for a genuine partnership with the democratic West.

The transformation of the Middle East will be a more complex undertaking than the restoration of postwar Europe. After all, social restoration is inherently easier than social transformation. Islamic traditions, religious convictions and cultural habits must be treated with patient respect. Only then will the time be ripe for democracy in the Middle East.


Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser in the Carter administration, is the author of "The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/08/opinion/08BREZ.html?ex=1079326800&en=1ec60113c05aced5&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[Trigger]

Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser in the Carter administration, is the author of "The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership."
That's comforting.

[Ian H]

Interesting read. I agree in principle for certain.

[Javehn]

Yes , goof luck selling democracy for people with midle ages middle eastern menthality ... They need it like used toilet paper . It wasn't big surprize that a civil war will errupt in Iraq in after current operation . The only thing holding the civil war is massive presence of international contingent , and they eat the whole **** pie .
Those people aren't used to leave in democracy , and they will find any excuse not to have it . They only understand fist hand . All of those who will jump on this , just don't understand or never saw their menthality .
They like to fight "for freedom" , and then they **** themselfes up . In Lebanon , Sudan , Ethiopia , Somalia . That middle eastern temper and influenced from it Islamic extremists .

[Sixgun Symphony]

If the muslims have democracy, they will vote for an Islamic republic like Iran or the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

We got Saddam, so lets bring our troops home and let the Sunni's, Shiites, and Kurds hash it out among themselves.

[TALOS]

If the muslims have democracy, they will vote for an Islamic republic like Iran or the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

We got Saddam, so lets bring our troops home and let the Sunni's, Shiites, and Kurds hash it out among themselves.
I honestly believe that the majority of Arabs would like to have more freedoms and rights but just be allowed to gradually move into it rather than one big jump. That would be too much culture shock for them. They need time to grow into it and make sure that its takes strong roots not shallow ones.

[Yard Ape]

If the muslims have democracy, they will vote for an Islamic republic like Iran or the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.There is an opportunity here to establish the foundations for women & minorities to be more than second class citizens. There is a chance to ensure basic human rights & dignity become respected. There is the possibility of greater freedom for the average Iraqi. No. It would be better to let thousands die in a civil war and a new “Taliban-like” regime to take control of Iraq (requiring a subsequent invasion to clear out the terrorists).

Sixgun,
I have noticed that you often post that you, as a US citizen, place high value on individual rights & freedoms. You have even made it clear that you will defend these to the death. Yet, when it comes to the world outside US boarders it seems they can go fük their hats before you will give a damn.

Are you a hypocrite? Or, do you believe the world owes you something & you hide behind your speeches to fake the moral high ground?

[Sixgun Symphony]

There is an opportunity here to establish the foundations for women & minorities to be more than second class citizens. There is a chance to ensure basic human rights & dignity become respected. There is the possibility of greater freedom for the average Iraqi.

So how long you want to stay there? 5yrs? 50yrs? 500yrs?

[Kilgor]

Arabs have never known democracy and freedom of speech.

They are too bound by religion and heavy government to accept democracy in such a short time. As stated before, any vote would just elect a Iran style Islamic dictatorship.

As much as Id like to see Iraq flourish, I dont think its going to happen.

[SeanAshi]

The most oppressive country in the world Saudi Arabia, they need democracy.

[Flagg]

So how long you want to stay there? 5yrs? 50yrs? 500yrs?

As long as it takes....anything worth starting is definitely worth finishing

[SeanAshi]

Shabbat Shalom bin Laden!

[Yard Ape]

So how long you want to stay there? 5yrs? 50yrs? 500yrs?If we do not stay until the work is done, then we will be going back in for a third war (just like there never would have been a second war if war if we had stayed until the work was done under the first George Bush). It may take a generation or more (like Cyprus).

[Shake n Bake]

Behold Zionist pigs and Crusader infidels, there is no God but Allah!

Allah was amused this morning to learn that only one-half of 1% of Americans think they are going to hell when they die. The reason that is amusing is because only one-half of 1% of Americans are Muslims. Allah has a funny feeling that 99% of you are in for a big f*** disappointment, kufr.





Allahu Akbar!




This is the best gimmick account in a long time

[Marmot1]

Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser in the Carter administration, is the author of "The Choice: Global Domination or Global Leadership."
That's comforting.
He he what is funny is that Brzeziński is Polish :-D

[Yard Ape]

Sixgun,
I have noticed that you often post that you, as a US citizen, place high value on individual rights & freedoms. You have even made it clear that you will defend these to the death. Yet, when it comes to the world outside US boarders it seems they can go fük their hats before you will give a damn about thier dignety, rights, and freedoms.

Are you a hypocrite? Or, do you believe the world owes you something & you hide behind your speeches to fake the moral high ground?Too bad you will never be able to address this apperent hypocracy.

[Yard Ape]

Sixgun,
Welcome back. Care to address the apperent hypocracy of your posts?

[citizen-k]

Democracy & the arab world, now that what I call fiction!

The only country in the world who is "Arab" in a way and is a cemocracy is Turkey (and they are not exactly Arabs and not exactly a democracy)

Who ever think there can be a democratic Arab country in the middle east in the next 100 years should share some of his fine X with us!

[WARPIG]

Democracy? In a Nazi regime? Democracy? In an Arab state?
How long should we stay? How long until we leave Europe? Whether people agree to what is going on.. how we got there... or why we stay... we as human beings have a responsibility to stay and help. If the US presence is what is making the situation bog down.. then maybe another country would like to take the task. Hmm... no takers? I am shocked and amazed that no other country in the world is willing to do the dirty work for the long haul.

Dicamus's post brings a lot of thought to the situation and how the US is handling it. Problem is.. no one else is handling it. Bush is entitled to mistakes... he still has to take responsibility for them. This may be a bigger task than his presidency is able to handle. But our country is being tested. How can you create a love of democracy in a people who have never known it? Arab states and terrorists see democracy as a threat to their way of life. That is why the peace process in Iraq is being sucker punched from the outside.

Iraq is going to have issues within it's own borders. I think months ago I mentioned that civil war was eminent. We had a bit of a civil war in our past as well. It will get uglier before it get's better. No doubt.

The one thing that Bush has always displayed and has pulled this country along this very bumpy road is resolve. The very stubborness to make this work no matter what failures we endure.. is what will bring peace and prosperity to that region.. and eventually put terrorism in it's place. History.

[pinkeye]

Democracy? In a Nazi regime? Democracy? In an Arab state?
How long should we stay? How long until we leave Europe? Whether people agree to what is going on.. how we got there... or why we stay... we as human beings have a responsibility to stay and help. If the US presence is what is making the situation bog down.. then maybe another country would like to take the task. Hmm... no takers? I am shocked and amazed that no other country in the world is willing to do the dirty work for the long haul.

Dicamus's post brings a lot of thought to the situation and how the US is handling it. Problem is.. no one else is handling it. Bush is entitled to mistakes... he still has to take responsibility for them. This may be a bigger task than his presidency is able to handle. But our country is being tested. How can you create a love of democracy in a people who have never known it? Arab states and terrorists see democracy as a threat to their way of life. That is why the peace process in Iraq is being sucker punched from the outside.

Iraq is going to have issues within it's own borders. I think months ago I mentioned that civil war was eminent. We had a bit of a civil war in our past as well. It will get uglier before it get's better. No doubt.

The one thing that Bush has always displayed and has pulled this country along this very bumpy road is resolve. The very stubborness to make this work no matter what failures we endure.. is what will bring peace and prosperity to that region.. and eventually put terrorism in it's place. History.

your first statement is false. for starters, a country does not have to contribute militarily to make a difference. moreover, many countries have been actively participating in peacekeeping operations for many years/decades, and, unlike some countries, have not withheld funding to the united nations. in addition, the u.n. and ngos have been helping around the world for decades with few resources and little thanks. u.n. employees in africa, for example, do incredibly important work under very difficult conditions. again, fighting terrorism is not and cannot be limited to military approaches.

and why do we always assume that democracy is the best model for societies with very different cultural, social, and political traditions? this is such a western-centric view of the world. there are many factors to be considered, and this western cookie-cutter, "one size fits all" approach is ridiculous.

[WARPIG]

Democracy? In a Nazi regime? Democracy? In an Arab state?
How long should we stay? How long until we leave Europe? Whether people agree to what is going on.. how we got there... or why we stay... we as human beings have a responsibility to stay and help. If the US presence is what is making the situation bog down.. then maybe another country would like to take the task. Hmm... no takers? I am shocked and amazed that no other country in the world is willing to do the dirty work for the long haul.

Dicamus's post brings a lot of thought to the situation and how the US is handling it. Problem is.. no one else is handling it. Bush is entitled to mistakes... he still has to take responsibility for them. This may be a bigger task than his presidency is able to handle. But our country is being tested. How can you create a love of democracy in a people who have never known it? Arab states and terrorists see democracy as a threat to their way of life. That is why the peace process in Iraq is being sucker punched from the outside.

Iraq is going to have issues within it's own borders. I think months ago I mentioned that civil war was eminent. We had a bit of a civil war in our past as well. It will get uglier before it get's better. No doubt.

The one thing that Bush has always displayed and has pulled this country along this very bumpy road is resolve. The very stubborness to make this work no matter what failures we endure.. is what will bring peace and prosperity to that region.. and eventually put terrorism in it's place. History.

your first statement is false. for starters, a country does not have to contribute militarily to make a difference. moreover, many countries have been actively participating in peacekeeping operations for many years/decades, and, unlike some countries, have not withheld funding to the united nations. in addition, the u.n. and ngos have been helping around the world for decades with few resources and little thanks. u.n. employees in africa, for example, do incredibly important work under very difficult conditions. again, fighting terrorism is not and cannot be limited to military approaches.

and why do we always assume that democracy is the best model for societies with very different cultural, social, and political traditions? this is such a western-centric view of the world. there are many factors to be considered, and this western cookie-cutter, "one size fits all" approach is ridiculous.

Here is what is ridiculous.. whatever false statement you assume that I made.. It is not in this post. I didn't say a country has a responsibility nor did I say militarily. What the hell did you read into my post.
Your blatant rhetorical views have seemed to cloud your ablity to read. If a better model of goverment is availible to people of those countries you speak of.. then our cookie-cutter democracy wouldn't be needed. We don't assume that our way of life fits Iraqi's.. one would have to be pretty naive to believe so. I don't mind having a heated discussion about opposing views pinkeye.. you just seem to argue for the sake of arguement.

[sierraone]

The big prize for democracy and the beginning of all peace processes would be a democratic Saudi Arabia. It all starts from there. The Royal Family has to sail off to the sunset - with their super-luxury yachts - establish the election process, political parties, human rights and all-encompassing general elections.

That is where it all has to start from: Saudi Arabia

[pinkeye]

Democracy? In a Nazi regime? Democracy? In an Arab state?
How long should we stay? How long until we leave Europe? Whether people agree to what is going on.. how we got there... or why we stay... we as human beings have a responsibility to stay and help. If the US presence is what is making the situation bog down.. then maybe another country would like to take the task. Hmm... no takers? I am shocked and amazed that no other country in the world is willing to do the dirty work for the long haul.

Dicamus's post brings a lot of thought to the situation and how the US is handling it. Problem is.. no one else is handling it. Bush is entitled to mistakes... he still has to take responsibility for them. This may be a bigger task than his presidency is able to handle. But our country is being tested. How can you create a love of democracy in a people who have never known it? Arab states and terrorists see democracy as a threat to their way of life. That is why the peace process in Iraq is being sucker punched from the outside.

Iraq is going to have issues within it's own borders. I think months ago I mentioned that civil war was eminent. We had a bit of a civil war in our past as well. It will get uglier before it get's better. No doubt.

The one thing that Bush has always displayed and has pulled this country along this very bumpy road is resolve. The very stubborness to make this work no matter what failures we endure.. is what will bring peace and prosperity to that region.. and eventually put terrorism in it's place. History.

your first statement is false. for starters, a country does not have to contribute militarily to make a difference. moreover, many countries have been actively participating in peacekeeping operations for many years/decades, and, unlike some countries, have not withheld funding to the united nations. in addition, the u.n. and ngos have been helping around the world for decades with few resources and little thanks. u.n. employees in africa, for example, do incredibly important work under very difficult conditions. again, fighting terrorism is not and cannot be limited to military approaches.

and why do we always assume that democracy is the best model for societies with very different cultural, social, and political traditions? this is such a western-centric view of the world. there are many factors to be considered, and this western cookie-cutter, "one size fits all" approach is ridiculous.

Here is what is ridiculous.. whatever false statement you assume that I made.. It is not in this post. I didn't say a country has a responsibility nor did I say militarily. What the hell did you read into my post.
Your blatant rhetorical views have seemed to cloud your ablity to read. If a better model of goverment is availible to people of those countries you speak of.. then our cookie-cutter democracy wouldn't be needed. We don't assume that our way of life fits Iraqi's.. one would have to be pretty naive to believe so. I don't mind having a heated discussion about opposing views pinkeye.. you just seem to argue for the sake of arguement.

warpig, perhaps you need to read your first paragraph once more. i wrote that many countries and organisations are in it for the long haul. what do you think the united nation does? are you familiar with canadian peacekeeping, for example? canada has been helping others for decades.l

your last sentence appears to imply that the u.s. is forced to do the dirty work over the long haul because no one else is stepping to the plate. if you are not implying this, then what exactly are you trying to say? one would be hard-pressed to interpret your statement any other way.

as for the dirty work, dirty hands for dirty work, eh? ;)

have you studied international relations? what about development studies? my guess is that you have not. you fail to understand that we cannot apply our political and social values on societies with very different traditions. this is basic 101 stuff here. honestly, do you know anything of iraq's social and political history, values, etc., etc.? i suggest you do some reading. this arrogance displayed by some, as though we in the west somehow know what's best for everyone, is utter garbage. we have our fair share of problems at home, so before we speak of democratising the rest of the world, let's remedy the problems of our respective political systems first.

it's not a question of a better governance model being available. it's a question of adapting models to suit the needs of the targeted population/society. if democracy is to emerge and/or evolve, it must do so naturally. american-style democracy is appropriate for the u.s. only.

[WARPIG]

I have no idea how you are interpreting my comments. Maybe reading them literally will help.
The few words you chose to ignore instead of twist and interpret are when I mention that the US does not assume to think our brand of democracy fits the Iraqi way of life. You also failed to acknowledge that I did not imply or say that no one else is helping. In the big picture.. the US is left with the dirty work.. dirty hands.. of course. Is this a surprise to anyone? Nope. Is every other country simply clean of the wrong doing in the middle east? Nope. Yet there seems to be no lack of finger pointing from the safety of apathy. I also never mentioned that Canada was not doing something in the world. Your ability to read into what I type is amazing. Take this comment... for the second time.. literally. You are arguing for the sake of arguement. Don't read into it. Don't ask me to "read up" on anything that you cannot speak intelligently on or fail to publish yourself. Speak from substance. If you want to disagree on a generally opinionated level.. fine, that can be done from intelligence. Not by assuming what is said and twisting what is meant however.

[WARPIG]

The big prize for democracy and the beginning of all peace processes would be a democratic Saudi Arabia. It all starts from there. The Royal Family has to sail off to the sunset - with their super-luxury yachts - establish the election process, political parties, human rights and all-encompassing general elections.

That is where it all has to start from: Saudi Arabia

Interesting point. You think the US should be holding Saudi accountable for their ties to terrorism? Or do you think that the reason the US doesn't put some pressure on Saudi is because maybe the have some dirt on the US?
My assumption.. conspiracy aside, is that the influence Saudi Arabia has culturally and educationaly, would be the best starting point to make terrorist free nations.

[sierraone]

Couldn't agree more Warpig. The way things are at the moment:

a. Saudi Arabia is the richest moslem country. They have made an absolute fortune from the black stuff they are sitting on.

b. It is the most fundamentalist islamic state. It is the birthplace of Islam, home to Mecca and the Hadj and obeys strict Islamic law. The Koran was written there and Mohammed was born and lived there etc. There are public beheadings, amputations, very little in the way of justice and appeal. They have the greatest influence in the Moslem world.

c. It has zero democracy of any sort. No elections, no parties and lifelong hereditary rulers appointed by divine decree.

Being that strong Islamic and rich it is inevitable that it will support anyone killing jews. They draw the line of course on Euro and Americans as you don't normally bite the hands that feeds you do you? To the US saudis are untouchable. Americans therefore like the status quo there. The ruling family lives a lifestyle beyond anyone's dreams and supply us with lots of oil. If there was a democracy they would say maybe 'screw this' and put up the prices, make it harder for the west to obtain oil and depend always on the feeling of the public to be voted in or out. The Saudi public though have never heard of such a thing as democracy. They would be politically too immature to elect a working bureaucratic government. Then there is the fear of electing a person of anti-western sentiment given the strong islamic culture of the country.

At present the authorities work with us on terrorism and pursue the local cells and collaborate with the west as much as possible- they don't want to give up the $$$ do they?

Now that has been the state of being for the past 50 years and has worked fine until the end of the Cold War. The wests military machine was powered by saudi oil -hence no involvement in the Middle East wars- and the Warsaw Pact from Russian oil and double dealings with the Arabs - eg Saddam etc. And then 9/11 happened. Things are turning. The most scared people after 9/11 was the Saudi establishment. It happened at the presidency of a devout Christian, a republican patriot and worse of all, a Texan magnate who knows everything about oil.

All of us know that OBL and lots of his cronies are Saudis. We know now that Saudi funders pay suicide bombers' families big $$$ and Palestinian organisations to do what they do. Same goes for Chechens, KLAs, Morrocans, Algerians, Indonesians, Talibans, 'foreign fighters' etc. To pay up of course they want to see evidence hence all the gruesome videos from Chechnya etc that are flooding the internet. What do you think these are? out of being sick? No they are their 'receipts'. All these videos end up in some Saudi palace. Funnily enough it is the Caucasus where the Warsaw Pact was getting it's oil from.

But things might get our hand. The public may have too much of an anti-western sentiment by now. Muslims all over the world might want to see more attacks against the west for getting rid of Saddam, supporting Israel, banning headscarves, drinking beer and eating pork and women walking on beaches with bikinis.

Question is: How long is the West - inc. Russia - will put up with this? Also Russia didn't want to go to war as they were getting oil from Saddam. Same with the french. Saudis though wanted to get rid of him. So they OK'd George to go ahead and get rid of him thank you very much. Now they need Caucasus oil even more. Same with the French and Germans. Do you think the anti-war movement would be so strong if there was no government in the world that didn't want to get rid of Saddam? They got spurred on by 'old' Europe and Russia's goverments.

The possible solutions to end terrorism are:

a. everyone becomes a client of the Saudis. The saudis stop funding Chechens and all the rest and they go down the drain faster than toilet paper. But then who controls the alternative sources? Saudis may not be happy if it is not them. They will need mega-deals and agreements to stop funding terrorists. Then do they want Jews to stop getting killed? They love the money but they still hate Jews.

b. establishment of a new pro-western government in Saudi that stops funding terrorism. We would have to make sure that this goverment is not as Islamic and has the facade of a democracy. A bit like Turkey I suppose. Turkey though had to go through a very violent and oppresive regime - Kemal Ataturk - to get rid of the Islamics. He literally was hanging imams from telegraph poles. If you establish democracy you have to make sure that the Islamics don't get into power whether with elections of terrorism. Maybe covert assasinations who knows? I am sure Rumsfeld has thought of everything.

c. Before anyone says 'invade Saudi' that is out of the question. There is no pretence to begin with. Then the Islamic world is going to erupt. And until we organise who gets the oil we might starve.

d. Alternative power sources. Saudis will do anything to block them and anyway they are too little and too early to make any difference.

Bottom line is: things have to change in Saudi Arabia the whole terrorism will change. But is George such a 'crusader' to want things to change? Are the Saudis that Islamic to let things go wild? If Kerry gets elected the Saudis will be rubbing their hands I think.

These are things we don't know. Just a few thoughts of mine.

[sierraone]

sorry posted twice