John Guardiano may turn out to be right that the protests in
Egypt aren’t a replay of the Islamic revolution in Iran, but it is
hardly clear that they are the equivalent of Jefferson-quoting
demonstrators in
Tiananmen Square either. We’ve seen numerous examples of free
elections in majority-Muslim polities empowering Islamist parties,
from Iraq to the Palestinian Authority. We’ve frequently seen
bad governments replaced by worse governments or governments
incapable of governing at all.
Creating democracy where it has never existed before is
extremely difficult and requires a great deal more than just free
elections, facts that proponents of the democracy promotion project
are usually quick to acknowledge in theory but frequently slow to
recognize in practice.
Although most governments in the world are, as they always have
been, autocracies of one kind or another, no idea holds greater
sway in the mind of educated Americans than the belief that it is
possible to democratize governments, anytime, anywhere, under any
circumstances. This notion is belied by an enormous body of
evidence based on the experience of dozens of countries which have
attempted with more or less (usually less) success to move from
autocratic to democratic government. Many of the wisest political
scientists of this and previous centuries agree that democratic
institutions are especially difficult to establish and maintain —
because they make heavy demands on all portions of a population and
because they depend on complex social, cultural, and economic
conditions.
The above wasn’t written by Pat Buchanan or even George H.W.
Bush. Those are the words of uber-Reaganite neoconservative Jeane
Kirkpatrick,
writing in Commentary, not Chronicles or
the American Conservative. The democratists are right that
U.S. support for authoritarian regimes has helped turn portions of
the Arab and Muslim world against us. But it doesn’t automatically
follow that the U.S. should jump into supporting the overthrow of
those governments, especially given the real-world
alternatives.
We simply don’t know the extent of the opposition’s liberalism.
We don’t know whether the Muslim Brotherhood is hanging back during
the protests to take advantage of the fall of Mubarak when it
(possibly) comes. That doesn’t mean that the U.S. should attempt to
prop up the existing government, even though it has been more
reliable in the war on terror than a government in which the Muslim
Brotherhood plays a large role would likely be. Our lack of
knowledge should inspire caution and humility, the “humble foreign
policy” once espoused by the president associated with the “freedom
agenda.”
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.31.11 @ 9:13AM
Mr. Antle,
here is a copy-paste from another thread. I think it is relevant here as well.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.31.11 @ 8:12AM
Egypt,
Will prove intractable.
Mark that down in in your personal journal.
Muslims simply don't have the tools...the foundation...to build a successful society.
For centuries they have been like mice in the walls, nibbling at the crumbs of western technological progress.
Now, due to the intervention of Western oil-men, they can sell oil and buy the toys of war.
They are no longer timid mice in the walls. Pehaps the best known scavengers of all? Hyenas?
Hyenas in the walls, folks, that are harmless until you go to sleep...unarmed.
At that point, they become deadly.
Be awake, and keep your shootin' irons handy.
William R| 1.31.11 @ 10:16AM
The George Bush you forgot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9SOVzMV2bc
Occam's Tool| 1.31.11 @ 11:51AM
Why do we assume a secular "Democratic" Egypt would be friendly?