Will Middle Eastern Democracies be Friends or Foes?

Will Middle Eastern Democracies be Friends or Foes?

Citing the Reichstag fire just one month after to solidify his grip on power, Hitler shredded the constitution and outlawed all other political parties. Six years later WWII began, costing some 60 million lives

The Americano
By J.D. Gordon
25 Feb 2011

Many in the West have cheered the prospect of Western-style democracies taking hold in the Mid-East, siding with protest movements that have toppled autocratic regimes in Egypt and Tunisia while spreading like dominoes to Yemen, Bahrain, Jordan, Libya and Algeria.

That’s a natural reaction, given the fact that democracies have yielded successful outcomes in Western societies and embodied the concepts of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

However, a closer look at existing social conditions in the Middle East and North Africa, combined with a quick glance at some past “democracies” ought to give one pause.

In condemning violent crackdowns, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay cited the root of anger as, “decades of neglect of people’s aspirations to realize not only civil and political rights, but also economic, social and cultural rights.”

While true, it doesn’t address why there has been so much neglect of people’s aspirations. As if a sudden switch to democracy might fix everything?

Realistically speaking, most Middle Eastern and North African countries don’t enjoy the social conditions that would fulfill such needs – regardless of the type government.

There religious leaders wield the type of power and influence over daily lives in ways we haven’t seen in America for centuries. And their standard fare is preaching intolerance, demanding subservience of women, and blaming the West and Israel for all their problems. In a society of devout followers, most people naturally become conditioned to view the West unfavorably, just as public polls show. Truly representative democracies under these circumstances would likely be deeply hostile to U.S. interests.

Those still pushing democracy for the sake of an egalitarian “power to the people” should at least take a look at some case studies. History is full of notionally democratic, yet also deeply troubled societies that do not have happy endings.

For instance:

Germany, 1933 – As the elected leader of the Weimar Republic’s Majority Nazi Party, Adolph Hitler was appointed as Chancellor by octogenarian President Paul von Hindenburg to form a coalition government that would pull Germany out of the Great Depression. Citing the Reichstag fire just one month after to solidify his grip on power, Hitler shredded the constitution and outlawed all other political parties. Six years later WWII began, costing some 60 million lives.

Iran, 1979 – After a pro-democracy movement toppled the U.S.-backed Shah, the Mullahs quickly instituted Sharia Law — legitimized through a national referendum. Declaring that protests against the Ayatollah were the same as protests against God, Iran has ruthlessly suppressed any form of dissent ever since. Dedicated to its nuclear program in pursuit of regional dominance, Iran is just years away from producing the bomb.

Algeria, 1991 – In reaction to centuries of colonization and a few decades of secular yet incompetent autocratic leaders, Algerians elected the Islamic Salvation Front which promised to enact Sharia Law. Seeing the nightmare that unfolded in Iran, Algeria’s Army launched a coup and removed the Islamists from their elected posts. The result? A decade long civil war that killed over 150,000 people.

Venezuela, 1999 – Failing to take power in a coup, Hugo Chavez was elected by a populist movement fed up with poverty and a lack of social mobility. Since then, the murder rate has quadrupled, foreign investment has all but dried up, and chronic food shortages plague the nation.

Gaza, 2006 – Once Palestinians finally had the chance to pick their elected leaders, they chose Hamas, an internationally recognized terrorist organization. Cut off from Western aid, Hamas wasted little time before firing rockets into Israel.

So what can we learn from all this?

First, though democracy may represent the ideal form of government, successful ones must be accompanied by the social conditions that can lead to positive results for its people.

Second, instant democracies in the Middle East and North Africa are most likely to result in highly antagonistic nations, given the prevailing anti-Western sentiments and climate of intolerance. This is particularly true if Islamist parties like the Muslim Brotherhood come to power – either directly via general elections, or through steamrolling political opposition within their respective legislatures.

Navigating this crisis will be difficult for America, even with the wisest policy decisions from Washington. If the current administration’s waffling through the Egyptian chaos gives any indication of things to come, we may be in real trouble.

================
J.D. Gordon is a communications consultant to several Washington, DC think tanks and a retired Navy Commander who served in the office of the secretary of defense from 2005 to 2009 as the Pentagon’s spokesman for the Western Hemisphere. For more info: www.jdgordoncommunications.com [1]

Rob Raimond: On the Scene in Cairo...

A post from Rob Raimond (Allegheny College) who is studying at the American University in Cairo. A boots-on-the-ground report:
Since I last wrote Egypt has almost been flipped on its head. Mubarak announced he would not step down then stepped down the protesters have left Tahrir and life is more or less normal again. Before I get ahead of myself though, let me congratulate Egypt, and say that the courage, discipline and sheer humanity the protesters showed is by far and away the most inspirational thing I have ever experienced in my life. Since I’m not Egyptian is a little hard for me to comprehend exactly the sentiment of the people here but I’ll try my best to explain the sheer euphoria that an entire nation felt on the 12th:

I was on my way up from grocery shopping when my bawab, which is a security person, came up to me hugged me and said “Mubarak khalas” which means Mubarak done, finished. I didn’t really know what he meant though so I went up to my apartment and turned on the news, the headline flashing on the screen was “Mubarak Steps Down”. I was so excited I dropped my groceries and ran across the street to my Egyptian friend’s apartment. I knocked on the door and the look on his face was complete euphoria. So we decided we should go to Tahrir one last time to celebrate. When we got there, thousands and thousands of people were in the square we could barely move and sometimes we just got pushed along with the crowd. People were shooting off fireworks it was like a party for a team that just won the Super Bowl. After that we went to a bar to celebrate, and all night we sang Egyptian songs and celebrated as one group, Expats and Egyptians. It made up for having been accused of being an Israeli spy a week before.

The next day though realization that maybe Mubarak stepping down wasn’t as great as we had all thought began spreading. During the revolution the people and the military had been “one hand” as the protesters said. Then the supreme military council took over the presidency and left all ministers in their positions, of course all of these ministers had been handpicked by Mubarak, and many were former or current members of the military. So while I congratulate Egypt I do also think it should be tempered with the understanding this was more or less a coup. And even though the military is promising to hold elections and reform, they are still Mubarak cronies and have benefited heavily from the last 59 years of military rule. Also the military made a fairly sinister sounding statement about how protesters needed to leave Tahrir immediately and return to normal life. This also caused some shock waves here and many protesters returned to Tahrir simply because of this message. Shortly thereafter the army began dismantling the camp that had been set up on traffic circle in the center of the Square.

I personally believe that until there are elections there should be demonstrations. Of course nothing on the scale of the 18 days that lead to Mubarak stepping down, but enough to make sure people remember they haven’t won quite yet. For many people here though the sentiment is anyone is better than Mubarak and so many are content to trust in the military to keep their word and hold elections within in the next six to eight months. But I guess the thing of it is, no one really knows what will happen, I have a friend who works in the Embassy Economic and Political Analysis Department and he doesn’t even know exactly. My very cynical guess is that free and fair elections will not happen because the military does not want to give up the grasp it’s had on politics for almost 60 years. Let’s hope I’m wrong.