Do free elections bring democracy?
Pat Buchanan on elections and democracy:
Consider the Bush panacea for peace: democracy, rule by the people and by governments that reflect the popular will.
But what makes Bush believe this would advance peace or U.S. vital interests? Does the Arab street share our love for Israel or Bush's admiration for Sharon as a "man of peace"? Do Arab masses revere Bush, or bin Laden?
When free elections were held in Algeria, the people voted for an Islamic republic. In Gaza, they just voted 70 percent for Hamas. Moderate Mahmoud Abbas was elected to succeed Arafat, but only because Marwan Barghouti, now serving a life sentence in Israel, declined to run. In Iraq, the Shia voted as an ayatollah told them to vote, so they could take over the country from the Sunni.
Democracy is America's panacea. But if the abdication of the kings, sheiks, sultans and autocrats in Morocco, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Oman and the Gulf states would be good for America, why is the fall of these royal houses and of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt also sought by bin Laden and the Muslim Brotherhood? What assurances are there, in the history of the region, that when the kings depart, democrats will arise?
Personally, I don't think that the neocons ever believed that democracy would come to Iraq. I think their support for this idiotic war was nothing more than a strategy to get U.S. military forces into the Middle East so that they would be able to fight the enemies of Israel.
1 Comments:
You are wrong. If neocons had Israeli interests in mind, they would lay waste to the Arab world, Gengis-Khan-style...not hunker down troops in Baghdad to get shot at with RPGs while holding elections.
Post a Comment
<< Home