|
Why democratization cannot work
This comes from the New York Times, but nonetheless makes sense:
The paradox of American policy in the Middle East—promoting democracy on the assumption it will bring countries closer to the West—is that almost everywhere there are free elections, the American-backed side tends to lose.What then is the lesson? There are two. The first and immediate lesson is that democratization is a no-winner. We promote democracy not just because we like democracy but because we expect certain substantive results to come from it. But the substantive results we want from democratic procedures never happen and cannot happen, because a freely voting Muslim population will vote for pro-sharia and pro-jihad candidates and against American-backed candidates. The second and larger lesson proceeding from the first lesson is that the U.S. cannot hope to shape and influence the internal politics of Muslim countries. We can’t do it and shouldn’t try. What we can do is shape their external situation in accord with the legitimate self-preservation needs of ourselves and the non-Muslim world generally. We can shape the Muslim countries’ external situation in the following ways: (1) by preventing them from projecting themselves militarily, demographically, or politically into the non-Muslim world; (2) by preventing Muslim regimes from acquiring WMDs; and (3) by destroying dangerous Muslim regimes.
It is a reasonable hope that if the Muslim world finds itself permanently cut off and rejected by the rest of the world, it will spontaneously develop Kemal type politics in order to make itself less of a pariah. But we cannot do that for them. They must do it for themselves. All we can do is act rationally in our own defense and in our own interests by containing and isolating Islam. But if we do so, that may lead to positive changes within Islam that we cannot effect ourselves. Email entry |