« Iraq: The Painful intervention of holier than thou ideology | Quick recommendation for the Arabic speakers »
March 01, 2004
On the new US "initiative"
I reproduce a comment made elsewhere, on the new US initiative (http://www.calpundit.com/mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=3384) :
As a regional specialist and someone working in the region, I find it exceedingly difficult to take such proposals seriously. Now my dear little tacitus who is taking his virginity losing trip to my region thinks this demonstrates something.
Not unexpected, the partisans on both sides, Kerry and Bush, are seeking election battling points.
I could, to be frank, give a fuck about election points insofar as I end up living the actual policy in action.
Now, reality. Reality is that short term policy goals (stability, acquiesence to US policy) are fundamentally at odds with long term policy goals (democratisation) in the region. Reality is that democratisation and freer press will in the short run produce anti-US commentary and anti-US policy - if we take US policy in the context of a rather blind and not terribly creative support for the appearance of "secularism" or quasi-secular states, blind support for Israel regardless of the need for a more balanced approach, and policy that plays to the rather simplest of views on the MENA region.
Real democratisation in the short term (5-10) years will produce Islamist regimes, will initially produce stricter social regimes (i.e. regression on the image level if not reality on women's rights) and produce less friendly regimes in re US FP in the region. It might produce less investment friendly regimes, but I think actually probably Islamic regimes in the end will end up being more friendly to investors than the pseudo secular ones.
Now, Islamophobes or polite bigots will likely clap loudly at the posturing, and go on about how "we" can not "allow" sharia regimes in Iraq, etc., Islamist threat and all that. The reality is, if the rhetoric of democracy is to work in the long run, it has to allow popular decisions, and allow the societies in question to work out their issues.
The Bush initiative is throroughly incoherent insofar as it engages in rather magical thinking in regarding to what 'democracy' will really mean and what a free press will mean - magically thinking that free press will mean pro-American, and rather not dealing with the contradictions.
I have seen no signs of the American administration actually grappling with these issues, which to give credit to them on a level, are highly difficult, even intractable in the near term.
Intractable in the near term means one has to think very carefully indeed before jumping in. Unless of couse it is just something to sell to the electorate and the Islamophobes who are wetting their pants about the new culture wars....
In addition I will note that to date, the Middple East Partnership Initiative which I have had close relations with in several areas, strikes me as more an issue of ideological point making than a true reengagement with the region. The departure of Liz Cheney rather took the wind out of it, and I find their vision for investing in the region (as part of the Funds function) to be sadly naive.
Money will be spent, as far as I can tell, rather poorly insofar as the ideological component of the critique seems to be trumping the practical.
Posted by The Lounsbury at March 1, 2004 05:44 PM
Filed Under:
Jan-Jul 2004
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1133

RSS



