RSS« On Getting Things Right in the Middle East | Quick arty ref »
February 02, 2005
Iraq, The Model. (Irony)
Elections Are Not Democracy
The United States has essentially stopped trying to build a democratic order in Iraq, and is simply trying to gain stability and legitimacy
By Fareed Zakaria
Newsweek
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6885455/site/newsweek/
My response is, I sure bloody hope so, and about bloody time!
I long ago said that the best case scenario for Iraq was a sort of Egypt on the Euphrates.
Zakaria correctly notes:
But it is also true, alas, that no matter how the voting turns out, the prospects for genuine democracy in Iraq are increasingly grim. Unless there is a major change in course, Iraq is on track to become another corrupt, oil-rich quasi-democracy, like Russia and Nigeria.
Perhaps I am too cynical, but that is a step up from a failed state, and I am right happy about that.
I never bought this bloody democratization nonsense, and still don't.
Leaving aside that, Zakaria raises key issues, and for the rah rah simpletons, you should pay attention. Otherwise, for those who want to cry failure, I say, well, long ago this was a failure on its face, so rebenchmarking from the default downside position we had six months ago, Zakaria's scenario is an actual upside.
He notes, by the way, the following:
First, you need to avoid major ethnic or religious strife. In almost any "divided" society, elections can exacerbate group tensions unless there is a strong effort to make a deal between the groups, getting all to buy into the new order. "The one precondition for democracy to work is a consensus among major ethnic, regional, or religious groups," says Larry Diamond, one of the leading experts on democratization. This has not happened. Instead the Shia, Sunnis and Kurds are increasingly wary of one another and are thinking along purely sectarian lines. This "groupism" also overemphasizes the religious voices in these communities, and gives rise to a less secular, less liberal kind of politics.
Indeed. Indeed. More disturbing is perhaps the Egyptian story emerging from our rebuilding largess, rather quickly becoming pure bribery in his argument. I suspect that is true.
However, again, I'm looking at the realm of the possible, and the possible here tells me that this fucked up half baked result is not bad. In fact, you can even forsee making money.
Presuming civil war is avoided. A big presumption, but just barely possible.
Posted by The Lounsbury at February 2, 2005 05:57 PM
Filed Under:
Jan-July 2005
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/566
