Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Cairo, We Have a Problem

So this week has really been something in the Middle East - Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan. It seems like democracy is spreading across the region (are we finally seeing George Bush's vision when he decided to invade Iraq?), and I know that this is supposed to be a good thing. But please allow our domestic cynics to come out. First, David Brooks "teaches" us that these kind of uprisings are usually successful in forming democracies. However, after explaining the lessons we should have learned, he warns us:

The other thing we’ve learned is that the United States usually gets everything wrong. There have been dozens of democratic uprisings over the years, but the government always reacts like it’s the first one. There seem to be no protocols for these situations, no preset questions to be asked.

Policy makers always underestimate the power of the bottom-up quest for dignity, so they are slow to understand what is happening.

Need examples? Enter Ross Douthat:

Americans don’t like to admit this. We take refuge in foreign policy systems: liberal internationalism or realpolitik, neoconservatism or noninterventionism. We have theories, and expect the facts to fall into line behind them. Support democracy, and stability will take care of itself. Don’t meddle, and nobody will meddle with you. International institutions will keep the peace. No, balance-of-power politics will do it.

But history makes fools of us all. We make deals with dictators, and reap the whirlwind of terrorism. We promote democracy, and watch Islamists gain power from Iraq to Palestine. We leap into humanitarian interventions, and get bloodied in Somalia. We stay out, and watch genocide engulf Rwanda. We intervene in Afghanistan and then depart, and watch the Taliban take over. We intervene in Afghanistan and stay, and end up trapped there, with no end in sight.

Sooner or later, the theories always fail. The world is too complicated for them, and too tragic.

However, we should remember that these moments aren't about us. Sure, we should be concerned about the spread of radical political and religious ideologies and think about our national security, but, as David Ignatius reminds us, these protests are about the people trying to improve their lives:

Washington debate about the new Arab revolt tends to focus on the U.S. role: Has President Obama blundered by not forcing Mubarak out sooner? Should America abandon other oligarchs before it's too late? But this isn't about us. If Washington's well-chosen emissary, former ambassador to Cairo Frank Wisner, has helped broker Mubarak's departure and a stable transition to new elections, so much the better. But Egyptians don't need America to chart their course.

It's encouraging to see that the demonstrators in the streets of Cairo, Amman and Sanaa are not shouting the same tired slogans about "death to America" and "death to Israel" that for several generations have substituted for political debate. And it's reassuring, as well, that the Muslim Brotherhood and other militant groups have so far played it cool. They know that the past "decade of jihad" was ruinous for Muslims and is unpopular.

"This is not about slogans," says [Lebanese journalist Jamil] Mroueh. "The real issue is life: I want an apartment, I want a job." And it's about the dignity that comes from these essential human needs. In reaching out to the military, the protesters have chosen the right allies for a path of stability and change.



4 comments:

Unknown said...

I agree that the US shouldn't be participating in other countries domestic politics, because certainly more often then not, we get it wrong.

Teri said...

I agree with the concept, but I have an issue with standing aside when genocide takes place. How does one do that and recognize a nation's autonomy at the same time?

Unknown said...

What genocide exactly are we talking about?

Teri said...

I'm talking about many genocides: Nazi Germany, Rwanda, Bosnia, The Congo, Darfur, Iraq, and Cambodia, to name a few. We tend to do nothing when there's nothing to be gain either politically or in resources. We only entered Iraq because Saddam wanted to do business in euros rather than dollars.

http://www.espritdecorps.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=109:hugo-is-the-boss&catid=42:middle-east&Itemid=102