| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Thomas L. Friedman: New power struggle emerging in Mideast |
| 2006-07-15 |
| Don't usually agree with Friedman, but he does a good job describing the dwindling hope for democracy in ME When you watch the violence unfolding in the Middle East today, it is easy to feel that you've been to this movie before and that you know how it ends — badly. But we actually have not seen this movie before. Something new is unfolding, and we'd better understand it. What we are seeing in Iraq, the Palestinian territories and Lebanon is an effort by Islamist parties to use elections to pursue their long-term aim of Islamizing the Arab-Muslim world. This is not a conflict about Palestinian or Lebanese prisoners in Israel. This is a power struggle within Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq over who will call the shots in their newly elected "democratic" governments and whether they will be real democracies. The tiny militant wing of Hamas today is pulling all the strings of Palestinian politics, the Iranian-backed Hezbollah Shiite Islamic party is doing the same in Lebanon, even though it is a small minority in the cabinet, and so, too, are the Iranian-backed Shiite parties and militias in Iraq. They are not only showing who is boss inside each new democracy, but they are also competing with one another for regional influence. As a result, the post-9/11 democracy experiment in the Arab-Muslim world is being hijacked. Yes, basically free and fair elections were held in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories and Iraq. Yes, millions turned out to vote because the people of the Arab-Muslim world really do want to shape their own futures. But the roots of democracy are so shallow in these places, and the moderate majorities so weak and intimidated, that we are getting the worst of all worlds. We are getting Islamist parties who are elected to power, but who insist on maintaining their own private militias and refuse to assume all the responsibilities of a sovereign government. They refuse to let their governments have control over all weapons. They refuse to be accountable to international law (the Lebanese-Israeli border was ratified by the United Nations), and they refuse to submit to the principle that one party in the Cabinet cannot drag a whole country into war. "Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinians all held democratic elections," said the Israeli political theorist Yaron Ezrahi, "and the Western expectation was that these elections would produce legitimate governments that had the power to control violence and would assume the burden of responsibility of governing. But what happened in all three places is that we (produced) governments which are sovereign only on paper, but not over a territory." Then why do parties like Hamas and Hezbollah get elected? Often because they effectively run against the corruption of the old secular state-controlled parties, noted Ezrahi. But once these Islamists are in office they revert to serving their own factional interests, not those of the broad community. Boutros Harb, a Christian Lebanese parliamentarian, said: "We must decide who has the right to make decisions on war and peace in Lebanon. Is that right reserved for the Lebanese people and its legal institutions, or is the choice in the hands of a small minority of Lebanese people?" Ditto in the fledgling democracies of Palestine and Iraq. When cabinet ministers can maintain their own militias and act outside of state authority, said Ezrahi, you're left with a "meaningless exercise" in democracy/state building. Why don't the silent majorities punish these elected Islamist parties for working against the real interests of their people? Because those who speak against Hamas or Hezbollah are either delegitimized as "American lackeys" or just murdered, like Rafiq Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister. The world needs to understand what is going on here: The little flowers of democracy that were planted in Lebanon, Iraq and the Palestinian territories are being crushed by the boots of Syrian-backed Islamist militias who are desperate to keep real democracy from taking hold in this region and Iranian-backed Islamist militias desperate to keep modernism from taking hold. It may be the skeptics are right: Maybe democracy, while it is the most powerful form of legitimate government, simply can't be implemented everywhere. It certainly is never going to work in the Arab-Muslim world if the United States and Britain are alone in pushing it in Iraq, if Europe dithers on the fence, if the moderate Arabs cannot come together and make a fist, and if Islamist parties are allowed to sit in governments and be treated with respect — while maintaining private armies. The whole democracy experiment in the Arab-Muslim world is at stake here, and right now it's going up in smoke. |
| Posted by:Captain America |
| #7 If Iraq had been an island, the "insurgency" would have been toes-up in six months. It is the extra-territorial financing, foreign fighter elements, and Iranian RG C-3 support that has made resolution of the low-level war in Iraq problematic. There won't be peace in Iraq until Syria and Iran have been brought to heel. I strongly dislike Vietnam parallels with the present conflict, but the hands-off with Syria and Iran smack too much of the NVA sanctuaries in Laos and Cambodia. |
| Posted by: mrp 2006-07-15 21:15 |
| #6 ahhhh once again, Ein-El-Hellhole comes up. Perhaps the Hezbs and Iranians are using it as a base, Israel (*hint hint*wink wink*) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-07-15 19:26 |
| #5 Hezb grew up in the Paleo camps in Lebanon. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-07-15 19:17 |
| #4 Hard to believe the Lebs can outdo the Paleos in the "Shining Pantheon of Cultural Stupidity™", but we shall see....I prefer the explanation that most Lebs are moderate, want sovereign independence, but were outgunned by the Syrian/Iranian proxies... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-07-15 19:15 |
| #3 They got their chance. If they blow it, they will suffer the consequences. Perhaps it will become a learning experience. If not, it can be repeated after rinsing. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-07-15 18:55 |
| #2 It's not a democracy or republic if the people don't control it by their votes. It's useless to go to the ballot box if, in the end, mobsters and gangsters control the government through terror tactis of murder, bribery, fraud etc. I think one problem that these people have is that they are like the Europeans. They expect that if mobsters or gangsters or foreign agents take control of their government - that some mommy or daddy state is responsible for stepping in and making it all better. Um, no. Democracy requires the people themselves to take action to preserve their government. Besides - in Palestine - they voted for the government that would give them what they want - the destruction of Israel. And their government is attempting to give as promised. They got what they voted for. And in Lebanon - well they are under seige by Iranian, Syrian and Hezbollah. They can't rid themselves of these elements by themselves. They need help - much like we needed the help of the French in our revolution. But in the end - it is the responsibility of the people themselves - not some superpower, or global body - to keep control of their own government. That's why we maintain the right to bear arms. The forefathers understood that the people need protection FROM their governments and a means to dissolve and reform it if it doesn't perform. Often that means fighting. That's why we revere those who came before us and fought the battle for our freedom. Freedom isn't a guaranteed birth right - it's paid for in blood. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-07-15 18:40 |
| #1 Mr. Friedman sure low-keys Iran in this column. Keller probably told him not to give W. any ideas. |
| Posted by: mrp 2006-07-15 15:00 |