 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|||
  |
Long-term commitment to transforming the Middle East and making democracy
have never been a pillar of U.S. foreign policy and it is hard to believe
that it will be. The U.S. administrations basically do not want democracy
- any reading of it -in the Middle East. There is a huge gap between the
rhetoric of democratization and the reality of the United States' actual
policy. The reasons are:
1. The U.S. administrations have been very comfortable living with full
or partial autocracies in one form or the other in the region for a
long time. They want to deal with one "big" guy or family in every
state in the region. They do not want to get involved in working with
democracies due to their complexities in domestic and foreign
policies. Do they really want another E.U. when dealing with the U.N.
or other international institutions?
2. Democracies are not usually interested in long-term conflicts - other
than the U.S.- when they are not directly attacked. How will the U.S.
benefit from peace while military production for internal and
external needs is one of the most profitable areas for American
companies?
3. Supporting democracies is based on understanding and dialogue. The
U.S. administrations usually talk the language of power not the
language of mutual understanding even with the allies.
4. Local democracies are usually related to international trade. The
largest Middle Eastern state, Iran, which has made the greatest
genuine strides towards representative government is also under the
greatest burden of US trade sanctions (and now Syria). Sanctions have
a high correlation with the sanctioned state's policy toward Israel:
more enmity toward Israel, more sanctions.
5. Have anyone heard about encompassing and well-funded U.S projects and
programs in the area of economics, education and civil society in the
region?. Have anyone heard about anything like this in Iran? But we
have heard thousands of words and lip services from the U.S.
officials about promotion of democracy in Iran. USAID, the National
Endowment for Democracy, Middle East Partnership Initiative and the
like have usually other intentions, causes and functions than
democratization.
6. Is it possible to promote democracy by overthrowing democrats (like
coup against Mossadeq)? The U.S. administrations have usually
capitulated any democratic movement in the region and radicalized
them. Maybe they are seeking the paradox of "democracy without any
democratic movement," put aside "democracy without democrats." The
U.S. administrations consciously know that every democratic movement
in the region would not be pro-U.S. Supporting democratic movements
has never been the declared U.S. policy in the region. The U.S. wants
clients and not colleagues.
7. If there really were free democracies in the Middle East, the
unpopularity of the United States would likely have guaranteed that
Washington would never have had any bases or support in the region.
8. The very low credibility of the US in the M.E is an important
obstacle for real engagement in democratization from abroad. Even
elites and modern strata like technocrats and university scholars and
students cannot trust the U.S. administrations.
9. Developing democracy would be very effective through educating
people to the real notions of democracy. Have anyone heard about the
U.S. support for education in the region? Has the U.S. done anything
about the millions of children that have no access to education or
depend on the Islamic madrasas for receiving part of their daily
nutritional needs?
10. The U.S. administration is not ready to push the democratization
process in the region because it knows this could empower the
Islamists.
11. No body in the administration talks about constitutional and judicial
reforms with resort to civil society institutions but they talk about
women's right or liberalization with resort to a mass society
approach. Gradual democratization is impossible without
constitutional and judicial reform.
12. The U.S. administrations have no idea about the kind of democracy
that would fit in the region. Would it be " direct democracy",
"guided democracy", "liberal democracy", "religious democracy", etc?
13. They want to sell this idea to the U.S. public that Israel is the
only democratic state in the region and this justifies one-sided
policy of the U.S. in blinded support for Israel. The non-democratic
ME provide a handful of cases for this policy in the West. This is an
essential part of the neocons' presentational strategy which tries to
reshape the Middle East in line with Israel's perceived ideological
and material needs.
Majid Mohammadi
SUNY-Stony Brook
