In a concession to political correctness, Bush has said that he doesn't want Iraq to turn into the US, only that it become a free, democratic society after the Iraqi fashion.
Is this a distinction without a difference? Is our conception of the minimal standards for freedom and democracy fundamentally at odds with what Iraqis (or indeed the entire Arab and/or Muslim world) desires?
There are cynics who think Bush is lying, that the invasion is nothing more than a ploy to ensure a steady oil supply and ensure new markets for everything from McDonald's to Halliburton. That the US is not only an economic but a cultural imperialist superpower.
(In fact, a joke is supposedly circulating in Iraq in which Iraqis are telling the Americans: "Go home, and take us with you!". )
Setting aside cynical beliefs about American imperialist tendencies, an increasing number of skeptical observers are wondering whether the Iraqis are ready for a liberal society, whether there is something in Iraqi culture that attracts them to strong men with autocratic tendencies. If tribal loyalties weigh heavier than universal liberties and order is more important than freedom, it should follow that Iraq won't be a single, pluralistic democracy anytime soon.
I happen to think that the framers of the US Constitution had it right when they wrote that all humans have certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I also think that nearly all Iraqis would prefer a liberal democracy over any of the relevant alternatives if they had an informed choice. The issue, in my mind, is not whether Iraq should become a pluralistic democracy but how it should get there.
After all, few democracies sprang fully formed from the minds of their founders. The US had to work out (among other things) federalism, slavery, universal suffrage, civil rights, etc., to get to its current, unfinished state. Israel - probably the most abrupt democracy in history - still hasn't figured out how to protect pluralism.
Yet each improvement liberal democracies have had to make were accompanied by periods of instability. It is no wonder that Iraqis fear reforms, what with the many divisions within their borders.
In this context, a liberal democracy is a more radical proposition than an Islamic theocracy or a secular tyranny.
Sent from my Blackberry
Comments