polifrogIran, Egypt,
Tunisia,
Yemen,
Belarus. It seems rattling the cage has become fashionable across the Mideast.
Some of these are genuine movements for democracy while others are less so. In some the uprisings are out and out co-opted by non democratic forces.
In the wake of the chaos in Egypt I have been wrestling with what our appropriate response should be to this wave of uprisings.
It seems that it is not fashionable to bring up the Iraq war, but viewing the events currently taking place in the Mideast without including the changes that have befallen Iraq over the past decade would lead to decidedly wanting conclusions.
One of the reasons behind invading Iraq was to sow the seed of democracy in the Arab world. The example, it was hoped, would grow the strength of pro democratic groups within neighboring countries by convincing the citizenry that an Arabic democracy is possible.
In the years that followed the invasion of Iraq the US did not support a dictator or install a strongman in Iraq, instead the US gave the people of Iraq the time necessary to create their own "democracy" in whatever form best suited their culture.
But what US did was greater than that.
US actions in Iraq may have created a desire for freedom, an "I want what they have in Iraq" feeling, which freely flows throughout the Mideast. The subjugated people of the Mideast are aware of the freedom Iraq now enjoys and they realize that their fears of the US acting as a colonial power have not materialized. The US did not steal Iraq's oil or subjugate its people. Iraq is now a nation unto its own but under the influence of its citizenry. Who in the Mideast would not want what Iraq has?
Unforeseen or not though, it seems that Bush's approach of installing a democracy in the heart of the Mideast has resulted in destabilizing non democratic nations across the region regardless of how friendly they are to the US. As such, it is becoming clear that Bush's approach to Iraq reached beyond the his own administration and could well reach into other administrations beyond the Obama's.
If this is the case, then the desire for democracy has become the ether through which current and future Mideast diplomacy should be framed.
This is a wonderful development as the default desire for stability among with our nation and the nations of the world frequently leads to a lackadaisical interest in liberty, and often, an outright support for a lack thereof in the Mideast.
But how should the US approach freedom movements that may have been co-opted by extremists in traditionally friendly nations as in the case of Egypt?
Using the Muslim Brotherhood as an example one can easily conceive of an Egypt worse off tomorrow than today if the Muslim Brotherhood were able to ride a wave of democratic desire bolstered by American support to power. One wonders, though, how long-lived such rule would be if the same individuals who pushed for overthrow received less freedom rather than more as a result of their efforts. This would especially be the case if the Muslim Brotherhood represents only a small fraction of the population currently rattling the cage. In retrospect, would the Muslim world view the US as having once again supported another strongman in the Muslim Brotherhood?
Alternatively, consider the results of not supporting what might be, predominantly, a democratic movement. It could chill the desire for democracy among populations of nearby non democratic nations. Imagine their thoughts: Why take the risk of resisting the current regime when the leader of the free world doesn't have your back, or worse yet, actively supports your foe?
Perhaps supporting only those uprisings that are obviously democratic would be appropriate while standing astride those that are not clearly democratic would be wise . This could conceivably be what is in the thoughts of many in the US who generally support freedom and liberty, but currently support Mubarak. Again, this approach to supporting the spread of democracy in the Mideast could be viewed as inconsistent from the perspective of the Mideast.
The last way to play it would be for the US to remain silent rather than come out against undemocratic uprisings. It seems far fetched to consider this as an option but sadly it seems to have been our response to the truly democratic Iranian uprising.
In the end, the strength of a democratic Iraq will likely counter the US's often inscrutable Mideast foreign policy from the perspective of the Arab world (and mine). We are fortunate to have an Iraq today that will hopefully permanently provide the ether through which freedom may spread throughout the Mideast... despite ourselves.
Lastly, I would be remiss if I were not to mention that the thanks for this increased desire for freedom among the people of the Mideast goes to the many who sacrificed all and to a single embattled man's love and tenacity.
out
