[$tinkle]

ghadafi's son thinks now is good.(guardian article)

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - The son of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi said Wednesday Arab countries should support President Bush's campaign to promote democracy in the Middle East.

arab reformers - not so much (wash post article)

A much-anticipated summit of the Arab League, scheduled to begin today in Tunis, was abruptly put off Saturday, and for a remarkable reason: The kings, emirs and presidents-for-life of the Arab Middle East are unable to agree on a common response to the Bush administration's new policy of promoting democracy in their region. The younger and brighter rulers, knowing the stagnant status quo is unsustainable, are pushing a strategy of co-option, offering halfway, half-baked "reform" programs they have hastily drawn up. The less enlightened insist on sticking to the excuses that Arab dictators have offered the world for the past half-century: a) the first priority must be Israel, and b) foreign tutelage is wrong, except when applied to Israel.

(sorry 'bout the edits - a bit sloppy today)

 

[Changleen]

It's unsuprising the Status Quo and 'Presidents-for-life' and so on don't want change - they're simply self interested dictators. They know if they fall from power they'll be killed, pulled up on charges or simply just not have as much money as they did last week.

As long as the west positivly continues to promote democracy and individual and economic freedoms, change will happen, slowly but surely. Change on the scale we want to see can't happen overnight without a lot of death and destruction - actually it probably can't happen overnight period. Look what happens when you go to war with a culture who's ideals are different from yours - whatever your 'good intentions' are, they're never gonna see it like that and simply end up hating you more.

Slowly slowly catchee monkey...

 

[Silver]

The one thing I haven't figured out is how to make sure that the people don't immediately vote in a fundamentalist Islamic regime in a free election that then goes ahead and suspends the constitution, leaving you back at square one.

Somehow, it's got to be a process with a ton of internal pressure. I don't know if a region so wrapped up in a single religion can do that.

 

[Changleen]

Despite what people may think, there's very little chance of that. Iraq was quite a rich, westernised country pre 1991 and alot of people still remember what it's like living like that. Secondly despite what Fox might tell you very few Sh'ites are fundamentalists and the Sunnis definatley arn't.

The Gov they end up with will probably have Muslim elements and ideals, but I really think its not exactly gonna be sharia law...

 

[JRogers]

Originally posted by Changleen
Despite what people may think, there's very little chance of that. Iraq was quite a rich, westernised country pre 1991 and alot of people still remember what it's like living like that.

Honestly, I don't know much about the subject so I am curious: what are you basing this on? I would assume that Iraq would fall into the same sort of categories that many other middle eastern oil-producing countries do and did: "rich" nations with incredible disparities in income distribution. Not accusing you, just ignorant of the issue.

 

[Silver]

Iran was much the same way in the era of the Shah, look at them now...

 

[Changleen]

A bit of published fact and a bit of personal experience.

I went to Brunel University in London, and one of my best friends on the course I was attending fled Iraq across the mountains pre the 1991 war. (Remeber the refugee trail?) anyway, he was lucky enough to have relatives in the UK who sponsored his family to come and live here. He was a very bright guy called Ruyuid. He grew up in an affluent Iraqi home - his mum was a doctor and his dad was an industrial plant manager - he grew up watching satelite TV (MTV, Discovery and so on) and listening to a mixture of western and Middle eastern music and likewise politics. He told me all about his lifestyle, his upbringing and his views of the west - largly favourable although somewhat hypocritical. He'd get into the hypocracy every now and then and tell me what bull**** George Bush (no.1 - 43) pushed on his country. Despite his exsodus across the mountains he was obviously from a well to do family - he wore expensive clothes and his room was full of expensive electronics - a nice PC, a very nice stereo - he always bought course study literature out of his pocket (not cheap) and generally behaved exactly like a 'westerner' when it came to materialism and his attitude towards it. He was part of thousands of people forced to flee by the US and UK's first war against Saddam. I have no reason to doubt what he told me about he brultality of Saddam or the 'normality' of Iraq before the West's interferance.

Secondly: (look here for source)

The Iraqi Economy: 1990

Overview: The Bathist regime engages in extensive central planning and management of industrial production and foreign trade while leaving some small-scale industry and services and most agriculture to private enterprise. The economy is dominated by the oil sector, which provides about 95% of foreign exchange earnings. Since the early 1980s financial problems, caused by war expenditures and damage to oil export facilities by Iran, have led the government to implement austerity measures and to reschedule foreign debt payments. Oil exports have gradually increased with the construction of new pipelines. Agricultural development remains hampered by labor shortages, salinization, and dislocations caused by previous land reform and collectivization programs. The industrial sector, although accorded high priority by the government, is under financial constraints. New investment funds are generally allocated only to projects that result in import substitution or foreign exchange earnings.

GNP: $35 billion, per capita $1,940; real growth rate 5% (1989 est.)

Unemployment rate: less than 5% (1989 est.)

Agriculture: accounts for less than 10% of GNP but 33% of labor force; principal products--wheat, barley, rice, vegetables, dates, other fruit, cotton, wool; livestock--cattle, sheep; not self-sufficient in food output

And:

Saddam Hussein's government is well known for its human-rights abuses against the Kurds and Shi'ites, and for its invasion of Kuwait. What is less well known is that this same government had also invested heavily in health, education, and social programs for two decades prior to the Persian Gulf War. While the treatment of ethnic minorities and political enemies has been abominable under Hussein, it is also the case that the well-being of the society at large improved dramatically. The social programs and economic development continued, and expanded, even during Iraq's grueling and costly war with Iran from 1980 to 1988, a war that Saddam Hussein might not have survived without substantial U.S. backing. Before the Persian Gulf War, Iraq was a rapidly developing country, with free education, ample electricity, modernized agriculture, and a robust middle class. According to the World Health Organization, 93 percent of the population had access to health care.

There's plenty of stuff about his on the web - just google for it.

 

[Silver]

I know that Iraq is the most secular country in the middle east. However, conditions are extremely ripe right now for a fundamentalist revival....and remember it only takes one election before someone with no respect for the rule of law or the constitution can do the damage.

The fact that the US is still in Iraq without broad based support just exacerbates the situation.

 

[Changleen]

Originally posted by Silver
I know that Iraq is the most secular country in the middle east. However, conditions are extremely ripe right now for a fundamentalist revival....and remember it only takes one election before someone with no respect for the rule of law or the constitution can do the damage.

The fact that the US is still in Iraq without broad based support just exacerbates the situation.

This is, unfortuanatley, true. GW does nothing to add to the potential support that is out there, even amongst the Arab world.

George is his own worst enemy in a lot of ways. He wants what everyone wants but is unable to see that his way 'the quick way' of achieving it just makes things worse. It;s like picking a scab. It just bleeds. You've gotta leave it until it's healed.

 

[Toshi]

i think democracy in the middle east, in the whole world for that matter, would be great. but to force it upon the world would extract a price too dear for even the us economy (strictly in dollar terms, the cost in terrorism and lost life would be worse) to bear.

 

[$tinkle]

Originally posted by Toshi
i think democracy in the middle east, in the whole world for that matter, would be great. but to force it upon the world would extract a price too dear for even the us economy (strictly in dollar terms, the cost in terrorism and lost life would be worse) to bear.

so....choice #3? (maybe later)

agree with the whole make them eat cake thing. If i can be permitted to use a patriarchal metaphor, we resist the instruction of a parent, but embrace that of a mentor or peer. Maybe democracy by proxy is the answer?