The events in Egypt have been both riveting and frustrating. The speed with which a motivated group of people have been able to move to the brink of remaking an entire society has been stunning and inspiring. However it’s been painful to hear the street voice of Cairo tie the dictator Mubarak to the United States. We are supposed to be the beacon of liberty that lights the world. Egypt was an opportunity to be a role model for 80 million people in the most powerful Middle Eastern Islamic country, but it is not to be the case. “Made in USA” stamped on the tear gas canisters trumps anything President Obama or Secretary of State Clinton can possibly do or say at this point.
Had I been President we would be operating under The d’blank Doctrine, which says that the United States will never align itself with a despotic government and will always take the side of the forces working for freedom and democracy.
Is that Pollyannaish? I don’t think so. What has our support for anti-democratic regimes ever done for us? We’re still at odds with Iran more than 30 years after the Shah’s brutal dictatorship collapsed. I just returned from Chile where the U.S. is not hated, but people have not forgotten our role in the overthrow of Allende. Kuwait dragged us into one war. Saudi Arabia breeds terrorists. Cuba nearly precipitated a nuclear war out of frustration with Yankee-supported dictators. Has our support for the wrong guy in any of these countries made us safer?
The benefits far outweigh the risks. Democracy and freedom are the central promises of the American brand. America is aspirational. We need to be on the right side in situations like Egypt’s. That knowledge alone gives confidence and motivation.
There is a clear global trend towards democracy. More than 85 authoritarian governments have fallen in the past few decades. The United States should stand with the people seeking freedom in foreign lands, not just because it is right, but because they will stand with us once they achieve the freedom the crave.
Posts
10 comments:
I totally agree about what our support for dictators has cost us. Unfortunately it's not easy to identify the forces striving for democracy. And even when we can, there's no telling how things will turn out in the end. We supported the guys who got the Russians out of Afghanistan and then they turned into the Taliban.
I just get sick and tired of us poking our noses into everybody else's business. Too many wars, invasions, military aid, etc., etc. We just don't act like the "good guys" we were raised to believe we were. When I hear people say we are a peace loving nation I don't know whether to laugh or cry. How many years have there been where we weren't fighting somebody somewhere in our lifetimes?
My emphasis would be on not supporting despots, who are easy to spot, rather than trying to pick the good guys.
JD Salinger said it is better to live humbly by a cause than to die proudly for one. Is leading by example so passe?
"We supported the guys who got the Russians out of Afghanistan and then they turned into the Taliban." Hodding Carter said that America will never rise until it stops supporting governments/regimes that share neither our values or aims.
There exists a provincial tenet of the right which denigrates anything that goes against US policy. There is no debate on merit, just blind obedience. They don't question hegemony. They have no appreciation for a foot on a neck by one of "our" dictators. Mainly a feature of the right, but not exclusive. As LBJ said when someone despaired of one of America's "allies:" "he may be a bastard, but he is our bastard."
But let us not bear the wisdom of the masses of Cairo on our shoulders. They have swallowed their share of propaganda. Israel has its share of hubris, but Jews who were thrown out of Egypt penniless, have a long memory.
What happened in Iran with the Shah has great relevance today. I clearly remember the anti-Shah demonstrations that took place in Tehran and near my house in downtown DC. It was primarily made up of college educated middle class Iranians. They were the best educated and one of the most prosperous people in the Middle East.
There hopes were quashed after the fall because instead of a western democracy they got a theocracy.
Could a democracy spring up in Egypt, perhaps, but the best organized group after the army is the Muslim Brotherhood and they will certainly not be our friend and Israel will likely have a new enemy on its western border.
You also could easily see a cut off of American ships using the Suez Canal.
Mubarak,for all his faults, did honor the Egyptian Israeli peace agreement.
Our choice of despots seems to be the continuing result of our flawed cold war strategy from 1950 - 1990. Sure, we toppled the Soviet Union by forcing them to over invest in weapon systems but what did we get in return? We've been trying to put out fires all over the world since the fall of the Soviet Union. It's the ultimate case of "be careful what you wish for".
It may be too late but the D'Blank doctrine looks like a good strategy moving forward. It would be nice to be good guys again. I just don't if the rest of the world will let us.
As Pogo said "We have met the enemy and he is us". We so desperately want to hang on to dead end relationships with "strategically situated" countries that we not only support dictators and despots, but would support the devil himself if he allowed us a military base, flyover and landing rights, etc.
We have just witnessed in Egypt in scarily rapid fashion the power of an unhappy populace. The d'blank Doctrine makes sense and that philosophy is long overdue. It is time that those ideals were expressed over and over again to the people who make the decisions to support despots and dictators. The last election proved that from the White House to the Capitol elected government officials do actually hear what the electorate has to say.
Lincoln's ideal of democracy was "government of the people, by the people, for the people". Perhaps the people need to be heard.
"The last election proved that from the White House to the Capitol elected government officials do actually hear what the electorate has to say. "
I disagree. All the last election said was that people were unhappy, and when given the opportunity, they will flush the toilet. [However, I am surprised at how many people don't wash their hands afterwards]
To draw specific conclusion from the electorate is reading tea leaves. The winners would have you believe that the electorate is giving them a mandate. If science was based on such conclusions, you would still be taking a conestoga wagon to get to California.
This essay from Newsweek says it all.
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/27/mohamed-elbaradei-the-return-of-the-challenger.html
What has transpired in the Middle East over the last couple of years seems so implausible.
Nobody would have predicted that there would have been massive protests in the streets of Tehran less than two years ago. Then Iran was followed by the fall of the Tunisian Government, King of Jordan replacing the Government as a result of protests and now Egypt. You have to wonder what has been the tipping point that has caused all of this to bubble up in such a short period of time.
This is all about empire. In the interest of realpolitik we abandon the principles for which our country is supposed to stand, and favor the rich over the poor, the powerful over the disenfranchised, and the past over the future - not in the interest of democracy, that's only important if it's easy to support, but in the interests of our influence in the world. Whether it's Marcos, the Shah, Mubarek, or some banana republic dictator, that's what we do. That's what all empires do. NO MORE EMPIRE!
Post a Comment