The Middle East & Neocon Democracy

Bringing democracy to the unwashed masses of the Arab world was a neoconservative mantra long before they hijacked the Bush presidency to use as their own ideological testing ground.

In the abstract, the idea is a noble one. In reality, it has been a disaster in Iraq – where democracy was imposed at point of gun with ruinous results – and pretty much a non-starter elsewhere in the region.

This despite ample evidence that self-rule – although not necessarily a catholic version of American democracy – is attractive to Arabs who understand that they’ve been held back by their so-called leaders and the ultra orthodoxy of their faith.

I hasten to add that bringing democracy to this troubled region was a formidable task from the jump and the political and spiritual leaders of many Arab nations, and not the U.S., must share the brunt of the blame.

But aside from sending Karen Hughes out to talk down to kindergarten students in Kuwait and enough speeches from Bush administration bigs to burn out the sturdiest paper shredder, the U.S. has pretty much talked the talk but has not walked the walk. It has done far more to enflame anti-American animosity and stoke fervent nationalism that is only incidental to democracy than to build bridges.

In fact, the endless blathering about democracy has been a substitute a real policy.

Compounding this failure is the U.S.'s habit of choosing its friends based less on their willingness to embrace democratic values than more pragmatic concerns. How many times has Washington been blindered because a brutal dictator is willing to allow American warplanes, ships and troops, and more recently facilities for renditioned terror suspects, to be based in his duchy in return for American blood money? As Jeb Koobler notes at Foreign Policy Watch:

"Indeed, there is a general consensus amongst analysts that one of the most significant factors fueling anti-Americanism in the Middle East is the Bush administration's violent foreign policy and its support for corrupt Arab autocrats. When traveling in the Middle East last year, I conducted a very informal poll myself and found this theory to be overwhelmingly true. Arab friends, teachers, and recent acquaintances all said the same thing when the topic of terrorism came up: while they may once have held a generally ambivalent opinion towards the United States, many now professed their support for violent extremism. The reason? America's aggressive foreign policy and its continued efforts to prop up corrupt Arab allies like Hosni Mubarak and the House of Saud."

I hasten to add that this practice did not commence with the Bush presidency, but has been taken to new heights in the relationships of convenience that the administration has forged since the 9/11 attacks.

This is because the notion that America should lead by example -- as opposed to shoving its politics down other peoples' throats -- has been relegated to the White House dustbin. And that when push came to shove, the very neocons who professed to want to shine the light of democracy across the Middle East had darkness in their own hearts.

In the end, they embraced not democracy but Machiavelli, who famously wrote that "it is better to be feared than loved."