ستتراجع عملية ترويج
أنجلوس تايمز - 15/6/2007
ان الانتخابات الحرة في كل من
غزة و لبنان و العراق لم توقف
الحرب الأهلية, و لكن هذا لا
يعني انعدام الثقة
promoting democracy backfire?
elections in Gaza, Lebanon and Iraq haven't stopped
civil war, but that doesn't mean democracy is
GAZA TO LEBANON to Iraq, the Middle East is aflame, and
the vaunted free elections that have been held in each
country have hardly produced peace, stability or good
governance. Some Arabs are now claiming that democracy
itself is discredited. That's neither fair nor true.
is the only path to a government for and by the people.
And without the competition of free elections,
politicians have no real incentive to enact reform, and
citizens have no meaningful way to hold them
accountable. But it is simplistic to equate elections
with democracy. Nor should Americans expect elections to
produce outcomes we approve.
this decade, Washington was fiercely opposed to
Palestinian elections that would surely have legitimized
the late PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat's leadership against
his weak rival, Hamas. After Arafat's death, Hamas won
elections that were unquestionably free and fair, and
this week, Gaza has descended into a fierce civil war.
The U.S. applauded the Iraqi and Lebanese elections. Yet
sectarian strife, malevolent neighbors and crippling
historical legacies have conspired to nullify the
resulting democratic gains.
is often said that were free elections to be held
tomorrow, Islamists would sweep into power across the
Middle East. That's because Islamists are seen as an
antidote to corruption and despotism, and they are
organized. So governments such as Egypt's have virtually
crushed secular democratic opposition, while the
Islamists continue to spread their messages in mosques
and underground. Cairo banned Muslim Brotherhood
candidates from parliamentary elections last week,
beating up poll watchers and turning away voters in
heavily Islamist neighborhoods. Such repression is
intolerable, of course. Still, the central challenge to
the Bush administration's democracy promotion strategy
is the inconvenient but pressing question: What does the
U.S. do when elections produce leaders who despise the
United States, or whom the United States despises?
we must practice patience, which has not been a
traditional American virtue. It is worth remembering
that in U.S. foreign policy, as in medicine, bad
outcomes are sometimes inevitable. Elections should not
have been expected to cure the poisoning of the
Palestinian body politic after 40 years of war,
occupation and strife. Elections could not prevent Syria
from assassinating Lebanese politicians. And medievalist
Al Qaeda has no respect for the ballot. That does not
mean balloting should not take place.
the U.S. should reiterate that merely getting elected
does not make a government legitimate. Civilized nations
also judge each other on the basis of their adherence to
the rule of law, political pluralism, minority rights,
an independent judiciary, freedom of speech and press
and respect for international borders. U.S. support for
democratic ideals does not obligate it to recognize a
freely elected government of Nazis, genocidal thugs or
Bush administration would be wise to recalibrate its
rhetoric and promote more realistic expectations. But it
should not retreat from our democratic principles.
لهذه المقالات لا يعني أنها
تعبر عن وجهة نظر المركز كلياً
من حق الزائر الكريم أن ينقل وأن ينشر كل ما يعجبه من موقعنا . معزواً إلينا ، أو غير معزو .ـ