Search This Blog

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

The Arab Winter


Daniel Byman makes a pessimistic forecast for the Arab Winter:


The most dangerous outcome of the Arab Winter, however, is the spread of chaos and violence. In Syria, where thousands have already died, the body count may grow exponentially as sectarian killings spread and peaceful protesters take up arms. In Yemen, the resignation of Ali Abdullah Saleh has not ended the turmoil throughout the country. And Libya, lacking strong institutions and divided by tribal and political factions, may never get its new government off the ground.

AM: Byman rightly highlights some facts that may be unpleasant for supporters of democracy. First, dictators and strongmen sometimes do a better job of maintaining order and peace within weak states. For example: the removal of Hussein in Iraq unleashed massive sectarian violence. This does not mean that democracy is not a laudable long term goal, only that it may not be the best system for government for weak states which face problems consolidating political order.
Second, democratic governance may not mean more 'peace' between countries. For example, should radical organizations come to gain control over the Egyptian or Jordian governments, Byman notes, this could lead to a deterioration in relations with Israel.

5 comments:

  1. You sound like America in the 1980s: dictatorships are good, so lets use the CIA to prop up murders for our own benefit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well, to be fair, a lot of those dictatorships also claimed to be using democracy, or something close to it.
    Sure, dictators suck. So did Bush jr.

    Also, some cultures don't react well o the idea of political freedom.
    Many Italians under El Duce loved the guy, and back when Napolean "freed" Egypt from England (or more accurately, freed the Suez canal ...) he gave Egypt the chance to govern itself once more.
    They tried democracy themselves, and then demolished the experiment themselves. Without any intervention.

    No argument n the criticism of 80's America though. What a bunch of goons .....

    ReplyDelete
  3. HM: google the essay "dictatorships and double standards" by Jean Kirkpatrick. Learning is painful so i'm sure you'll hate it at first, but it might pay off.

    LV: I the case of Egypt, and many other dictatorships, I think that it has more to do with the attitudes of the elites than with the attitudes of the people. You usually need some pro-democracy elites to get a democracy. That's what you don't have in the Middle East: strong political reformers at the elite level.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AM: Agree - weak states need strong leaders. Arab states have traditonally always had a strongman of some sort at the helm.

    HM: They supported dictators in the sense that thay understood the power dynamics of the region and supported stable governments in an effort to prevent the soviet threat from winning their favor. They provided arms and money to combat the 'red scourge' which those governments then turned on their own people and in some cases, the US itself.

    Democracy is not always good. I can parade out the usual examples of Nazi Germany etc but I think we all know that democracy has negative aspects and unforseen consequences. It takes a while to catch on and build up and the intrum can be violent and bloody, as we are seeing now.
    Revolutions usually are, its just we're used to reading about it in a textbook, not seeing it live on TV.

    Many of the arab states have never in their entire history had a democratic institution. They don't know how to govern that way. Some may even prefer to live under a dictator as there is a certainty that comes with it. They don't know true freedom like we have in the west and don't understand that freedom can be bad and destructive at times. The West has had hundreds of years to build their democratic institutions, economies and organize their society accordingly. These States are now supposed to do all that in a few years?

    It is easy for another strongman to seize power (realativly speaking) because all the framework is there for him to rule already. A few small changes here and there to the face of this statue and the name of that building, and there you go (yes, I simplify, but you get the point).

    Democracy should grow organically, not be transplanted and 'forced' on the people. If there is no support at the grassroots level how can these countries hope to succeed?

    CM

    ReplyDelete
  5. CM: I'd be careful about making any supposition about what people in Arab countries prefer.

    I'd also be careful about holding Nazi Germany up as a failure of democracy. Germany is an interesting case because it had almost no experience with democracy before 1919. yet, it was successfully imposed from the top down in 1945. Same thing with Japan.

    The reason that worked there is b/c they were strong states. Of course, there is no guarantee that you can get democracy through a period of endogenous germination either.

    ReplyDelete