»» Columnists

NY Times’ Kristof Misses The Point In Defense Of Arab Democracies

by Matt Schneider | 9:58 am, February 27th, 2011

» 15 comments

In The New York Times, Nicholas Kristof attempts to dispel the myth that Arabs in the Middle East are “too politically immature to handle democracy.” Inspired by the courage he sees of the protesters, Kristof admits there will be bumps ahead, but believes the time has come for “people power” to sweep across the Middle East and hopes the rest of the world shares his belief too. Though his optimism about such a result sweeps under the rug America’s very legitimate concerns.

Despite Kristof admitting “the overthrow of the shah in Iran, of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, of Tito in Yugoslavia, all led to new oppression and bloodshed,” the list of such perils completely ignores what America fears most: an Islamic fundamentalist regime gaining power and legitimacy in any newly free Arab country. It is in America’s best interest to do whatever is necessary to maintain peace and stability in the Middle East. If certain populations want nothing more than to destroy Israel and promote extreme elements of their religion, then maybe favoring the continuation of dictators who are slightly less crazy than some of the people they govern isn’t necessarily such a bad idea? Hesitating to be in support of freedom to all is a realistic approach to foreign policy, despite not seeming as nice as Kristof’s naive prediction that the entire Arab world is ready for democracy.

Outside of America, according to Kristof, the notion that “Arabs or Muslims can’t do democracy [is] still a view peddled by Arab dictatorships, particularly Saudi Arabia — and, of course, by China’s leaders and just about any African despot.” Such a view could be motivated by prejudices concerning the nature of Arabs, as Kristof suspects, yet also couldn’t the view merely be the rationale any leader would grasp at to justify their own continued necessity? In other words, in a survey of whether Arabs are mature enough for democracy, the opinions of dictators whose existence depends upon promoting the very idea of immaturity seems irrelevant.

Kristof concludes, “I’m awed by the courage I see, and it’s condescending and foolish to suggest that people dying for democracy aren’t ready for it.” Everyone can agree the protesters have demonstrated remarkable bravery by standing up to their dictators. Yet America expressing genuine concern about what comes next with a free Arab population is not suggesting Arabs cannot handle democracy. It’s merely preparing for that possibility, and such preparations are certainly not condescending or foolish.

Check out Kristof’s full column.

democracy, middle east, New York Times, Nicholas Kristof

dummy123

I was napping.
So George W Bush is a hero for giving the people of Iraq a chance at democracy?
same2u

Conservatives will support democratic reforms for these savages as long as the country doesn’t have a dictator that kisses our ass.
timzank

same2u said:
Conservatives will support democratic reforms for these savages as long as the country doesn’t have a dictator that kisses our ass.

What?
same2u

timzank said:
What?

Translation: I find any spoken support by conservatives for democratic revolutions in these Muslim countries sickeningly insincere.
Helix

Just because an Arab country overthrows a dictator does not mean it instantly has usable military power. While they can be a local threat and a short term problem, long term a democracy has more in common with the US and less reason to hold a grudge. If they do hold a grudge and are willing to attack us we can still kick their ass if we want to and are willing to spend the money and resources necessary. So IHMO it does not matter if they are hostile now or not. I think of dictators like tampons, they are used as allies and then thrown away when it is convenient and in our national interest to do so. Be real, people, they would do the same to us if they were more powerful and the positions were reversed. Our real allies are Britian, Canada, Japan, etc., and similar democratic countries with common interests.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Mark-Ward/100000135233619 Mark Ward

Interesting timing…

I just watched a (rebroadcast) in which Dr. Zahi Hawass (Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs) was receiving Egyptian artifacts which had been removed from Egypt.

The emphasis of the show, was that “because” Egypt has modernized and proven it can properly keep and display the ancient artifacts, that they should ALL be returned to Egypt.

ONE thing the protesters in Egypt had demonstrated is that they ARE NOT ready to give their own history the reverence and respect due. Neither, I fear, will they give Israel nor the rest of the non-Muslim world the respect due.

The destruction of ancient Egyptian artifacts make THESE protesters NO BETTER than the Tomb Robbers of Antiquity – and will (properly) put the brakes on ANYONE ELSE “returning” the artifiacts in THEIR CARE.

I wish the modern Egyptians (and other Middle-Eastern countries) well and good luck with their new government(s), but don’t go around acting like you’re some tower of virtue!

Get it RIGHT, and the world will respect you! Get it WRONG (again), and the world will not (and rightly so).
pshap

Matt,

I think you fairly characterize Kristof’s article, although I would take issue with one aspect of your criticism. Toward the end, you state (correctly) that concerns about democratization in the Middle East are reasonable because: (a) in a democratic system, any person/group with enough popularity can be elected to lead; (b) in several of these states, hardline elements with anti-Western views have notable support among the populace; (c) therefore, democratization of the region could lead to one or several states freely electing leaders who are less friendly to the U.S. than their autocratic predecessors. The problem this presents is that it substantially diminishes American influence in the region, and it leaves U.S. without recourse to challenge the legitimacy of those hostile states.

However, you state that these concerns are “certainly not condescending or fooling,” implying that Kristof would consider to be so. I think that’s inaccurate. His point is a larger one: the transition from an oppressive government to a free society is difficult, and there can be (and often are) serious setbacks along the way. Yet these transitions are such that they inevitably tend towards adopting more openness/freedom/civility. In recognition of the fact that every country is different and thus every transition presents unique challenges, it is natural that the time horizons can vary greatly.

What Kristoff objects to is the notion that this analysis doesn’t apply to Arab countries, which are distinct because of the anti-Americanism that exists among a subset of fundamentalists. If I understand him correctly, his point is that the possibility that some hostile views may be held among the leadership of a democratic Middle Eastern state is not a reason to not support democratization in this context, because the same positive forces that have driven other transitions will play out here as well. Any “condescension” or “foolishness” comes from the claim that, notwithstanding the legitimate concerns regarding democratization in the region, Arab states remain the exception to the rule of promoting free elections and representational government.

Finally, at one point you write, “It is in America’s best interest to do whatever is necessary to maintain peace and stability in the Middle East.” I don’t mean to be disrespectful or nitpicky, but this seems pretty glib to me. Obviously, peace in the region is preferable to war in the region — but the idea that we should do whatever it takes to maintain peace and stability presumes that there is peace and stability to maintain. This is one of the least peaceful and most unstable regions in the world, and we would be wise to not minimize the costs that autocratic rule imposes on its population.

Anyways, that’s my view. I look forward to reading reactions (if there are any), and I hope everyone is having an enjoyable Sunday.
BarneyFranken

same2u said:
Translation: I find any spoken support by conservatives for democratic revolutions in these Muslim countries sickeningly insincere.

This is a woefully inept assessment of how conservatives think.

Its either unabashedly ignorant or maliciously false.
Pablo

BarneyFranken said:
This is a woefully inept assessment of how conservatives think.

It also demonstrative of considerable ignorance of conservative foreign policy and its recent history. How many Arabs have the Democrats liberated, um…ever?
http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-Glackin/100000892011713 Joseph Glackin

Hey, Pablo–How ’bout that place called Iran? During the Truman Admin. they got a democratic govt. Then Ike got the White House and Allen and John Foster Dulles overthrew Mossadegh and installed the Shah. How’d that work out in the long run? There’s over 100,000 graves in Iraq, thanks to W & Darth Cheney. And 4500 here in the US.
Liberal Tormentor

From DEM Cynthia McKinney:

“Colonel Khadafy should be highly commended for honoring our ancestors — the framers of true democracy — by reaching out from Africa to the entire world. We would like to thank him for this opportunity to discuss his thoughts as presented in the Green Book.

“We are here to listen and observe, then to support and carry forth the ideas of democracy and equality, universal principles embodied in the Green Book, the goal of our effort being to link and empower Black, indigenous and oppressed peoples world-wide for the betterment of our earth and all of its inhabitants.”

You can’t make this stuff up, people!
pshap

Liberal Tormentor,

I don’t defend what Cynthia McKinney said — not at all.

But taking a statement (which was made in Oct. 2009) from a former member of Congress (def. in 2006 election) and insinuating that Democrats support a Qaddafi, a murderous dictator, is extremely obnoxious and childish.

This is a very lazy way to argue, and indicates to me someone who would rather take an intellectual shortcut than actually make a thoughtful contribution.
Thelonious Funk

we weren’t ready for democracy either. but we did all right
Liberal Tormentor

Thanks for your critique of my post, pshap. I’ll put it where is belongs, in the trash.
chicgoods7

===== http://www.chic-goods.com/ =====

===== http://www.chic-goods.com/ =====