Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
The invaluable Andrew McCarthy has a new piece at NRO on American self-deception about Egypt in particular and the Arab Spring in general.
I don't believe that our policymakers have set out to promote Islamist regimes in the Middle East and Southwest Asia--but they have done so. Why?
It seems to me that there are two causes of the American-supported spread of Islamist regimes.
First, the Progressive confidence which underlies the idea of nation-building has been greatly attenuated by the relativism and multiculturalism which has become prominent in American intellectual life in the last several decades. On the one hand, we proclaim contemporary Western style democracy as the only just form of government. On the other hand, we feel guilt about judging the Islamist regimes which are popular with large majorities in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Egypt. The incoherent result is American-sponsored Islamist nation-building.
For an example of this intellectual confusion at work, I recommend President Obama's Cairo Address. It opens with multicultural praise of Islam, but the bulk of the speech is about the many changes that need to be made to modernize Egypt and make it acceptable to the standards of Western elites. The practical result is democracy Muslim Brotherhood style.
It goes without saying that Progressives from Teddy Roosevelt to Lyndon Johnson never thought of assisting with the establishment of Islamic theocracies or any other form of government that was hostile to Progressivism
The second cause of our incoherent foreign policy is a perennial problem identified by John Quincy Adams as a reason to avoid intervening in the internal affairs of other nations. He points out that we will not know enough about the facts on the ground to avoid making mistakes and being manipulated by indigenous groups that do know those facts.
Naive American policymakers believed they were promoting democracy in Libya by toppling the Gadaffi regime. In reality they were merely empowering the group of tribes that Gadaffi had displaced when he came to power.
These are the kinds of mistakes we make again and again. We keep expending vast amounts of blood, treasure, and diplomatic capital for results which are inimical to American interests.
The American people don't much care about these things because they are far away. Nation-building has become unpopular, but most Americans are not directly harmed by our foreign policy debacles. They are more concerned with issues at home such as the economy. This makes sense--the economy is much more directly related to our everyday lives.
Our policymakers are the real problem. These are the people elected or appointed to oversee our foreign affairs. They have typically imbibed bad ideas that have no relation to reality, and they do not think clearly about the consequences of implementing delusional policies because they do not live in any real or meaningful way with the consequences.
Similar causes led American intellectuals and policymakers to fantasize about the end of history after the fall of the USSR. It is easy to daydream while living as a sort of lotus eater. There is no pressing reason or urgent necessity to question the reigning dogmas learned in prestige schools and reinforced by fashionable opinions floating around cocktail parties in D.C., New York, or Geneva.
I very much hope that we will wake up before further damage is done. It took 9/11 to disabuse our policymakers of the idea that we lived in a world where peace had an aspect of permanence. We should all pray that no other terrible events have to occur to awaken us from our current stupor.
- Comment (22)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Jun '10
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Where there's no history of pluralism, new democratic institutions will almost certainly be improperly designed, with not enough checks and balances, or maybe none at all. And odds are, Democracy will amount to replacing an unpopular tyrant with leaders of the biggest assembled mob.
Jul '11
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Regarding your last statement, it is a certainty to me that terrible events are on the horizon. We have a reckoning with Islam who has not only failed to police it's radical elements but also tacitly approved of them.
Mar '11
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Funny how this thread makes the front page so soon after another urging us to get involved now!
As I said in other posts on this subject, the Arab Spring is really an Islamist Spring, and it's really a modern version of the Spanish Civil War: a rotten war (or in this case, series of wars) with equally nasty foes, neither worthy of our support, both hating our guts from one degree to another. No good can come if it, and no matter who wins, we lose. Stay out of Syria and any other Middle East "Springs" that pop up.
Jul '10
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
And yet for most of his administration, Obama made it clear that he did not want the US to be seen as "meddling" in Iran’s internal politics. Never mind that Iran has been meddling in ours for three decades. When at last the people in Iran desperately needed some verbal support from us, the only thing they heard were crickets. But when the rebels – about whom we knew nothing – arose in Libya, Egypt, etc., he actively supported them.
It was early in his administration that he purposely chose the wrong side in Honduras. With President Zelaya’s close ties to Venezuela’s Chavez and Nicaragua’s Ortega – and their close ties to Iran – it seemed pretty clear that he had something in mind. In hindsight, it could have been that it was his faith in his ability to sweet talk Iran into giving up their nuclear ambitions. But surely there were some old salts at State who could see the folly of this.
Oh, I forgot. It’s been written that O considers himself to be smarter than his advisors.
Nov '10
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
The folly, I think, is in demanding that they embrace Western democracy, and expecting it to work immediately. What we should demand is that they embrace a system of government appropriate to the immediate conditions, confident that Democracy will take hold once the crisis has passed. The best recent example of this is Chile. There were no doubt many lefties who decried Pinochet's toppling of the Allende regime, who had driven the country to economic ruin, as a step backwards into totalitarianism. I'm sure some jerks in the State department were working hard to get Allende back in power. But they failed, Pinochet killed a lot of commies, and the country was put on solid economic footing by the boys from UChicago. Ten years later Pinochet stepped down (as he said he would) and the (now solvent) country held democratic elections. Now it's the only country in South America in which Americans needn't fear being gunned down if they step outside.
Dec '11
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
I would simply make these 2 books required reading for Middle East policy makers:
1."The closing of the muslim mind" - Robert Reilly
2."The closed circle"-David Pryce-Jones
Job done.. now where's me beer mate?
May '10
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
The man most responsible for the "Arab Spring" was Osama Bin Laden. By attacking the US, the greatest super power and - in the minds of Islamists - the greatest tyrant, he inspired Arab Muslims to challenge the tyrannical dictators of their own countries, upsetting the status quo. I think the Bush Admin. anticipated the "fit hitting the shan" in the Middle East after 9/11, and decided to put forth an example of democracy in the region by way of Iraq, as well as retaliating for 9/11 by entering Afghanistan. Leading a horse to water, as it were. Will it work? It's not too far a distance to go from someone motivated to fight to overthrow an oppressive gov't to fighting for their liberty. It would be a Phoenix rising from the ashes and an utter failure on the part of the terrorists, if the attacks of 9/11 ultimately influenced the rise of democracies in the Arab World.
May '12
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Unfortunately, this will never happen, this is why the Muslim world and the West are often at such odds with each other. For Muslims, the revealed word of God as revealed by Mohammed(PB&J) is part of the very essence of their identity and community. State and Mosque are inseparable. Criticism of either state or Islam is treason.
In Islam, there is no such thing as humanity, only the duality of the believer and unbeliever. This cannot be 'tackled' any more than being American (whatever this means nowadays), democracy, etc, could be tackled here in the US.
Edited on August 17, 2012 at 8:04pmAug '12
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Global superpowers have global interests - and that's why the US supported dictators (like Mubarak...and Saddam Hussain) in the past, and that why the US is supporting (leading from the back, very sensibly) the Arab Spring today.
Wrt the Arab Spring - it's an expression of the people wanting a say in how their countries are run. Why is this unnatural or bad?
Mar '11
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Zafar:
Wrt the Arab Spring - it's an expression of the people wanting a say in how their countries are run. Why is this unnatural or bad?
It's not unnatural or bad. It's pretty much a Sunni version of the Shi'ah Iranian Spring in 1979, on a much larger scale. Who was the US President, then?
The lefties (in Iran and the US) thought they were coming to power in Iran on the backs of the Islamists - turned out to be the other way round. Lefties in the West will suffer the same fate if the Islamists are not stopped.
The only long term hope for the West is energy independence, and that don't mean windmills and solar panels. It means non-lefty governments.
Edited on August 17, 2012 at 11:08amMay '12
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
"I don't believe that our policymakers have set out to promote Islamist regimes in the Middle East and Southwest Asia--but they have done so."
This administration achieved the result it desired.
Aug '12
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
David
[It's not unnatural or bad. It's pretty much a Sunni version of the Shi'ah Iranian Spring in 1979, on a much larger scale.]
Similarly, the Arab Spring isn't being driven or controlled by the US. It's a mistake, imho, to ignore the people's 'agency' (sorry, hideous word) in this.
[The lefties (in Iran and the US) thought they were coming to power in Iran on the backs of the Islamists - turned out to be the other way round.]
So true! Surely a lesson to be learned there about trying to come to power on the back of any authentically supported movement.
[Lefties in the West will suffer the same fate if the Islamists are not stopped.]
They seem to have been fairly unaffected by the 1979 (?) Islamic Revolution in Iran. Why will this be so different?
Regards
Nov '10
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
It's a common theme at NRO (I forget who said it first, but I know Steyn and Goldberg both endorse it) that while promoting democracy abroad is good, we place entirely too much emphasis on elections and not enough on liberal governance. Elections should be the end goal of democratization, not the first step.
Mar '11
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Zafar:
Wrt the Arab Spring - it's an expression of the people wanting a say in how their countries are run. Why is this unnatural or bad? · 10 hours ago
The Iranian revolution in '79 was an expression of people wanting a say too, and they got what they wanted: an Islamist theocracy. It's insanity to provide American support to such things, though.
Stay out, and let them make their choices and live with the consequences of those choices... as Iranians are doing now. They've got some buyers remorse, but tough... they chose Ayatollah's, they have to live with that choice. They can't blame us. So, not one dollar or one drop of blood to help or hinder them.
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Why do we have the right to demand that "they" do anything? Unless there is a threat to the security of American rights, we have no right to demand they do anything.
The Declaration of Independence describes nations as having a "separate and equal station." Nations are entitled to this station by the "laws of nature and nature's God."
The idea that all men are created equal precludes the rule of other human beings without their consent--unless they have harmed or threatened our rights. The domestic equivalent is criminals.
To govern other peoples without their consent (e.g. by telling them how to live) is the foreign equivalent of domestic slavery.
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
Global powers do have global interests. But that doesn't mean we have to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations that are not threatening our rights. We should have peaceful commercial relations with all nations willing to trade.
In the Cold War, there was a plausible argument that supporting Mubarak was necessary for American national security. There was no reason to topple Mubarak (which we effectively did) because his regime posed no threat to us at all.
The Arab Spring won't end well because the majority of the people in the region don't respect the equality and equal natural rights of other human beings. It isn't our business to sort this out, but the average person in Egypt will be worse off in the long run.
Zafar: Global superpowers have global interests - and that's why the US supported dictators (like Mubarak...and Saddam Hussain) in the past, and that why the US is supporting (leading from the back, very sensibly) the Arab Spring today.
Wrt the Arab Spring - it's an expression of the people wanting a say in how their countries are run. Why is this unnatural or bad? · 10 hours ago
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
The administration has not achieved its stated goals, or at least it has not achieved the embrace of women's and gay rights.
I don't buy the idea that the Obama administration is hoping to establish Islamist theocracies.
In cases like this, the safest course is always to assume incompetence rather than clever conspiracies. :)
The Fradgan:"I don't believe that our policymakers have set out to promote Islamist regimes in the Middle East and Southwest Asia--but they have done so."
This administration achieved the result it desired. · 4 hours ago
Aug '12
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
It's arguably a sound idea, Douglas, but I don't know how eager either side of US politics would be to take a consistently non-interventionist approach. I suspect that there's too much private profit being turned from US overseas adventures for lobbyists to resist gaming the system.
As for the ME blaming the US - it's practically a tradition, plus there's all that history.
Douglas
Zafar:
Wrt the Arab Spring - it's an expression of the people wanting a say in how their countries are run. Why is this unnatural or bad? · 10 hours ago
The Iranian revolution in '79 was an expression of people wanting a say too, and they got what they wanted: an Islamist theocracy. It's insanity to provide American support to such things, though.
Stay out, and let them make their choices and live with the consequences of those choices... as Iranians are doing now. They've got some buyers remorse, but tough... they chose Ayatollah's, they have to live with that choice. They can't blame us. So, not one dollar or one drop of blood to help or hinder them. · 6 hours ago
Aug '12
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
John Grant
Safeguarding US vital interests for a century has meant a degree of control over much of the world. It’s very difficult to combine that with simple commercial relations. Power corrupts.
[There was no reason to topple Mubarak…his regime posed no threat to us at all.]
Being a great power doesn’t mean complete control. Egypt (and Iran) illustrate that. Supporting thugs like Mubarak, Saddam, The Shan, etc. is a false economy. They cost more in the long-run than you gain.
[The Arab Spring won't end well because the majority of the people in the region don't respect the equality and equal natural rights of other human beings.]
Neither did the US right after the Revolution, but look at you now. People and cultures can improve over time – if given responsibility. You did well, they might too.
[It isn't our business to sort this out, but the average person in Egypt will be worse off in the long run.]
It’s hard to see how in the long-run, but I would say that US intervention would be deeply counterproductive for both Egypt and the US.
Edited on August 18, 2012 at 3:57amNov '10
Re: Our Ongoing Middle Eastern Delusions
John Grant: Why do we have the right to demand that "they" do anything? Unless there is a threat to the security of American rights, we have no right to demand they do anything.
The Declaration of Independence describes nations as having a "separate and equal station." Nations are entitled to this station by the "laws of nature and nature's God."
The idea that all men are created equal precludes the rule of other human beings without their consent--unless they have harmed or threatened our rights. The domestic equivalent is criminals.
To govern other peoples without their consent (e.g. by telling them how to live) is the foreign equivalent of domestic slavery.
Because we believe that men are created equal, we abhor dictatorship of the exploitative kind. (Nobody is calling for the overthrow of the King of Lichtenstein.) Because totalitarianism contravenes the laws of nature and of nature's God, we have a right to demand that they change. And because we are rightly disgusted by moral relativism of the sort that would consign these people to death at the hands of their slave masters, we should acknowledge that we have a responsibility to help them.
Edited on August 18, 2012 at 11:23am