The Neo-Conservative aim of spreading democracy throughout the world, especially in "rogue states", seems all well and good, but it has several failings. One of these, I believe, causes the type of situation described by the NY Times, above. The Neo-Con attitude seems to be that democracy comes first, and then Western civilisation and associated norms follow. For me, this process is the wrong way round, and the latter aim is both ridiculous and arrogant. Firstly, the ground must be prepared for democracy, rather than the world's preferred method of government being foisted upon an unconvinced population. By "preparing the ground" I mean:
- explaining the electoral process
- establishing rules by which elections will be run, including:
- what is and is not acceptable during campaigns
- acceptable methods of funding for political parties and candidates
- establishing rules for political parties in general, for example:
- no party can be allowed to associate itself with any sort of militia or other armed group
To return to the NY Times article, I think that Mr. Abbas's suggestion to replace the current government with one comprised of technocrats is a good one, and could greatly improve the lives of the Palestinian people. I do not think that new elections would be sensible (although many people may now move their allegiance away from Hamas, given their poor record in government) as this would simply be propogating the problem of the Palestinian Territories' immature democracy. Until policy related to Israel ceases to overwhelm all domestic policy in the Palestinian legislature, elections will continue be counterproductive as the results will mostly reflect Palestinians' attitude towards Israel, rather than any concern for good governance.
And as for Iraq, what's Blogger's word limit?!
No comments:
Post a Comment