Weekly Column
That's why it was such a surprise to open my paper and find the following:
"[T]his has so far been a year of heartening surprises - each one remarkable in itself, and taken together truly astonishing. The Bush administration is entitled to claim a healthy share of the credit for many of these advances. It boldly proclaimed the cause of Middle East democracy at a time when few in the West thought it had any realistic chance. And for all the negative consequences that flowed from the American invasion of Iraq, there could have been no democratic elections there this January if Saddam Hussein had still been in power."
Why is there so much hope among policy makers currently? Freedom, it seems, is on the march.
Many pundits doubted that elections were possible in Iraq and called for a postponement until the security situation could be improved. But U.S. and Iraqi leaders concluded that before we could bring peace to the country and turn its security over to its own people, we would have to let the Iraqi people establish a government that they could truly call their own.
Once given the opportunity, Iraqi voters turned out in large numbers to select their leaders. So far, the sober work of the newly elected officials is refuting the notion that Arab culture is incompatible with democracy. Time will tell, but the signs are hopeful.
Due to the passing of Yasser Arafat, and during the run- up to the Iraqi elections, on January 9th the Palestinians held their first elections since 1996. The resulting parliament seems to be committed to negotiating peace with Israel, attacking corruption, and establishing a competent government.
In Lebanon, the assassination of an opposition leader brought a broad political coalition out in the streets to demand that Syria end its decades-old occupation of that country. The pressure became so intense that the Syrian- dominated government resigned. Lebanese citizens and the international community are saying clearly that it is time for Syria to get out so the upcoming Lebanese elections can be held without interference.
In Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak has agreed to allow opponents to run against him in the upcoming presidential election. Previously, voters were only going to be allowed to vote "yes" or "no" to Mubarak's continued rule. Nobody expects Mubarak to change the rules enough to make it possible for him to actually lose, but growing numbers of Egyptians are looking at the elections in Iraq, Palestine and elsewhere, and are saying, "How about us?" It's a healthy development.
Under pressure from the U.S., and with the Iraqi elections as a backdrop, Saudi Arabia's feudalistic monarchy is holding a series of municipal elections. Everybody agrees that this is just a start, but one that was long overdue.
Given the relentlessly autocratic history of most of the Middle East, even tentative advances for freedom in the area are important. Once the people of the Middle East feel that they can influence their governments through peaceful means, they will be less likely to produce extremists who express themselves through bombs and bullets at home and abroad.Source
