"In the Wall Street Journal, Fouad Ajami writes today that the vibrant display of political activism in Iran since its elections highlights the relative “stagnation” of politics in the Arab world. He writes that the recent UN Arab Human Development Report dissects the condition of the Arab state and sadly recognizes that despite oil wealth, the region has an autocratic political culture, high unemployment, floundering economies and widespread poverty. States have failed their people, contends Ajami, but leaders have nevertheless become masters of personal political survival, which is reinforced by shortcomings in strong opposition movements, the middle class, and power of property the private sector.
Ajami is critical of the UN Arab Human Development Report’s authors, but narrows his argument to criticize a new American policy in the Middle East under President Obama. This policy values the status quo over the “risks of liberty,” he writes, and misses opportunities at supporting democracy." (Project on Middle East Democracy)One of the most notable things about the Iranian Uprising is the relative quiet in the Arab world. Even the Egyptian Kefeya movement cannot mobilize more than a few dozen protesters, while Iranian dissenters were able to fill the streets with thousands. One could speculate as to the reasons for the difference. Ajami seems to imply it is cultural, as if the Arabs were somehow incompetent or growing more impotent without Washington's prodding. In fact, if one were to draw any conclusions about American influence, it might be the opposite: where American influence is the weakest (Iran) democratic impulses are the strongest. Only where American influence props up dictators and stifles civil society do popular movements fail.
No comments:
Post a Comment