RSS Feed MenuPresident Barack Obama’s State Department has reversed the George W. Bush administration’s policies of undermining authoritarian Middle East regimes through the spread of democracy. Indeed, the President appears to have abandoned the democracy agenda.
As the BBC reports, the Obama administration “has all but dismantled the Iran Democracy Fund” – federal funding to a classified list of groups that work to foster democracy and undermine the mullahs’ tight grip on Iran. The timing of this could not be worse, as democracy advocates continue to come under attack for protesting the fraudulent June elections that handed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a second term. Just last week, Iran announced plans to execute three activists.
As Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) observed, “It is disturbing that the State Department would cut off funding at precisely the moment when… needed most.’”
In Egypt, democracy advocates also feel abandoned. Egyptians believe that President Hosni Mubarak, who has held a tight grip on power since 1981, will appoint his son Gamal as his successor. The Obama administration has been silent on this issue, which has many Egyptians seething. The administration has also withheld comment on the regime’s campaign of mass arrests against opposition leaders, bloggers, and other political activists.
“We are very disgruntled with President Obama,” said Kamal al-Fayoumi, an activist jailed by the government last year. “He has given the regime the green light to do what it wants with the Egyptian people.”
In Turkey, the illiberal Justice and Development Party (AKP) recently launched a campaign to bring down the Dogan Group, a private, pro-West company that owns about half of the country’s media (including CNN Turk). If the AKP succeeds, it could ultimately bring 90% of the media under its control – reminiscent of the state-controlled Russian media. This would be a devastating blow to the region’s only democracy. Liberal Turks are now beginning to ask why the administration has failed to weigh in.
Democracy advocates also are painfully aware of the President’s ambivalence about the U.S. commitment in both Iraq and Afghanistan – two countries where the shoots of democracy are sprouting, but can easily whither.
The beginning of the end of the democracy agenda can be traced back to the President’s Cairo speech in June. He referenced a “controversy about the promotion of democracy… connected to the war in Iraq.” In an attempt to create “a new beginning” with the Muslim world, he stated, “let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other.”
Most Americans would likely agree that imposing any political system on others is the wrong approach. However, Obama’s policy of “anti-Bushism” is equally wrong. The democracy deficit in the Middle East has not contracted. And given recent developments in Turkey, the deficit may widen further. This could lead to further radicalization of the region. Failing to recognize this may ultimately harm American interests.
LB // Oct 22, 2009 at 7:52 am
Yes lets keep sending barrels of money over there, because you know it worked so well up until this point. (that’s sarcasm in case you missed it)
All we’ve really managed to do is massively destabilize the area. The US has no right to be in the regime change game. Not only that, but history shows us that not only are the most successful democratization efforts are organic and homegrown. Much like the American Revolution, change will only come if the people want it, otherwise there’s not a whole lot you can do other than lead by example.
Derek // Oct 22, 2009 at 9:20 am
It is nice to see the right promoting such an idealistic foreign policy. They are the hippies of the new century, even coming to the aid of the “liberals” in Turkey. It’s as if they are to the left of Obama, when it comes to foreign policy. They are the leaders of idealistic missions, around the planet. Missions that are not colored by considerations of national interest.
Meanwhile, back here in NA they say liberalism is evil. It is liberals they are attacking, for not protecting liberals.
If they are willing to go to the left of Obama on foreign policy, why not outflank him on health care as well? God knows there is a huge vacuum to the left of Obama on health care.
balconesfault // Oct 22, 2009 at 9:54 am
I am entertained by seeing this site promote Kamal al-Fayoumi simply as “an activist jailed by the government last year”.
Yet the article linked to identifies al-Fayoumi as “a labor leader who was jailed by the government for launching a major strike last year.”
Is “New Majority” now going to be championing workers rebellions around the world that strike at the governments of some of our geopolitical allies in the GWOT?
Funny enough, I have the feeling that were Obama actively supporting al-Fayoumi, we’d be seeing articles about Obama abandoning our strategic partners in one of the countries universally recognized as having a very large militant muslim population.
http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200410130824.asp
After all – pushing democratization worked so well for US interests in Palestine and Lebanon, right? And nobody should forget that the losers in the Iranian election – fraud or no – were no friends of the US, and had made no committment to stopping Iran’s nuclear program. And democratization of Iraq looks likely to produce a government much more sympathetic to Iranian interests than Saddam would have ever been.
While we’re at it, let’s push for a Saudi democracy movement. That should really further US strategic interests in the region!
ottovbvs // Oct 22, 2009 at 10:06 am
………Puhleeeeze……The US has been in full retreat from this nonsense since the start of Bush’s second term……check out Egypt, Jordan, Saudia Arabia, the UAE……I’m sure this sort of piffle will excite the true believers but for anyone with a dimes worth of knowledge it’s absurd and ultimately jsut discredit Republicanism…….this is just not a serious party anymore
LFC // Oct 22, 2009 at 11:02 am
balconesfault said… After all – pushing democratization worked so well for US interests in Palestine and Lebanon, right?
“No fair! How dare you bring up actual facts and history that show our approach to foreign policy produced failure after failure, and in fact caused further destabilization. If you just follow our suggestions for the next hundred years, THEN you’ll see!”
– The Neocons
sdm // Oct 22, 2009 at 11:14 am
It’s tough to get much traction when the premise on which you base your arguments is faulty.
The so-called Bush democracy initiative was at point of gun, Iraq being the perfect example. Furthermore, democracy as defined by the initiative fell comfily inside neocon parameters.
And your sense of timing is exquisite since your post appears hard on the heels of that John Kerry negotiating a new presidential election in Afghanistan. Now that is democracy building.
Moderate // Oct 22, 2009 at 11:28 am
You guys are mentioning destabilization as if that was an unintended consequence of the neoconservative’s meddling and “democracy” agenda.
Destabilization is the goal.
Reason60 // Oct 22, 2009 at 12:24 pm
I am wondering why “undermining” authoritarian regimes is considered a good thing. The thought of Saudi Arabia being overthrown by God-knows-what should send chills up the spine of any rational person.
The proponents of foreign interventionism always have a ready answer, pointing out that there could be some benefit to America if this regime or that government is changed. They never stop to consider the awful cost in America lives, trillions of dollars, and having our security and interests sucked into a black hole of foreign intrigue and Byzantine politicking in places where we have no knowledge whatsoever.
They seem to take for granted our power, seeing the military and CIA as being magic machines that can produce any good result, anywhere we want, with no cost or blowback whatsoever.
It is odd that Glenn Greenwald and Pat Buchanan are on the same page with regard to this, that it is precisely our foreign interventions that have undermined our security, that have provoked the worst attacks on us. 9/11 was plotted by the very man who we armed and assisted, in an intrigue designed to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan 20 years previous.
In 20 years time, what will become of the Sunni militants in Iran who are our current allies? How will Karzai, “Our man in Kabul” end up?
This is madness.
chinagreenelvis // Oct 22, 2009 at 2:47 pm
THIS… IS… SPARTA!
czesco // Oct 23, 2009 at 1:12 am
I was against the policy from the beginning because it disregarded the fact that the basis of democracy is the rule of law. In societies where there is no tradition of the absolute rule of law and no independent judiciary it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for democracy to take hold. Also, it seems to me that destabilizing the Middle East is not the wisest decision in terms of foreign policy goals or the best use of the US’s financial and military resources.
potan // Oct 24, 2009 at 2:32 pm
I knew Obama abandoned any real commitment to human rights and democracy when he appointed Hindu extremist Sonal Shah to his cabinet. Sonal Shah has connection to fascist organizations such as VHP, Bajrang Dal, and the RSS back in India.