Mediocrates
10-30-2011, 01:39 PM
Written BY an Arab woman and published in the Arab media, at least twice:
http://english.alarabiya.net/views/2011/10/30/174441.html
http://www.daralhayat.com/portalarticlendah/323408
While the West speaks of the necessity of accepting the results of the democratic process, in terms of Islamists coming to power in the Arab region, there are increased suspicions regarding the goals pursued by the West in its new policy of rapprochement with the Islamist movement, in what is a striking effort at undermining modern, secular and liberal movements. The three North African countries in which revolutions of change have taken place, are witnessing a transitional process that is noteworthy, not just in domestic and local terms, but also in terms of the roles played by foreign forces, both regional and international.
The obsession of some Westerners with the so-called “Turkish model” of “moderate Islam,” able to rule with discipline and democracy, seems naïve, essentially because of its assumption that such a model can automatically be applied on the Arab scene, without carefully considering the different background and conditions that exist in Turkey and the Arab countries. There is also some naivety in assuming than the “Iranian model” of religious autocratic rule that oppresses people, forbids pluralism and turns power into tyranny, can be excluded as a possibility.
Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian judge, human rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, addressed the women of the Arab awakening at the Women’s Forum in Deauville, France, and said: Do not repeat our mistake. She said that the separation of religion and state is the only guarantee of democracy, not because the flaw lies in the Sharia itself, but because it can be interpreted by men who want more domination, and who view democracy as an enemy of their monopoly, one that takes away powers they have hijacked and purposely kept women away from.
At the same conference, the Yemeni participant, a friend of Tawakel Karman, the first Arab woman to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, said that Tawakel is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, and that, compared to the “Salafists,” this group represents moderation itself, as well as salvation. This is an opinion which seems to have been embraced by the West, strengthened and driven forward amid the applause of Islamist movements that present themselves as the alternative moderation, blocking the way for movements of modernity by mounting the steed of democracy, most likely on a single path from which there is no return. They are inflating themselves and their size, and entering into a temporary marriage with the West – which in their opinion is naïve – a marriage of convenience that is to their benefit as long as it breaks the back of secularists and modernists. In truth, the Democratic US Administration is not the only one encouraging Islamist movements to take such a course, as there are also some Republicans like Senator John McCain. McCain made sure to address Islamists from the rostrum of the World Economic Forum at the Dead Sea during a seminar on the American-Arab relationship, calling for respecting their rights to power, and thereby sending two messages: one to Islamists under the headline “we are with you,” and the other to the modernists under the headline “we do not care about you.”
The writer continues with a rhetorical point that there are two schools of thought on this in the west: 1) to let the Islamists demonstrate they are unable to govern and through some process they will be overthrown, and 2) intervene to prevent them from taking power.
I suggest a third way, far darker and strategic in nature. Step back and allow them to fail BECAUSE their own people will never rise up to replace them with any semblance of modernism (as we see in the black flags of al Qaeda being hoisted over Libya...). Let them implode wholesale. Let them unwind the clock all the way back. Oil isn't going to last forever anyway. Buy all the oil and gas we can now for as long as they are able or willing to sell it. Ignore the rest. But at the same time STOP aiding them as well. In 20 years the Arab world's explosion of population and ignorance will herald in a new Dark Ages like the world has never seen. It will make Congo and the savage wars of West Africa look tame and controlled. The west, particularly the US will gradually switch their hydrocarbon acquisitions to Mexico, Canada, West and SW Africa, Russia and parts of SE Asia.
The Maghreb, Mizrahi and Persia are doomed in the next generation or two. In a generation there will be more illiterate starving people in Pakistan alone than the total population of Mexico, South Korea, Canada and Taiwan combined. Where would you put your efforts?
http://english.alarabiya.net/views/2011/10/30/174441.html
http://www.daralhayat.com/portalarticlendah/323408
While the West speaks of the necessity of accepting the results of the democratic process, in terms of Islamists coming to power in the Arab region, there are increased suspicions regarding the goals pursued by the West in its new policy of rapprochement with the Islamist movement, in what is a striking effort at undermining modern, secular and liberal movements. The three North African countries in which revolutions of change have taken place, are witnessing a transitional process that is noteworthy, not just in domestic and local terms, but also in terms of the roles played by foreign forces, both regional and international.
The obsession of some Westerners with the so-called “Turkish model” of “moderate Islam,” able to rule with discipline and democracy, seems naïve, essentially because of its assumption that such a model can automatically be applied on the Arab scene, without carefully considering the different background and conditions that exist in Turkey and the Arab countries. There is also some naivety in assuming than the “Iranian model” of religious autocratic rule that oppresses people, forbids pluralism and turns power into tyranny, can be excluded as a possibility.
Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian judge, human rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, addressed the women of the Arab awakening at the Women’s Forum in Deauville, France, and said: Do not repeat our mistake. She said that the separation of religion and state is the only guarantee of democracy, not because the flaw lies in the Sharia itself, but because it can be interpreted by men who want more domination, and who view democracy as an enemy of their monopoly, one that takes away powers they have hijacked and purposely kept women away from.
At the same conference, the Yemeni participant, a friend of Tawakel Karman, the first Arab woman to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, said that Tawakel is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, and that, compared to the “Salafists,” this group represents moderation itself, as well as salvation. This is an opinion which seems to have been embraced by the West, strengthened and driven forward amid the applause of Islamist movements that present themselves as the alternative moderation, blocking the way for movements of modernity by mounting the steed of democracy, most likely on a single path from which there is no return. They are inflating themselves and their size, and entering into a temporary marriage with the West – which in their opinion is naïve – a marriage of convenience that is to their benefit as long as it breaks the back of secularists and modernists. In truth, the Democratic US Administration is not the only one encouraging Islamist movements to take such a course, as there are also some Republicans like Senator John McCain. McCain made sure to address Islamists from the rostrum of the World Economic Forum at the Dead Sea during a seminar on the American-Arab relationship, calling for respecting their rights to power, and thereby sending two messages: one to Islamists under the headline “we are with you,” and the other to the modernists under the headline “we do not care about you.”
The writer continues with a rhetorical point that there are two schools of thought on this in the west: 1) to let the Islamists demonstrate they are unable to govern and through some process they will be overthrown, and 2) intervene to prevent them from taking power.
I suggest a third way, far darker and strategic in nature. Step back and allow them to fail BECAUSE their own people will never rise up to replace them with any semblance of modernism (as we see in the black flags of al Qaeda being hoisted over Libya...). Let them implode wholesale. Let them unwind the clock all the way back. Oil isn't going to last forever anyway. Buy all the oil and gas we can now for as long as they are able or willing to sell it. Ignore the rest. But at the same time STOP aiding them as well. In 20 years the Arab world's explosion of population and ignorance will herald in a new Dark Ages like the world has never seen. It will make Congo and the savage wars of West Africa look tame and controlled. The west, particularly the US will gradually switch their hydrocarbon acquisitions to Mexico, Canada, West and SW Africa, Russia and parts of SE Asia.
The Maghreb, Mizrahi and Persia are doomed in the next generation or two. In a generation there will be more illiterate starving people in Pakistan alone than the total population of Mexico, South Korea, Canada and Taiwan combined. Where would you put your efforts?