The Middle East

The revolutionaries in the Middle East deserve our full support. “But aren’t those rebels dangerous,” you might ask, claiming that they may very well threaten our strategic interest in stability, affordable oil, and long-term ally Israel? Perhaps, but probably- and that’s all anyone can ever work with, probabilities- the allowance of democratic forms of national self-expression, at least in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, and perhaps everywhere in the Middle East except Yemen, will diminish the ability of fundamentalist groups like Al-Qaeda to blame the imperialist U.S. and Britain for keeping them down.

Did we, the Western Powers, keep them down? Did we help oppress and deny democratic representation and free political expression from citizens of the region? We certainly weren’t primarily responsible, their governments were, but we surely helped. Our agenda was simple: (1) stability, (2) the free flow of oil and (3) don’t create a situation where we feel compelled to go to war to protect those interests- and if you could achieve that with more democracy than less, more power to you. Well the Arabic people of the region finally demanded of their leaders- by using new technology, bravery, and the inspiration that comes from decades and even centuries of frustration- to have their voices heard, to be respected as individuals; to stand up for their individual dignity.

Sound familiar? Sounds a lot like what we Americans demanded of England; like what Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Paul Revere, Alexander Hamilton and John Quincy Adams demanded, born from Enlightenment thinking: the of claim self-determination. And now, finally, centuries later, the same revolution has come to the Middle East. How can we Americans not support people in their effort and struggle to follow the way we have helped lead?

The road ahead will be more challenging than the road behind. It will not be stable, it will change constantly and sometimes perhaps dramatically, but it will work out better than the unsustainable status quo, where we had to hold our noses when getting too close to autocrats and dictators who helped our realpolitik interests but offended our values of who we are, what we stand for, and the principles in which we believe.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt does not look really as dangerous as Hosni Mubarak and the right in our country would have us believe. Al Qaeda’s call to arms to throw off the foreign infidel oppressors seems a lot less necessary to “the Arab street” than a few months ago. Even the worst case scenario, the democratic election of political candidates who oppose our interests- like Hamas in the Gaza Strip- can be worked around until they can be worked with- like Israel has done.

During the Cold War we wouldn’t let Latin America choose its own leaders. Now they have, and look at all the good that has come of it. Look at how Brazil has abandoned its left leaning and anti-Yankee ways and become a capitalist juggernaut and tremendous success story (as has India). Latin America is stable, pro-Western, a good trading partner and its political and economic systems enhance the dignity of their people. Even the occasional Huge Chavez, a leftist and autocratic-leaning type is not a threat to us, and no more or less an irritant to his own people than right-oriented klepto-cratic governments. Not our ideal, just like in the Middle East not all future leaders will be, but not sufficient reason for us to be scared of change or instability or to abandon our own American ideals.