Nowadays the ongoing democratization of the Middle East and Islamic countries take a very careful analysis of the process.
Such as Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, the Islamic countries, it is more strict sense of the nation-state, traditional culture and has a strong cohesion, the internal tribal sectarian struggle is not so obvious, so they are more reluctant carried out the democratization process, but the rule of law to create a more stable form of government, but also a difficult and long process.
For Libya, Syria, Bahrain, these countries have in many cases is not the demand for democracy, but between the religious and tribal life and death struggle. When the regime change occurs, a new force came to power may or Gaddafi, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on behalf of the powerful forces of repression control. Such a thing has happened in Iraq in the United States under the constraints of democratic elections, but Sunni Muslims and Shiite Muslims and Kurds between the long struggle is very intense and complex.
That is, the democratization of the Middle East is in the form of a surface, to be integrated into a stable democracy is a very difficult process. Democratization usually understood, is often a particular faction or individuals to overthrow the dictatorship, but in fact the process of democratization after the overthrow of tyranny is much more difficult. Unlike most countries, Middle East, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, this nation-state, it is often difficult to understand how the political process in the Middle East Complex.
Specifically, the U.S. government in fact do not wish to see the downfall of President Mubarak that Egypt's own internal trouble. American strategists and even some important that the United States to persuade Mubarak to step down, do not take care of him, is very unwise, but also immoral, though he is an old friend of the United States for the security of the United States made a lot of contributions. However, subsequent development, making the U.S. government for political purposes had to change the original attitude, because if you do not like that, the domestic pressure of public opinion and members of Congress making it difficult for the U.S. government clearance.
Say that the behavior of some organizations in the United States, not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. government's long-term, the mentality of some Americans may not be consistent with the mentality of the U.S. government. Few governments want to see the developments to get out of hand. The complexity of U.S. society in its diversity, this is not the same with China. For instance, some Iranian-American became the elite in the era of the Shah, but after the Islamic revolution in Iran in exile in the United States, they are very rich in the United States, every day, hoping to overthrow the current government of Iran, a good home to rekindle old dreams, but the U.S. Government may not is such a mentality.
Fact that high-level U.S. leadership in East and North Africa and the complexity of the entire Islamic world, there are many research results, of which there are very respectable results. But most Americans, including some members of Congress do not understand the situation in the Middle East. Their general view is that how can the government force to suppress street protests of the people? Of course they will ask the overthrow of the regime, the conversion power. Successive governments including the United States government is facing Obama strong domestic public pressure to overthrow the tyrant, the people support the rebels, as rebellion is what the people who, after the overthrow of the tyrant tyrant will not produce new or new school of overwhelming those who know the injustice that most people do not care about, and can not do anything.
Like George W. Bush to overthrow the Iraqi regime is easy, but to help a regime to overthrow the regime governing the country is much more difficult than. Therefore, the U.S. government is already deeply aware of the problem, now we can see that the United States hesitated. But the United States are not a whole, a single individual or non-governmental organizations may be members of Congress to the U.S. government and put pressure on, saying you must do something for it, we can not turn a blind Rwandan genocide happened something like that, right?
U.S. government reluctant to intervene directly, but also do not want to direct the use of force, and it is to plan how the interests of their own best guarantee in the Middle East. Can not be simply identified the Middle East mess in its interest, and in fact is to maintain the basic stability of the Middle East, fishes better for America, just as 9.11 after the time that the last decade. The past only as Iran, Syria and Hezbollah that a few "troublemakers." Bin Laden's death and the change of Libya and the United States does not really change the basic argument that the pro-US regimes to maintain the most beneficial to the United States.
Such as Saudi Arabia is a pro-American regime, as long as not too much to suppress some of the opposition can not say what the United States. But if things become significant, the U.S. government under pressure, the regime they have to fall down, if the United States to guarantee, more likely than how to do? So it is now dating another girl was taken to approach, just as Syria is watching, in Libya, said Gadhafi should step down orally. But even if it means not to step down Gaddafi, Gaddafi will not step down yet? The United States believes the situation is difficult to control.
America drew on lessons learned in Iraq, the U.S. government and the main strategy now researchers think that the war is worth the candle, but the U.S. government can not open reflection, denied the previous government, to the Iraqi people an apology. War is over, only for the situation in Iraq now, and then test the success of democracy in Iraq. Now the situation in Iraq can not be determined success or failure, the test takes a long time. Eight years later the war in Iraq, no significant progress in democracy in Iraq, how can you imagine the situation will be better in other countries? Therefore, the U.S. reflect on how to make so full of internal contradictions, not the mature form of government more in line with U.S. interests.
From Syria, Libya and the situation in many countries, the United States can play a role is limited. I do not think these things are planned for the United States, the United States has so much power? To confuse the Middle East is not so silly it? Democratization of the United States of course is always an important goal, democracy, freedom and the rule of law is its creed, but the specific issues and strategists think the U.S. government is deep. If priority to U.S. interests to consider, the majority of regime change may not be realistic for the benefits of U.S. interests in the stability of the progressive realization of the long-term benefits of democracy may be more beneficial to the United States.
However, the U.S. government can not control the development of the situation, and thus be taken to address the way, the security focus on preventing nuclear proliferation and combating terrorism. U.S. security strategy now has changed the formulation, the original is against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, now adjusted to prevent the occurrence of nuclear terrorism, but there is no direct contact with the chaos in the Middle East.
In comparison, our Middle East and North Africa China is still very superficial understanding of these differences within countries, national ethnic composition of sectarian tribes, we know very little, we often are based on our historical experience, to understand and judge the foreign.
0 Post a Comment:
Post a Comment