Re: Will the Spread of Democracy be Israel’s Greatest Risk?
ByI don’t know if I would phrase the question that way. Democracy is only a risk to regimes that are undemocratic. If the new Palestinian government is legitimate and wishes to negotiate in good faith, then the question should be “Can the Spread of Democracy Resolve the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?” But just by looking at their track record, I have no reason to believe that Hamas will act in good faith even for the sake of their own people let alone for the stability of the region as a whole.
When I read that Hamas was victorious in the elections, I was disheartened. However, if the Palestinian elections turn out to be valid (and the verdict is still out on that), then we have to accept the outcome and deal with the consequences. At any given time in history, people get the government that they deserve, and if the Palestinians truly want a militant terrorist group like Hamas to run their show, then that’s what they will get. If they want peace, then they can have that, too. But peace will only happen when everyone, the Palestinians and the Israelis together, want it to happen. It’s enough to say that the ball is in somebody’s court. This is no game.
It's the end of the post, now what?
Bookmark and share to spread the word, we'd really appreciate it:
|
||
|
ReTweet: |
Join our email list: |
Subscribe to our feed: 
|
4 Comments
January 26th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Is democracy a risk to only regimes that are undemocratic?
Democracy by definition is government elected by the people. Therefore if Palestinians vote in Hamas to be their government then no way could it be undemocratic. The fact that Hamas has been voted in by its people makes them legitimate.
Is it not possible that there could be people in a nation that vote their leaders in democratically but are also aggressive and expansionists at the same time? Just because western civilization has outgrown its fascination with expansionism doesn’t mean other nations don’t want to give it a try.
I’m not very optimistic about today’s events and think it just indicates that Hamas has figured out that they could exploit democracy by making their views legitimate through the votes of their people sending a message to the Palestinian Authority that what the people want is not peace but war.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:37 pm
You ignore my caveat which I stated in my post. Perhaps I was prevaricating, but what the heck.
All things are equal if and only if the new Palestinian government can negotiate with the Israelis in good faith. And it is only truly democratic if the elections were not rigged, which you’ll probably never prove by me. The rest is merely idle speculation by the both of us.
True democracy is not a threat to other democracies. That’s just life. Thomas Friedman once said, “No nation with a McDonald’s restaurant ever went to war with another nation that had a McDonald’s restaurant.” Think of it as a corallary to life.
January 26th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
I hear what you’re saying and pretty much agree with you. I think what is perplexing me over this whole thing is this constant reporting of this “upset” and mentioning of how it has to be rigged.
Why does it have to be rigged? I don’t see why its impossible or shocking that a nation of people might be nationalist to the point where they support the guys who will bring them a hard-line stance against the enemy.
January 26th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
It’s not out of the realm of possibility that this was a legitimate election. Let’s face it, it’s not as if the Palestinians have a lot of options at the ballot box. In America, independent voters joke about pulling the lever for the lesser of two evils. In Palestine, it’s more like voting for the better of two killers.
Fatah was most likely voted out of office because it’s so riddled with corruption that it can’t even handle the most basic management of state services. Folks were looking for an alternative.
Hate to admit it, but Hamas has been saying all the right things to appeal to the Palestinian people’s sensibilities. They promised to make the trains run on time, so to speak (Yes, that nod to Mussolini was deliberate). They promised to help generate jobs. They promised to find ways to boost the economy. Oh, and by the way, they also promised death to Israel. Which campaign promises do you think they’ll try to fulfill?