The New York Times has an article about the Iraqi elections, juxtaposed against elections in South Vietnam during the height of that abortive war. While we all know the end to that story, the article aso points to the spread of democracy across Easterm Europe, most of Asia, and Latin America as positive indicators of democratic reform around the world.
The seeming success of the Iraqi election gave me pause, as a curmudgeon and writer-offer of the whole Mes O' Potamia. Does this mean Bush's foray into Iraq was the right thing to do? Probably not, but I guess like everything else it did have a little bit of an upside. How much of an upside that turns out to be will be for history to decide.
I'm pretty optimistic actually. When Iraqis start to debate their constitution, that can't help but resonate in the broader ME. That combined with the pretty forceful repudiation of the psycho-killers has a good chance of resonating more broadly. Given a choice between a Zarqawi and a democrat, most people will choose a democrat.
Prior to Jan 30, I had real doubts that Arabs really were that keen on democracy, but I am pleased to say I was wrong. The clash of civilisations may be more of a jostle. Now, I'm mainly worried about one of these groups getting a nuke...
Cheers, :)
Note: Your browser must have Javascript enabled to submit comments.