Democracy in the Middle East - a Failure?

Many of those who may have previously championed the US initiative to introduce democracy to the Mid East have grown skeptical, pointing to the recent Hamas victory in Palestine as evidence of failure. Natan Sharansky, Donald Devine, Francis Fukuyama and others fault US strategy for putting form before function. As we have it now, "More democracy simply means more influence for radical Islam," claims Devine. The State department’s translation of the Bush vision (as first articulated in a 6/24/02 speech) -"The Road Map To Peace" - has indeed tried to jump start democracy; elections have been rushed before the formation of democratic institutions, perhaps before basic rights, actually those natural rights which anchored the Founders - life, liberty, property, religion, speech - are secured. It is argued that in such an environment, elected officials will not be held accountable, will have little interest in reform.
These proud parents may be a tad too demanding of their new born. In our sketch of Feb/24 on this subject we argued that in fact the Hamas electoral triumph (and no one was more surprised than Hamas) is a fit for US policy because of the combination of the working mechanism of the election process, and, that powerful lever available to the West, originally applied so successfully by Reagan against the Soviets.
It is not required that we agree with the election outcome. Key is that this new mechanism, in the case of Palestine, effectively thrusts outlaws onto center stage, converting thugs into diplomats. Hamas would never evolve, never abandon extremism, never enter the main stream without this forum, the arena of exchange and debate offered by a democracy, however imperfect.
Now that Hamas has acquired the spotlight, some semblance of respectability, they will not easily surrendered it. This is simple human nature. They will in fact acknowledge their constituency, one that elected them not as an endorsement for more violence but as a rejection of past corruption and the hope for more aid, more state-run projects. And this is where the West can apply pressure "Reagan style", that of linking aid to reform. The US had what the Soviets needed by the way of money, expertise and markets. These were made available only if the Soviets acknowledged basic human rights. A fissure widened into a gulf and with the help of internal pressure it worked. This linkage will work in the case of Palestine; Hamas will moderate its rhetoric and reduce or even cease violence directed at Israel, our view.
The PA receives most of its $1.9 budget from donors. It is a society addicted to aid, with very little private sector and a bloated bureaucracy, really a welfare state. But that will favor the side of peace. The PA must pay 140,000 employees (who with their dependants count for about 30% of the population) and cannot do it without western help. The US just canceled $411 million in aid, Canada will follow suit; the EU, the largest contributor to the operating budget, has suspended direct aid.
Fortunately, the Arab League will not step up its funding to narrow the gap.
Of course Hamas says these decisions amount to a collective punishment of the Palestinian people. This is an old trick to create an enemy and divert blame, one used so skillfully by Arafat. Key is that the Palestinian people are not so sure. If it comes to Hamas abiding by the original details of the peace plan, of accepting Israel’s existence, or, starving its constituency, all but the willfully blind can see the outcome at the next round of elections.
As we predicted in February there has been a change in Hamas attitude, at least that manufactured for public consumption. Witness the new prime minister’s conciliatory statement of Mar/26, Haniyeh claiming that Hamas does not seek bloodshed, that the Hamas "presence of power marks the beginning of resolving the crisis." And in a published interview Friday, Apr/7, Palestinian foreign minister Zahar confirmed Hamas willingness to discuss a solution that would implicitly recognize Israel. Some dismiss this as phony, mere posturing, nothing new. Certainly there is face saving, but, as long as a united West continues to utilized its lever these comments telegraph a solid beginning.
So at this center we celebrate the electoral victory of Hamas. It sets the course for a solution, something never before possible without the rudiments of democracy.
Robert Craven