When democracy fails

This post might just as well be called the "Arab Spring Paradox."

As someone whose political inspirations developed during the Cold War, motivated to end Soviet aggression and see free enterprise and political freedom expand wildly in my lifetime, the recent "Arab Spring" uprisings would seem to be a ratifying moment for my cherished beliefs.  That I am uncomfortable with the apparent results, where Islamist revolutionaries have used "democracy's tool chest"  to take power from authoritarian regimes only to impose Sharia Law, must make me some kind of religious bigot, right?

Having been one of those US democracy assistance "meddlers" in Romania once upon a time, where I dispensed $6 Million of US taxpayer money to help develop Romania's democratic institutions, it struck me that US taxpayers had been pumping cash and meddling for democracy there for a full ten years ($60+ Million) before I showed up.  There was plenty of US-sponsored "institution building" work to be done, I was told, before Romania's democracy would be as self-perpetuating and robust as our own.

But there was another problem that had nothing to do with money or US aid programs, and that was a widespread lack of what I call "political ownership," by Romanians for their newly-established freedom.  Even after a full decade since Nicolae Ceausescu's boot was removed from their throats, large numbers of of Romanian intellectuals did not trust that elections by themselves would bring discernible change to their lives, and even fewer folks paid any attention to the brand new machinery the US had been providing in the form of training programs for journalists and political parties.

As one Romanian colleague pointed out, "Thank goodness we have democracy, now all we need are democrats."

So not all democracies are created equal.  Having the nomenclature of democracy, the electoral process, communications tools and institutions used to organize it-- all the basics-- is simply not enough.  There has to be citizen ownership of the state, without which democracy in-name-only is now wielded as a cynical weapon:

--If, say in Egypt, Tahrir Square led to elections where one political party, the Muslim Brotherhood, wins power in a legal and fair voting process, who are "outsiders" like many US presidential candidates to question the "will of the Egyptian people?"  Moreover, who is the US, just a 236 years-old itself, to "know" what perfect democracy looks like?

--Systemic parliamentary election vote rigging in a nominally-democratic Russia, for instance, we're told, is an "internal" Russian affair, and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has told observers to butt-out, saying that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is personally responsible for inciting unrest in his country.

The Arab Spring Paradox will soon test the Obama Administration in Egypt, where it has reversed US policy against recognizing the terrorism-sponsoring organization, to recognize the Muslim Brotherhood's electoral success in post-Mubarak Egypt.  Senator John Kerry, who visited recently, admits, "The proof will be in the pudding."  While the pudding is being made, of course, the US will continue to fund and arm a politically Islamist Egypt, lest it be accused of abandoning "democracy."

One needn't be reminded that Hitler was elected, too, and the Nazi Party in Germany was not seen as the pervasive menace it was until it had consolidated total control.  It is past time to remind ourselves that not all democracies are created equal-- that the most distinguishing characteristic of the US is not the Constitution, but the Declaration of Independence, without which the Civil War might never have been fought.

If the US remains "freedom neutral" when it comes to supporting and nurturing democracy as a core component of our foreign policy, it will be a cynical tragedy of global proportion.  The time is now for the US to stop promoting "democracy" as anything more than a framework, and to insist upon freedom as the only measure of friendship and success.