aris2chat
Gold Member
- Feb 17, 2012
- 18,678
- 4,687
- 280
You can't expect the middle east to function like most western countries. It too often functions by who you know and who you pay. Half the population are regarded as half a person if they are regarded at all.
Everything is graded by religion. Those who are not muslim have to be subject to muslims for allowing them to exist. They are not equals even when they are represented in government.
Power, money, respect, "face" are how life there works. Even the western educated return to the old way when they return.
You can't change millions of people to change and understand the west. They consider the west and corrupted and a failure. 200+yrs is a blink in time. They have seen nations born and die. Economies grow and collapse.
The middle east thinks not in years but centuries and millennia.
Why Western democracy can never work in the Middle East
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/11037173/Why-Western-democracy-can-never-work-in-the-Middle-East.html
As I write, the immediate crisis on Mount Sinjar appears to have been resolved but the appalling scenes which have dominated our television screens in recent weeks and the graphic reports in newspapers have galvanised public opionion. People demand that we do all in our power to help the Christians and the Yasidis who are being so viciously persecuted. And they are right to do so. This is a problem that will not go away. One million people have been displaced since Islamic State militants took over swathes of Northern Iraq. Yesterday, the governor of Dohuk province warned of a “genocide”, as hundreds of thousands sought refuge there.
So what exactly is in our power? This requires a realistic appraisal of the situation on the ground and of our capacity to change it. Certainly, the situation across the Middle East is now more chaotic and dangerous than it has been for half a century.
The enthusiasm of yester-year for the “Arab Spring” has proved entirely misguided. It has led to chaos in Egypt and anarchy in Libya. Those determined to be “on the right side of history” now find themselves on the wrong side of the argument. Democracy is empathically not the solution for extremely complex societies and Western meddling only makes matters immeasurably worse. The fundamental reason for our failure is that democracy, as we understand it, simply doesn’t work in Middle Eastern countries where family, tribe, sect and personal friendships trump the apparatus of the state. These are certainly not societies governed by the rule of law. On the contrary, they are better described as “favour for favour” societies. When you have a problem of any kind, you look for someone related to you by family, tribe or region to help you out and requests are most unlikely to be refused since these ties are especially powerful. In countries where there is no effective social security, your future security lies only in the often extensive family.
Behind what we might perceive as this somewhat chaotic structure lie the secret police and the armed forces. They hold the state together under the aegis of the president, king, or whoever rules the roost. That leader keeps the different elements of society in play with concessions to each group but he has an iron fist to be used when necessary, as the public well understand.
Examples can readily be found in Presidents Mubarak in Egypt, Asad in Syria and Saddam in Iraq. Nor are the kings of Jordan, Bahrain or, indeed, Saudi Arabia altogether different. There is much less cruelty in the latter countries but the iron fist is there when needed. Yet who in those countries today could survey the Middle East and believe that a republic would be a better option.
The West’s abject failure to understand the inner workings of these countries has had some disastrous effects. Iraq is the classic case. I was opposed to the invasion of that country, not because I had any love for Saddam but because I believed that the alternative would be worse. I was concerned that our invasion would destroy the stability of the Gulf which had, since the fall of the Shah in 1979, depended on a tripod comprising Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia (the latter supported by the West). That is exactly what happened and we now find that the Iranians are in a position to dominate the Gulf region.......................
Everything is graded by religion. Those who are not muslim have to be subject to muslims for allowing them to exist. They are not equals even when they are represented in government.
Power, money, respect, "face" are how life there works. Even the western educated return to the old way when they return.
You can't change millions of people to change and understand the west. They consider the west and corrupted and a failure. 200+yrs is a blink in time. They have seen nations born and die. Economies grow and collapse.
The middle east thinks not in years but centuries and millennia.
Why Western democracy can never work in the Middle East
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/11037173/Why-Western-democracy-can-never-work-in-the-Middle-East.html
As I write, the immediate crisis on Mount Sinjar appears to have been resolved but the appalling scenes which have dominated our television screens in recent weeks and the graphic reports in newspapers have galvanised public opionion. People demand that we do all in our power to help the Christians and the Yasidis who are being so viciously persecuted. And they are right to do so. This is a problem that will not go away. One million people have been displaced since Islamic State militants took over swathes of Northern Iraq. Yesterday, the governor of Dohuk province warned of a “genocide”, as hundreds of thousands sought refuge there.
So what exactly is in our power? This requires a realistic appraisal of the situation on the ground and of our capacity to change it. Certainly, the situation across the Middle East is now more chaotic and dangerous than it has been for half a century.
The enthusiasm of yester-year for the “Arab Spring” has proved entirely misguided. It has led to chaos in Egypt and anarchy in Libya. Those determined to be “on the right side of history” now find themselves on the wrong side of the argument. Democracy is empathically not the solution for extremely complex societies and Western meddling only makes matters immeasurably worse. The fundamental reason for our failure is that democracy, as we understand it, simply doesn’t work in Middle Eastern countries where family, tribe, sect and personal friendships trump the apparatus of the state. These are certainly not societies governed by the rule of law. On the contrary, they are better described as “favour for favour” societies. When you have a problem of any kind, you look for someone related to you by family, tribe or region to help you out and requests are most unlikely to be refused since these ties are especially powerful. In countries where there is no effective social security, your future security lies only in the often extensive family.
Behind what we might perceive as this somewhat chaotic structure lie the secret police and the armed forces. They hold the state together under the aegis of the president, king, or whoever rules the roost. That leader keeps the different elements of society in play with concessions to each group but he has an iron fist to be used when necessary, as the public well understand.
Examples can readily be found in Presidents Mubarak in Egypt, Asad in Syria and Saddam in Iraq. Nor are the kings of Jordan, Bahrain or, indeed, Saudi Arabia altogether different. There is much less cruelty in the latter countries but the iron fist is there when needed. Yet who in those countries today could survey the Middle East and believe that a republic would be a better option.
The West’s abject failure to understand the inner workings of these countries has had some disastrous effects. Iraq is the classic case. I was opposed to the invasion of that country, not because I had any love for Saddam but because I believed that the alternative would be worse. I was concerned that our invasion would destroy the stability of the Gulf which had, since the fall of the Shah in 1979, depended on a tripod comprising Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia (the latter supported by the West). That is exactly what happened and we now find that the Iranians are in a position to dominate the Gulf region.......................
