Democracy in Action...It's a Beautiful Thing, Pt 2

^.^

Welcome back!

In Part One of this article, I went over the victory of democracy in the Palestinian territories, and the total vindication that those elections were for democracy, peace, and the policies of George W. Bush, and Ariel Sharon, who refused to play the "business as usual" game with a committed terrorist.

Now we move on to Iraq, where a possibly even bigger election has just taken place. And I must say that this election mirrors one that was helf not too long ago in Afghanistan, resulting in the election of Hamid Karzai to the Presidency in that country. Iraq's completed election has similar effects throughout the Arab world, but it was done in a more spectacular way. Let us review, shall we?

1: First off, let's splash the entire idea that the Left put forth that the US could not use military force to impose a democracy on a people. I can see George Bush now, saying: "Well, we did...so NYAH!"

2: The terrorists (the word "insurgents" does not convey what these people really are) were supposed to have a banner day! There was supposed to be blood running in the streets, and they were supposed to have a real impact on the election. In fact, in the week or so running up to the election, attacks on Iraqis increased quite a bit. Most of those attacks were on election workers, or against polling stations. However, on the day of the elections itself, there were a few attacks during the morning hours, but by early afternoon, they had died out, and people turned out by the MILLIONS to cast their ballots!

3: The Left thought that turnout would be low, probably due to the terrorists. After all, once a person in Iraq cast his or her vote, their finger would be dipped in a purple ink that would not come off for a few days...and this would make them into easy targets for the terrorists. So why bother? Why risk one's life for what's likely to be a sham election of a puppet government run by those evil Americans...right?

WRONG!

Turnout in Iraq averaged 70%. In some places, it was above 90%. Folks, the United States hasn't seen those kind of turnout numbers for a very long time, if ever. Since the government shut down most of the roads and restricted travel, the people turned it into an impromptu holiday and it was quite festive in places.

By the way, you can take all three of those points I just made about Iraq, and they also apply to the election last year in Afghanistan. The democracy in Afghanistan was imposed there by the US military, it was carried out under the threat of attacks by the terrorists in that country, and turnout was not supposed to be high.

In both cases, the Left, the talking heads on antique TV, and the Liberal know-nothing politicians in Washington got the story horribly wrong.

BUT, let's not talk about the Left for a moment...

Instead, look at the situation in the Middle East, and listen to what various people are saying about the Iraqi elections.

First off, if you look at a map of the region, you see that we've had successful democratic elections in the Palestinian territory, Afghanistan, and Iraq. All three of these are areas in the Arab world that have virtually no experience with democracy whatsoever. The last free election in Iraq was in 1954, there has never been a really free election in Afghanistan until last year, and Yasser Arafat controlled all of the elections in Palestinian areas up until the one last month.

The success of these elections cuts the Middle East's autocratic nations into seperate areas, with little support for each other. If I were in Damascus or Tehran, I would seriously be looking over my shoulder at the possibility of a democratic uprising, in part inspired by the elections being held on my borders. The only reason the Iranian people haven't risen up yet is because the mullahs are feeding them some line of bull about how the US is about to attack them. It's the classic way for a government to avoid facing problems at hmome...have the people focused on a problem on the foreign relations front.

If either Syria or Iran collapses in a heap, and democracy is allowed to flourish there, it would be an huge thing. If both go, even better. If we throw Saudi Arabia on that pile, even better. Now, don't get me wrong...none of this will be a cake-walk. I doubt that Iran, Syria, or Saudi Arabia will go quietly into the night. These are entrenched regimes, possibly with the power of the military behind them, and the collapse of any government is seldom a neat affair.

However, things are possible in the area...good things. And for every person in Jordan who says that the election in Iraq is a sham to allow the Americans to stay there and suck all of the oil out of the country, there is a Yemeni wondering if this is only the beginning. When I saw that, I thought "You know, this could be just the beginning."

John B.