Hamid - The Problem of Democracy

The problem of dealing with unsavory characters is a challenge across a variety of situations. Think of dealing with a "pesky" neighbor, the business that failed to repair your car or a public official whose views are repugnant. In international diplomacy, dictators and despots perpetrate abuse of their citizens. In each of these examples, are there ways to maintain relationships that over the longer haul can result in positive change?

Shadi Hamid's The Problem of Democracy: America, the Middle East, and the Rise and Fall of an Idea (2022) explores the difficult issue of the contamination of democracy promotion versus the values of the liberal, Western, world. Hamid's view is that American politicians have fused the two by advancing a particular type of democracy, one that embraces among other things gender inclusion, equal rights, and free market economic principles. The result of the U.S.A. fusing democracy promotion with liberal ideology is hypocrisy in action and ineffective diplomacy that results in the world not trusting America's expression and advocacy for either. America has regularly aided unsavory governments and their leaders in order to achieve advances in liberalism or beneficial business and commodity bargains. On the flip side, America has abandoned grass roots democratic movements when it was not prepared to deal with the disruption and chaos that is a natural by-product of governmental transition.

Hamid's focus is primarily the Middle East (African countries in the north that border the Mediterranean, to the Saudi peninsula, and across to Iran). What these countries have in common is the influence of Islam. The bottom line is that American politicians are profoundly skeptical of Islam due to the perception that it is fundamentally anti-democratic. However, the precepts of Islam advocate fairness, equality, education, and advancement through diligent work. To be sure, Islamists come in many different guises, sometimes contradicting the values for which they presumably stand. But could this not be said about democracies around the world, including the U.S.A.?

The problem of democracy promotion then requires, quoting Roger Scruton's essay, "Limits of Democracy," the "ability or willingness to be unhappy but still obliging when one's adversary wins an election." Hamid's conclusion after reviewing presumed democracy promotion efforts in the Middle East is that liberalism must be separated by observing democratic minimalism "with its emphasis on the preferences of majorities or pluralities through regular elections and the rotation of power, over liberalism, which prioritizes individual freedoms, personal autonomy, and social progressivism" (locator 170 in Kindle). Democratic minimalism involves placing the foundations of legitimate government at the center of American foreign policy rather than any other liberalizing outcomes. The approach would require abandoning the advocacy of individual freedoms in favor of the collective obligations of free expression and participation in electing one's government.

The disruption that results in formerly undemocratic cultures from expressions of dissent is often avoided at all costs when the American government is involved. This has been part of America's Middle East foreign policy for generations and is largely the result of its protection of Israel. Pushing Arab regimes, many partially or entirely Islamic, to make peace with Israel significantly undermines the prospect of democracy because embracing Israel is only possible when an autocrat imposes it against the will of its citizens. American's commitment to security over democratization was graphically demonstrated during the "Arab Spring" of 2011-13 when Egypt erupted in mass demonstrations and protests. A more contemporary Middle East example is the fact that at the same time "Saudi Arabia and the UAE were becoming more repressive at home and promoting regression abroad, they were attracting more, rather than less, American support" (locator 752).

The bottom line of democratic advocacy in the Middle East is that it presently, and likely forever, will require the acceptance of Islam as central to its people and governments. As Hamid indicates, "one can think that Islamists are bad and still prioritize their participation in the democratic process" (locator 2871). The discomfort with Islamists must be countered in these circumstances with a fuller and more persistent commitment to democratic minimalism that welcomes participation by the Muslim Brotherhood, which has been vilified over the years. With the Muslim Brotherhood's founding partially a reaction to Israel's occupation of the holy land, America's unqualified advocacy for Israel is a potential, but not necessarily a determinant, obstacle. The Botherhood's adoption in 2004 of its "Reform initiative" as a commitment to a constitutional and democratic system within a framework of Islamic principles is a building block on which U.S. foreign policy could be centered.

If the U.S.A. were to commit to true democratization in the Middle East, it first must accept uncertainty and secondly commit to a reasoned response to actions that could possibly threaten U.S. security and economic interests. Uncertainty related to Israel would be one of the greatest challenges for American diplomats and politicians, including the potential for the regional order and architecture being fundamentally changed. However, Hamid asserted that prioritizing Arab democracy could be actualized by publicly guaranteeing Israel defense protection if attacked while shifting to a Middle Eastern policy  of placing democracy as the first and foremost priority, abandoning the folly of the "stability first" policy it presently imposes through a hypocritical mix of liberal ideology coupled with democracy promotion.