IF LIBERALS AND SECULARISTS LOSE, WHO WANTS DEMOCRACY?

In the matter of Middle East elections, the results of which we do not always like: Anyone out there have a better idea?

We ask amid some recent wringing of hands following elections for the Palestinian legislature, in which the terrorist group Hamas won an outright majority: elections in Iraq, where voters cast their ballots along sectarian lines, and a strong showing by the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt’s parliamentary elections late last year.

“Promoting democracy and modernization in the Middle East,” writes Francis Fukuyama in a new book, “is not a solution to the problem of jihadist terrorism: in all likelihood it will make the short-term problem worse.”

The brilliant insight here is that democratic processes do not always lead to liberal outcomes.

Contrary to the rhetoric of the Bush Administration, the taste for freedom-and the ability to exercise it responsibly-is far from universal. Culture is decisive. Liberal democracies are the product of long-term trends such as the collapse of communal loyalties urbanization, the separation of church and state and the political empowerment of the bourgeoisie. Absent these things, say the critics, democratic and liberal institutions are built on foundation of sand and are destined to collapse.

Which brings us back to the question of what American policy should be. One answer is to retreat completely in the hopes of being left alone. This is the formula recently suggested by Osama bin Laden: those who would credit it must also entrust themselves to him.

Another answer is to encourage friendly autocrats to “modernize” their countries without necessarily creating the kind of democratic openings through which Islamic fundamentalists could come to power. This is what the US has been attempting in Egypt for the past three decades, without success. A related idea is to promote liberal democratic ideals by means of “soft power”- McDonald’s, Oprah, USAID, Voice of America, Britney Spears. Soft power has much to recommend it, though generally only as a complement to hard power. Absent the latter, it is powerless to defend the very people it inspires, especially when the tanks are rolling.

(Editorial: Democracy Angst; Review & Outlook

The Wall Street Journal; Monday, February 27, 2006, p. A14)