« "Israeli demands from Obama " (sic) | Main | "US punched Bibi, Barak in the face" YNET »

15 August 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.



That assumes that we can't be outbid in pursuit of some country's ambitions. pl



This quote is quite interesting: "That must include religious legitimacy, Sobhy said. He said U.S. officials didn't fully appreciate how much Islam must be incorporated into a democratic system. "The Islamic religion is strongly interlinked to various degrees with the functioning of most Arab governments and their respective societies," he said."

I suggest we have our own discussion about democracy. As you know, we are deluged with shibboleths about "free market," "minority rights," and the "separation of powers". These make great sense in the American context. Our revolution essentially ejected the British Crown after King George ended Britain's 80-year policy of benign neglect of the Colonies. The American colonies had fully functioning legislatures and courts before the Revolution. We designed our own country. We did not ask for foreigners to write our constitution or seek approval from the IMF.

My point is pretty simple. Islamic democracy probably won't be like Western democracy, just as Chinese State Capitalism differs from American capitalism. Attempting to fit Egypt into Davos will lead to tears for everyone, won't it?



Foreign policy is not a board game nor is it a seminar bull session. I am interested in the well being of the United States, not in abstractions. pl


fair enough. What are our legitimate interests in the Middle East, & what relations should we have with autocratic Salafist governments or/and freely elected Muslim Brothehood states (Egypt + Turkey?). What is our proper relationship with Israel. Offensive Realism (offshore balancer), Defensive Realism, or some other strategy?

First we pursued the war against the Sunni in places such as Fallujah and Afghanistan. Now, we are gearing up for war against the Shiites. Whose interests do these wars serve?


Babak Makkinejad

It only means that the Grand Strategy of the United States in the Middle East does not have local statioanry pillars.

That is, US has no positive program that could engage people in the Middle East - in contradistinction with the Concert of Europe that came out of the Congress of Vienna - as thus must soley rely on balance of military power.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad