Ukraine vs. Iraq: When America Gets It Right

"Democracy is not the absence of tyranny. It has to grow from within over time, and it requires far more care and feeding than Washington seems able to give."

-- George Packer in The New Yorker, December 20 & 27, 2004 (Comment: Invasion vs. Persuasion)

Just in time, George Packer makes a compelling case for American foreign intervention that actually works. Call it Operation Ukraine. (Read the full article here.)

Contrast Ukraine with Iraq: whereas hasty, aggressive, and unilateral attempts by America to democratize the latter have met with almost universal resistance and questionable success, a much less invasive, much more sensitive and incremental approach in Ukraine over the past decade has helped that country embrace democracy with relative smoothness.

And with considerably less damage to America's global reputation.

In the Christmas edition of The New Yorker, Packer documents how the United States helped establish genuine democratic reforms in Ukraine from behind the scenes and gradually during the nineties. Financial and technical support was provided by both governmental and non-governmental organizations, and to all political parties, in order to create a truly balanced, non-partisan democracy.

With Ukraine, U.S. leaders apparently remembered that democracy "has to grow from within over time", that it can't be shoved against its will into the microwave and nuked at high without boiling over and tasting funny.

"The United States did in Ukraine exactly what it failed to do in Iraq: it upheld international standards in conjunction with democratic allies. The consequences of this failure in Iraq will always haunt the American effort here. . .Iraq has shown that a war of liberation is a crude instrument for setting a country free."

Here's hoping that Ukraine, not Iraq, serves as the model that future U.S. administrations follow in the years to come.

Happy New Year, everyone!

Democracy or Americanization?

"President Bush has put the idea of spreading democracy around the world at the rhetorical heart of American foreign policy. . .
The best role for critics in the President's second term will be not to scoff at the idea of spreading freedom but to take it seriously - to hold him to his own talk. The hard question isn't whether America should try to enlarge the democratic order, but how."

-- George Packer in The New Yorker, December 20 & 27, 2004 (Comment: Invasion vs. Persuasion)

Colour me blue and call me liberal if you really must, but I do appreciate Michael Moore. However biased or inaccurate he may be at times, few can argue that, with "Fahrenheit 9/11", he re-popularized dissent.

And yes, I believe that's a good thing, because it appears that America badly needed a wake-up call to reclaim its roots. Despite what the O'Reillys and Gibsons of the world would have us believe, dissent is not the new terrorism. On the contrary, it is what has always made America beautiful.

After all, you don't have to agree with everything Moore says. That's the great thing! Just to be able to disagree, and to believe that the act of doing so contributes to the continual fine-tuning and upgrading of our democracy, is what has (historically) made America the envy of the world.

What freaks the world out is not the (yes, sometimes trivial, other times dubious) criticisms of America's Left, but the almost religious "patriotism" of the Right.

"You can't root against your country in Iraq and still be a loyal American, period", says Bill O'Reilly. O'Really? When did lack of dissent become the defining attribute of an "American"? Is anybody else confused by the Right's version of democracy?

If Right-leaning media really speaks for the current U.S. Administration, one could be forgiven for asking: Is U.S. foreign policy really about democratizing the world, or simply about Americanizing it?

International affairs specialist John Ikenberry claims to already know the answer, stating that U.S. policy going back to Wilson, "begins with a fundamental commitment to maintaining a unipolar world in which the United States has no peer competitor", a situation which is to be "permanent [so] that no state or coalition could ever challenge [America] as global leader, protector, and enforcer."1

I don't want to believe Ikenberry when he says that the current strategy "presents the United States [as] a revisionist state seeking to parlay its momentary advantages into a world order in which it runs the show." But I'm really having trouble disagreeing with him.

And I love America!

Now that I think about it, I resent having to even say that. It bugs me that I have to defend myself against charges of anti-Americanism simply because I register concern with some things America does. I mean, is this where we've come to? After nearly 230 years of the great democratic experiment, is 21st-century America really no further beyond, and possibly even a step or two behind, its forefathers on the defining ideas of free speech and dissent?

It is this rush to marginalize dissenters that makes me wonder if it's really global democracy that U.S. foreign policy is aiming for, or if Ikenberry is right: that democracy is merely a cover for good old-fashined imperialism.

If he's wrong, then American leaders (and their media-based supporters) should welcome dissent (not only from the Moores and Stewarts, but from U.S. war veterans and families as well) as the best evidence of success. That Moore's "F9/11" was not completely blocked from release was a good sign, but I think politicians and media execs need to do more.

Blind support of America's actions in Iraq and elsewhere, whereby critics are villified and "defenders" praised, naturally leads the world to question America's motives. And no, dammit, that doesn't mean we're hateful or jealous. Just deeply concerned, because, hey, this affects us too.

I know O'Reilly and crew would love to argue that their rantings are simply one form of dissent in the thriving democracy that is America. But their comments don't merely disagree with opposite views: they marshall against the act of dissent itself, dissent in principle. They imply that criticism of the Administration is, in and of itself, un-American.

I really hope America's leaders don't agree. I concur with Packer's quote that starts this article: the time is past to simply throw rocks at Bush for going into Iraq. For better or worse, he's there. The task of the dissenter now is to make sure that when he says "democracy" in his speeches, it's actually democracy that Iraq (and the world) end up with.

It just might have helped to asked them if they wanted democracy in the first place. After all, wasn't it their democractic right to have a say in the matter?

1 John Ikenberry, Foreign Affairs, September-October 2002

162,000 Dead, Millions Homeless

As of this morning, the death toll in Asia (click here for details) has reached nearly 162,000, affecting at least 12 countries. Worst hit were Indonesia and Sri Lanka, whose dead or missing have accounted for nearly 89% of the total.
Tens of thousands remain unaccounted for and hundreds of foreign tourists are still missing. Some (including the World Health Organization) have already suggested that diseases resulting from the massive flooding could double the number killed by the December 26 earthquake. At least 5 million more have been left homeless.

Several of the world's richest nations (with Canada taking the lead) have announced that they will indefinitely suspend all debt for countries affected by the tsunamis. Additionally, "a spokesman said the [Canadian] government will match as much as is donated by individual Canadians up to Jan. 11", reports the Globe and Mail.

Billions of dollars in aid have already been pledged by countries around the world.

If you would like to help, contact any of the following organizations:

Canadian Red Cross: 1-800-418-1111; on-line at http://www.redcross.ca

Unicef Canada: 1-877-955-3111; on-line at http://www.unicef.ca

World Vision: 1-800-268-5528; on-line at http://www.worldvision.ca

The Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace: 1-888-664-3387; on-line at http://www.devp.org

The High Commission of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: 1-613-233-8449 or on-line at http://www.srilankahcottawa.org

The Mennonite Central Committee: 1-888-622-6337 or on-line at http://www.mcc.org/respond/rapid_respond/asiaearthquake/index.html

Or visit:

The American Red Cross

AmeriCare

Oxfam

Network for Good

CARE

ADRA International

If you are concerned about whether your donations will be used appropriately, read this article at the Globe and Mail.