Despite being labeled with such undesirable monikers, as “Crusader” and “Cowboy”, President George Bush, however, remained committed to a policy of attempting to export democracy to the Middle East. And while this policy has not been without flaws and miscalculations, there are some encouraging signs that democratic ideals have been planted in the Middle East. It will most likely take decades to discern whether or not Bush’s policy of exporting democracy was successful, furthermore, the current floundering of the global economy may or not set back the spread of democratic ideals. Bush may well not be given credit, but his commitment to the exportation of democracy as well as the ever-increasing stability of the region will most likely lead to democratic growth within the Middle East in the coming decades.
While some may think that the prime example of successfully implementing a democracy in the Middle East, there may be better examples; moreover, examples of states that have implemented democratic features and ideals without direct US influence, not “at the end of a gun.” Egypt and Saudi Arabia have both taken grand steps in the direction of reform. Saudi Arabia, a state known for its traditionalism and strict adherence to the Pillars of Islam, has already made some minor progress towards reform, including the implementation of a 25 member family council with the Al Saud family to choose the successor to King Abdullah. Saudi Arabia also satisfies a few of the requirements for democratization set forth by Russett. First, Saudi Arabia has enjoyed increased national wealth due to prolific oil revenues. Saudi Arabia has increased its level of diplomacy in order to sell its oil, and thus, it has become more economically interconnected with other states. “The discentives would be magnified for highly interdependent economies, which suffer even from damage inflicted on each other’s territory that destroys investments, markets, or sources of imports. Interdependence also creates groups with vested interests in continuing economic exchange.”[1] Egypt, on the other hand, is not near the oil exporter that Saudi Arabia is, instead, Egypt is one of the more commercially and industrially developed states within the Middle East. Egypt has been very slow to make reforms and increase individual liberties. President Bush decided to grant Egypt a substantial aide package. Subsequently, an increasing amount of elements of reform are becoming more and more prominent within Egypt’s political power structure. Second, it is important for democracies to establish elements of civil society such as governmental and nongovernmental institutions. These elements of civil society not only help to create societal norms within a state, but according the Russett, those societal norms help to create shared values and interests among democracies. Democracies are also more likely to succeed when there are greater levels of democratic ideologies within their respective regions. Moreover, if democratic reforms continue to take hold, and more importantly, can be sustained, President Bush’s efforts to spread democracy in the Middle East may indeed prove fruitful.
Iraq may instead be an example of exporting democracy at the point of a gun. While this method of spreading democracy is statistically far more likely to fail, there have been examples that suggest it can be successful. At the end of World War II the United States and its allies sought to implement democracy in Germany and Japan. While President Bush was committed to implementing and nurturing democracy after toppling Saddam Hussein’s regime[2], the president did not, however, use the lessons provided from Germany and Japan. President Bush was not originally interested in a prolonged presence in Iraq, instead, Bush’s administration sold the invasion of Iraq as a short engagement aimed at toppling the regime, as well as finding and destroying what remaining WMD in Iraq. Additionally, the American public, by and large, were not interested in a prolonged engagement either, what’s more, as the engagement continued, Bush’s approval rating plummeted. In contrast, while Bush did make several crucial errors such as disbanding the Iraqi military and entirely dissolving the government, the president did, however, realize that establishing an Iraqi democracy would not happen overnight, as was the case in Germany and Japan. When the American military’s position in Iraq looked frivolous and, more acutely, untenable, President Bush pushed for a surge to quell the counterinsurgency. The surge policy was very divisive at the time, but the situation in Iraq has changed astoundingly; the probability of success appears to be much higher. Whether or not democracy survives in Iraq will obviously be far less dependent upon U.S. influence and aide, but moreover, success will be far more dependent on whether or not provinces within Iraq can develop greater shared identities and interests, and if democratic values continue to take hold in the region. “I think that over the last several years, because of a more assertive American voice on this, there have been some real gains- like women in Kuwait voting or like Iraq, which is an imperfect and fragile and still-emerging democracy but one that is multiconfessional, multiethnic and in the center of the Arab world.”[3]
Whether or not President George W. Bush’s efforts to promote democracy in the Middle East will lead to a more stable, peaceful, and ultimately predominately democratic Middle East will once again take decades distinguish. Furthermore, while the former president did set this in to motion, the role of the U.S. will now be decreased. The shrinking of the current economy, as well as the actions of state and nonstate actors will also greatly effect how democracy in the Middle East. The current status within the Israeli Knesset, which is becoming more greatly dominated by hard-liners, may also put a strain on democratic reforms by its neighbors. States within the region must remain committed to democratic reforms and increased cooperation. This is, however, not say that U.S. should not continue to pursue encouraging democratic reforms throughout the Middle East, much more, the world. “If the U.S. doesn’t remain that lodestar, then I think democracy moves off the international agenda at a time when you’re beginning to see, for instance, the Europeans unafraid to give their award to a Chinese dissident, despite the blowback from Beijing.”[4] It looks promising that President George W. Bush’s efforts promote democracy in the Middle East will be successful in the long-term, but subsequent presidents must remain committed to this same cause in order for Bush’s efforts to lead to fruition.
