"Is Arab Democracy Possible?"

Elliott Abrams, who served in the State Department for President Reagan for eight years and who later served President George W. Bush for four years, has written a new book entitled Realism and Democracy: Foreign Policy after the Arab Spring.

National Review Editor David Pryce-Jones reviews the book and makes this conclusion in his review:

"Abrams has coined the cautionary phrase “A human-rights policy means trouble.” If I understand it properly, he is accepting the Reaganite assumption that everybody recognizes and wants freedom, but also the fact that if we who are already free insist on others’ having the exact same rights, we will postpone and maybe invalidate any real progress toward freedom: Democratization is misrepresented in Islamic countries as a shameful surrender to the West. Abrams’s prescription for the future is that we go on doing what we have been doing up to now, with and for Arabs, only doing it bigger and better: more-generous aid (especially from private foundations), encouragement of political parties, genuinely competitive elections, no truck with dictators, inclusion of Islamists in the political process as much as possible, civil society, recognition that Arab democracy is linked to American leadership. That’s all very nice, but Abrams is placing a very large bet on hope."

Read more at: Is Arab Democracy Possible?

Personally, I have the opposite viewpoint of Abrams on this issue. I think that the USA should not spend one penny in promoting Arab democracy. I think that the Arabs are wrapped up in Islam, which makes denial of human rights a religious demand. Also, the Arabs are like their father:

Genesis 16:11-12 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.