Democracy as a WMD?
Updated: 2013-07-24 07:14
By Yang Sheng(HK Edition)
|
|||||||
In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq under the pretext of seeking weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and dubbed the initiative Operation Iraqi Freedom. Of course, Uncle Sam found no WMD at all. Instead, he left a WMD - multi-party democracy.
Democracy as a WMD? Yes, it can be. If not appropriately exercised, Western-style democracy, which is supposed to be the best possible social system mankind can choose, can bring catastrophic consequences, even a descent into the abyss.
Take a look at today's Iraq; instead of being an example for American-style democracy in the Middle East, it has become hell on earth with endless sectarian fighting. Sitting on the second-largest oil reserve in the world Iraq has been turned into a country in tatters thanks to force-fed democracy by America. Now with universal suffrage officially established, the Iraqi people have little left to lead a normal life, let alone rejuvenate the economy and pursue sustainable development.
Egypt's crisis is the latest case in point. Over the past fortnight, we have been constantly bombarded with news of how a democratically elected government crumbles. Ironically, enthusiastic supporters who voted for Mohammed Morsi last year, are the same vicious protesters who took to the streets to topple him (and Hosni Mubarak). Morsi never would have become president without their votes. In other words, yesterday's voters can easily become tomorrow's rioters.
As the Arab world's largest and most important nation, how Egypt's implosion evolves, or devolves, will serve as a template for other countries in the region. The sudden demise of the country's first ever freely elected government has made democracy lovers around the world dumbfounded, casting doubt over whether democracy can take root in Egypt or other countries on the democratization road map. Democracy as a WMD in Egypt has shown its real impact: it is no longer a question of which ruler is at stake, but the country. It is like a matter of life and death - will Egypt hold together as a unified country or will it be torn asunder by democracy?
Western media, ordinarily first to sing a chorus of praise for any democratic development around the globe, have undertaken sincere soul-searching. The New York Times recently ran an editorial headlined: "Is Democracy Possible in Egypt?"
Equally intriguing is the US's attitude towards Egypt's uprising and turmoil. So far, President Barack Obama has used tortuous rhetoric to avoid calling it a coup. If the US is a staunch guard of democracy, any ouster of an elected government should anger the US and its allies. However, Washington prefers to remain silent and passive this time around. It is sending a clear and sound message to the rest of the world - the US's national interest should always take priority, and if necessary, democracy and freedom could be discarded as easily as a pair of stinking socks.
To further illustrate my point - why democracy imported from the West can be tantamount to WMD, let's take Syria, another victim of the Arab Spring. The latest figures released by the UN indicate two years of conflict have quintupled unemployment; reduced the Syrian currency to one-sixth of its prewar value, and shrunk the economy by 35 percent. Nearly 7 million citizens - approximately Hong Kong's population - are being displaced within the country or beyond.
All this penetratingly lays bare the fact that any country should have what it takes to achieve democracy, or prepare to take a heavy toll, or in worst scenario - all hell breaks loose.
The crux of the problem is: the democratic system that works well in some countries doesn't necessarily fit in others. Western democracy can only be learned as a reference, but should not be copied. Any kind of blind action may lead to the tragedy that has beset places like Iraq, Libya, Syria and Egypt.
Hong Kong should learn a lesson from the Arab countries' democratic pursuit. Recent years have seen the city's public coming to believe that democracy provides a solution to all social ills. There have been an increasing number of political opportunists, with a roguish smile, capitalizing on issues of minor importance to fuel radicalism and populism. "Democracy is not a panacea" may sound like a clich, but still, we should reflect on others' failures in our zest for democracy, and not be fascinated by some scholars' unfailing glibness. We should opt for more consensus as a way forward, if we want Hong Kong's democratic cause to adapt, endure and thrive over time.
The author is a current affairs commentator.
(HK Edition 07/24/2013 page1)