"The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom."
- George W. Bush, January 2004
Imagine yourself a juror in a trial. It is the time for closing statements from both sides. On the one side is a lawyer arguing for democracy imposed by military invention, and on the other a lawyer advocating for uprising and revolution among the common people. As an American, which would you most likely identify and side with?
Imagine what would be happening today in Iraq had George W. Bush not invaded it? The spontaneous uprisings in various countries of the Middle East are demanding, without American assistance, an end to the autocratic regimes that have ruled these lands for decades. Is there any doubt that much the same would be happening in Iraq as well? America has no control over these events and does not know how they will ultimately unfold. One can speculate over the causes. There is the gap between the wealthy and poor, ever greater with globalization. A yearning for personal freedom among the youth. The plea of the middle classes against a calcified, ensconced rapacious oligarchy. Time will tell. But there is one thing that is obvious: these uprisings were not caused by American military intervention.
The recent events in the Middle East are an international rebuke of the central thesis of the Bush Doctrine. That doctrine holds that only democracy makes nation states safe and stable. Therefore, for America to be safe, the Middle East needs democracy, by force if necessary. And so from that, proceeded the necessity to invade Iraq, destroy its government, and reorganize its society so that it will be more amenable to American security needs. But this project didn't go quite as planned.
With Hussein, as now with Mubarak, there was a dictator in power who ruled by intimidation, violence, and villainy. There were always rumblings of revolt, but as in all dictatorships they were quickly suppressed with secret police, paramilitaries, and American-supplied weapons. In both cases, regimes with a long history of oppression rewarded their friends and punished their enemies. Back before the first Gulf War, both Hussein and Mubarak were a part of the American fold of friendly dictators, their regimes openly supported by American munitions and money. When the Project for a New American Century found a powerful ally in President Bush, they made it their business to end this state of affairs, by force, beginning with Iraq.
Instead of being greeted as liberators, we were greeted as invaders. Long-simmering sectarian tensions caused a bloody civil war. Civil institutions collapsed completely. Law and order disappeared. Millions became refugees. A trillion dollars borrowed, spent, and never repaid. And many, many, of our finest citizens cut down in their prime. All to build up a democracy that chose our worst enemy as its closest ally. This is the final verdict the Bush Doctrine of democracy by gunpoint: a fragile, weak state propped up by a coalition of gangsters and theocrats. This is not what America should stand for.
And then there is Tunisia. Egypt. Yemen. In each case--and there are others--the people themselves have risen up and captured the heart and soul of free people everywhere. No American soldier needed to be killed. No billions of dollars needed to be borrowed. No nation needed to see its entire society bombed into submission and millions of its people scattered to homelessness, poverty, and desolation. No American president needed to send them a message that he was bombing them for their own good. Instead of sending them our bullets, we sent them our Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. The people. On their own. Risking their lives for freedom. That is what America should stand for.
We do not know how recent events will evolve. The people of these nations face powerful forces, sometimes backed up by the United States and its allies. But make no mistake, if just one true democracy emerges from these uprisings, it will stand in stark, unyielding contrast to the foreign, forcible establishment of democracy in Iraq. It will stand in direct repudiation of the Bush Doctrine.
Most importantly, it will stand all on its own.