Comments on: Fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan Inextricably Tied http://www.captainsjournal.com/2008/01/01/fates-of-afghanistan-and-pakistan-inextricably-tied/ News & Commentary on Warfare, Policy and Counterterrorism Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:11:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Brian H http://www.captainsjournal.com/2008/01/01/fates-of-afghanistan-and-pakistan-inextricably-tied/#comment-24440 Brian H Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:33:17 +0000 http://www.captainsjournal.com/2008/01/01/fates-of-afghanistan-and-pakistan-inextricably-tied/#comment-24440 Democracy may not be sufficient, but eventually it is essential. The questions of "when" and "how" are crucial, but there are many ways to skin a cat. The mish-mash "bottom-up" process may intersect productively with the more formal attempts to rule from the center in Iraq, but the learning process is ongoing, and real. I suggest study of Bueno de Mesquita's data and analyses, which distinguish between regimes by the size of the "ruling coalition" of persons and forces, and by the size and nature of the "Selectorate" which is the next layer out and forms the pool for the ruling groups. Tyrannies have ruling coalitions which systematically parasitize the Public Goods produced by the country, but as the beneficiary pool widens, eventually a democratic system becomes the best payoff regimen for all concerned, and the Selectorate expands to encompass the whole population. This is a sliding scale, with no on-off switches in sight. To simplify, Islamists see the Moslem male population as the Selectorate, and the cabal of clerics and warlord-military bosses as the ruling coalition, with no role whatsoever for the "public will", since Allah has spoken about how things should go. Breaking this mindset moves in the democratic direction on the sliding scale, but there are plenty of alternatives, such as an SH-type dictatorship, or socialist / communist party rule, etc. And as far as "fostering terrorism", sometimes you just have to grasp the bloody nettle like a man and face and fight the wannabe theocrats. Democracy may not be sufficient, but eventually it is essential. The questions of “when” and “how” are crucial, but there are many ways to skin a cat. The mish-mash “bottom-up” process may intersect productively with the more formal attempts to rule from the center in Iraq, but the learning process is ongoing, and real.

I suggest study of Bueno de Mesquita’s data and analyses, which distinguish between regimes by the size of the “ruling coalition” of persons and forces, and by the size and nature of the “Selectorate” which is the next layer out and forms the pool for the ruling groups. Tyrannies have ruling coalitions which systematically parasitize the Public Goods produced by the country, but as the beneficiary pool widens, eventually a democratic system becomes the best payoff regimen for all concerned, and the Selectorate expands to encompass the whole population. This is a sliding scale, with no on-off switches in sight.

To simplify, Islamists see the Moslem male population as the Selectorate, and the cabal of clerics and warlord-military bosses as the ruling coalition, with no role whatsoever for the “public will”, since Allah has spoken about how things should go. Breaking this mindset moves in the democratic direction on the sliding scale, but there are plenty of alternatives, such as an SH-type dictatorship, or socialist / communist party rule, etc.

And as far as “fostering terrorism”, sometimes you just have to grasp the bloody nettle like a man and face and fight the wannabe theocrats.

]]> By: Dominique R. Poirier http://www.captainsjournal.com/2008/01/01/fates-of-afghanistan-and-pakistan-inextricably-tied/#comment-24433 Dominique R. Poirier Wed, 02 Jan 2008 00:09:29 +0000 http://www.captainsjournal.com/2008/01/01/fates-of-afghanistan-and-pakistan-inextricably-tied/#comment-24433 As far as I could see, Ralph Peters’ opinion on Benazir Bhutto was, and still is, unanimously shared, regardless of one’s political opinion. Then you wrote: “I have long said regarding the parliamentary system in Iraq that one serious flaw in the preliminary stages of Operation Iraqi Freedom was the naive belief in the healing powers of democracy. Democracy is itself produced by a society, and produces nothing. It is a deliverance of people and their value system, not vice versa. Said in another way, it cannot effect change. It is itself an affect or product. Given Iraqi history and culture, there might have been no good options, but democracy does not seem to have helped.” Just in case you might ignore it, you might be pleased to know that your opinion is shared by F. Gregory Gause III, Associate Professor of political science at the University of Vermont, who dared express similar views in an article on the war in Iraq, titled “Can Democracy Stop Terrorism,” he published in the September/October 2005 issue of Foreign Affairs. I provide, below, the link directing to this article, for the record: http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84506/f-gregory-gause-iii/can-democracy-stop-terrorism.html A relatively minor difference with your opinion, perhaps, is that Gregory Gause held that installing democracy in Iraq would inescapably foster terrorism in this country, given, as you suggest it, its long record of authoritarian regimes that succeeded one upon the other. But weren’t we all talking about “terrorism” rather than “insurgency” or “social unrest” in those earlier times. I couldn’t but notice this convergence of views since I happened to share Gregory Gause’s opinion, already. I seize the opportunity of this comment to wish to you and all your dear ones, and to the Captain’s Journal, a Happy New Year. As far as I could see, Ralph Peters’ opinion on Benazir Bhutto was, and still is, unanimously shared, regardless of one’s political opinion.

Then you wrote:

“I have long said regarding the parliamentary system in Iraq that one serious flaw in the preliminary stages of Operation Iraqi Freedom was the naive belief in the healing powers of democracy. Democracy is itself produced by a society, and produces nothing. It is a deliverance of people and their value system, not vice versa. Said in another way, it cannot effect change. It is itself an affect or product. Given Iraqi history and culture, there might have been no good options, but democracy does not seem to have helped.”

Just in case you might ignore it, you might be pleased to know that your opinion is shared by F. Gregory Gause III, Associate Professor of political science at the University of Vermont, who dared express similar views in an article on the war in Iraq, titled “Can Democracy Stop Terrorism,” he published in the September/October 2005 issue of Foreign Affairs.

I provide, below, the link directing to this article, for the record:
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84506/f-gregory-gause-iii/can-democracy-stop-terrorism.html

A relatively minor difference with your opinion, perhaps, is that Gregory Gause held that installing democracy in Iraq would inescapably foster terrorism in this country, given, as you suggest it, its long record of authoritarian regimes that succeeded one upon the other. But weren’t we all talking about “terrorism” rather than “insurgency” or “social unrest” in those earlier times.

I couldn’t but notice this convergence of views since I happened to share Gregory Gause’s opinion, already.

I seize the opportunity of this comment to wish to you and all your dear ones, and to the Captain’s Journal, a Happy New Year.

]]>