Friedman: Emptiness of Arab Dictatorships Prevents Development of Democratic Institutions
By Jacklyn Palme
September 24, 2007 | Printer Friendly

In a September 9 op-ed in the New York Times, Thomas Friedman contrasts the difficulty of establish democracy in the whole of Iraq with the relative success of democratic development in the Kurdish regions in Northern Iraq.  Friedman writes that the “emptiness of Arab dictatorships” throughout the Arab world prevents the development of civil society structures needed to take the place of the dictator once they are removed.  In the Sunni and Shiite dominated areas of Southern Iraq, both Sunnis and Shiites are turning to religious clerics because “there is nothing in between – no civil society, no real labor unions, no real human rights groups, no real parliaments or press. So it is not surprising to see the sort of clerical leadership that has emerged in both the Sunni and Shiite areas of Iraq.”

However, Friedman writes that the Kurds in Northern Iraq “are developing the elements of a civil society.”  He notes that while the United States has “spent billions trying to democratize the Sunni and Shiite zones and have little to show for it,” there is hardly any U.S. presence in the Kurdish region.  He argues that the U.S. played a key role in brokering an agreement to resolve a power struggle in 1998, but the Kurds have taken the lead in establishing effective political and economic arrangements.

Friedman notes three important lessons that can be learned from the Kurds: “1) Until the power struggle between Sunnis and Shiites is resolved, you can’t establish any stable politics in southern Iraq. 2) When people want to move down a progressive path, there is no stopping them. When they don’t, there is no helping them. 3) Culture matters.”  Friedman writes that the Iraqi Kurds’ moderate Islam has allowed for “an ethos of tolerance here you don’t find elsewhere in Iraq.”

Friedman also refers extensively to a new book by Michael Mandelbaum, Democracy’s Good Name: The Rise and Risks of the World’s Most Popular Form of Government.  Mandelbaum writes that democracy is made up of two elements: liberty and popular sovereignty.  Southern Iraq has held “elections without liberty” which result in the “tyranny of the majority,” while Friedman argues that “Kurdistan, by contrast, has a chance to build a balanced democracy, because it is nurturing the institutions of liberty, not just holding elections.”  The example of the Kurds also demonstrates the importance of popular sovereignty; Mandelbaum argues that “we can help create the conditions for democracy to take root, but people have to develop the skills and values that make it work themselves.”   

Source:
The New York Times: What’s Missing in Baghdad?