American Foreign Policy Naivete

From Egypt to Tunisia and across the Middle East, uprisings that have toppled authoritarian governments have been cheered by the Obama Administration as a sign that democracy is taking root in that area of the world.

This assessment by the President and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tragically underscores their own naivete as well as the failure of the administration's foreign policy to deal with reality.

Here is a reality check for the President and Secretary Clinton. There are only two real democracies in the Middle East. One is Israel. The other is Iraq, where thousands of U.S. troops still maintain a presence to protect this fragile democracy.

If history is any lesson, when authoritarian governments are toppled in the Middle East, after a brief flirtation with democracy the power vacuum is quickly filled by often worst despots. Exhibit A is Iran. When the Shah of Iran was disposed in 1978 by the Iranian Revolution, a new Islamic form of government was ushered in. With the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in 2005, Iran has withdrawn from the world and imposed increasingly harsh restrictions on free expression and dissent.

A far worse example of Mideast unrest gone haywire is what's happened in Lebanon. After the same kind of popular demonstrations several years ago, Lebanon leader Saad Hariri was forced to form a coalition government with the terrorist group, Hezbollah. That uneasy power sharing agreement ended in January when Hezbollah seized power and ousted Hariri.

The current protests sweeping the Middle East are no coincidence, despite the president's claims to the contrary. He and his policy makers believe the wave of unrest has been the result of a domino effect that began in Egypt and has awakened democratic populists in other countries. Those who subscribe to this theory surely also believe in the Tooth Fairy.

There are sinister forces at work behind the scenes. For example, there is no question the Muslim Brotherhood was at the least a player in the campaign to topple Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. In Yemen, protest are continuing against pro-American president Ali Abdul, who has battled Muslim rebels intent on removing him from office. No question Hamas and Hezbollah have both been surreptitiously organizing throughout the Middle East, including in countries now rocked with turmoil.

What these groups have in common is they want to establish a Muslim theocracy in their countries, governed by religious leaders, who do not recognize Israel's right to exist. That is the government template Iran uses today.

Therefore, it is naive at best to suggest that democracy is on the minds of those taking part in opposition protests. The flag-waving people in the streets may want something they call freedom, but it is not an open and robust democracy modeled after the United States.

Beyond the naivete, the Obama Administration has also shown it is ill prepared to deal with fast-breaking world events. The President dallied once protests heated up in Egypt. He couldn't make up his mind which side he supported until the inevitable outcome became apparent. Then he switched sides and left Mubarak dangling.

By comparison, the president refused to back the popular uprising in Iran in 2009. Back then he called on parities to resolve their issues through political debate, dooming the opposition's reform campaign to certain death. Apparently, Obama prefers Ahamadinejad to Mubarak.

Throughout the Middle East, the administration has also sent an unintended message to our allies. Our friends cannot count on the president's backing. Decades worth of military support and generous foreign aid will dry up at the first sign of trouble.

This cut and run strategy may seem appropriate to liberal policy makers because in most cases our Middle East allies have been sheiks or dictators who abuse their power. However, other U.S. supporters in the region will notice that our allegiance counts for next to nothing. Why should our allies risk backing the U.S. when they know that we will take our guns and money and flee at the first sign of protest?

We can't have it both ways. Backing undemocratic regimes makes the U.S. appear too willing to compromise our values. But far worse is running away from our allies, no matter how shabby. This strategy will leave our country friendless in a world increasingly populated by enemies who want to destroy us.