In her current FrontPage Magazine article
, Debbie Schlussel itemizes what popular election has brought - or would bring (according to polls) - to several Mideast locales. The voters choices? Terrorists and backers of terrorists. In Pakistan those polls favor Abdul Qadeer Khan, whose career Wikipedia
, summarizes thus:
In January 2004, he confessed to having been involved in an international network of clandestine nuclear proliferation from Pakistan to Libya, Iran and North Korea.
(Khan was pardoned by Musharraf on February 5, 2004. Thanks a lot.)
So what's the problem? What's the missing ingredient in "democracies" such as Iran, Egypt, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Authority? Why would Jordanians and Saudis vote for terrorists if they had the chance to vote (given the accuracy of the polls)? I'm sure that some are motivated by fear of retaliation. But their is a substantial number that want nothing more than mob rule, and to be part of the mob. Such people don't appreciate freedom other than their own. They blindly accept that their self-appointed saviors really have their genuine interests at heart, feeling no need for checks and balances on political power. (Not that checks and balances is a concept with which they have personal familiarity.) They have no desire for, or have no patience to await, a leader with a vision of how disparate groups can live with each other - Egyptian Arabs and Copts, Hashemite and Palestinian Arabs, Palestinian Arabs and Jews.
For most of history, "peace" was viewed as one group's absolute conquest over the other. So far, history is winning in the Middle East.