The “Unstable” Dynamic Politics of Iraq, the Stagnant Swamps of Arabia……….
These controlled media cover Iraq extensively these days, but not in a positive way: they use it as a warning to their peoples about the pitfalls of elected government. All the negotiations and counter-negotiations going on in Baghdad are portrayed as a terrible thing, as a sign of instability that can lead to insecurity. Much of Western media have also fallen into that Arab trap: portraying Iraqi political horse-trading as a sign of instability that may affect American withdrawal. (Politics are inherently unstable, very unstable, by Arab standards: the monarch or dictator will not always be there for you, but then nor will his goons and thugs be there, nor will the proverbial but very real and reliable midnight knock on the door come on time).
On a basic level, a very “basic” one, all these surrounding Arab depots are right. An Iraqi citizen today does not know who his leader will be next month or two months from now. By contrast a Saudi, an Egyptian, a Libyan, a Jordanian, or any other Arab knows who his leader will be next month, next years, five years from now, ten years from now, or a generation from now. That leader will be the same man who is the leader today, who was yesterday, will be next year and for all the years afterward. Either he, his son, or his brother will be here. This is portrayed in Arab oligarchy media as a positive thing, and it is in only one sense: in the same sense that a stagnant swamp can be portrayed as a positive thing because the water does not move and renew. The blood-sucking mosquitoes thrive in a swamp, as they do in the stagnant thing that passes for most Arab politics.
Come to think of it, the political turmoil in Iraq, and the other places, dynamic though it may be, does not look so bad now. Does it?
Cheers
mhg
Mon Email
Comments