February 2, 2005
"BUT" BOY:
The Iraq Election: First Impressions (Juan Cole, 1/31/05, History News Network)
I'm just appalled by the cheerleading tone of US news coverage of the so-called elections in Iraq on Sunday. I said on television last week that this event is a "political earthquake" and "a historical first step" for Iraq. It is an event of the utmost importance, for Iraq, the Middle East, and the world. All the boosterism has a kernel of truth to it, of course. Iraqis hadn't been able to choose their leaders at all in recent decades, even by some strange process where they chose unknown leaders. But this process is not a model for anything, and would not willingly be imitated by anyone else in the region. The 1997 elections in Iran were much more democratic, as were the 2002 elections in Bahrain and Pakistan.
Well, you know the old saying: as Bahrain goes, so goes the Middle East. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 2, 2005 6:57 AM
Comments
Since the Iranian elections don't matter because the mullahs hold the power anyway, it's irrelevant.
Posted by: Chris Durnell at February 2, 2005 10:29 AMThe Iranian mullahs only permitted approved candidates to run in the election. In what way was that more democratic than what happened in Iraq?
When are we going to have a Department of Education that cleans out the Augean Stables that are the liberal arts faculties of American colleges and universities?
Posted by: Bart at February 2, 2005 10:34 AMSome time in the late 2020's.
Posted by: Dave W. at February 2, 2005 12:33 PMPakistan's not in any Middle East I'm familiar with...
Posted by: Timothy at February 2, 2005 1:04 PM