Middle East - What Next For Bush?

In the fast paced, high stakes, poker game that is the Middle East, people around the world are wondering what President Bush is going to do next. Some suggest, since he has set the wheels in motion, he make let things run their course and hope the people in Syria, Iran and Lebanon rise up to overthrow their dictators. That thought would be a mistake - one the world seems to keep making.

David Warren has an insight into what the President's next play may be. One thing is sure, President Bush now has the strongest Middle East poker hand than any of the other players and he's calling their bluff.

This instruction applies particularly to his address yesterday to the U.S. National Defence University in Fort McNair, near Washington. It contained several dozen hints that the U.S. would now be accelerating, in its engagement with the Middle East. It also contained one pregnant little dropped allegation of fact: that the U.S. government is convinced the recent terror blast in Tel Aviv was ordered from Damascus, not from the usual sources on the Palestinian West Bank.

More was being said through that than meets the ear. Mr. Bush was not only telling Bashir Assad, the Syrian dictator, that he has drawn a bead on him. He was signalling beyond this that the U.S. is no longer interested in keeping what happens to Israel in a separate file from what happens elsewhere. He was thus subtly insinuating "peace with Israel" into the agenda of Arabs and other Muslims demonstrating for democracy in spreading waves throughout the region.

Warren also notes the effect all these demonstrations are having on ordinary citizens. Even the pro Syrian demonstrations in Lebanon, viewed around the world, show oppressed people how things should be - they should have the freedom to demonstrate.

I don't think any of these demonstrations would have happened without the extensive television coverage now spreading through the Arab and Islamic world of Lebanon and Iraq. Several of my correspondents in the region have pointed out, that Al Jazeera's "pro-terrorist" coverage in Iraq has backfired, because Arabs watching the footage of anti-government demonstrations take away a powerful impression that such demonstrations should be possible.

But, as Daniel Pipes points out, there are reasons to be cautious.

Note a pattern? Other than the sui generis Palestinian case, one main danger threatens to undo the good news: that a too-quick removal of tyranny unleashes Islamist ideologues and opens their way to power. Sadly, Islamists uniquely have what it takes to win elections: the talent to develop a compelling ideology, the energy to found parties, the devotion to win supporters, the money to spend on electoral campaigns, the honesty to appeal to voters, and the will to intimidate rivals.

This drive to power is nothing new. In 1979, Islamists exploited the shah's fall to take power in Iran. In 1992, they were on their way to win elections in Algeria. In 2002, they democratically took over in Turkey and Bangladesh. Removing Saddam Hussein, Husni Mubarak, Bashar Assad, and the Saudi princes is easier than convincing Middle Eastern Muslim peoples not to replace them with virulent Islamist ideologues.

The Middle East today is not alone in its attraction to a totalitarian movement – think Germany in 1933 or Chile in 1970 – but it is unique in the extent and persistence of this allure. I worry that my fellow neo-conservatives are insufficiently focused on its implications.

President Bush deserves high praise for his steadfast vision of a free Middle East; but his administration should proceed slowly and very carefully about transferring power from autocrats to democrats. The Middle East's totalitarian temptation, with its deep questions of history and identity, needs first to be confronted and managed. To skip these steps could leave the region even worse off than during the era of unelected tyrants.

I've played poker all my life and one thing I've learned for certain, sometimes a cool, quiet, confident man comes to the table and no matter who's at the table or how many times you shuffle the deck, he still wins, says nothing, quietly picks ups his chips and leaves. Bush is just such a man.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------