Under the shadow of continuous death, injury and violence precipitated by Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups, Iraq held its first ever democratic elections on Jan. 30, in which the people elected their own parliament. In the coming year a democratic constitution will be established, allowing this Islamic nation, ruled by an authoritarian system for many years, to embark on the journey of democratization. Whether or not this will cause a domino effect and produce similar changes elsewhere in the Islamic world remains to be seen.
It might cause Islamic nations, still entrenched in feudalism, caught up in what Samuel Huntington calls the third wave of democratization, to become modern democratic countries.
There are two historical inferences to be made here.
The first is that, over the past two centuries of human history, there has never been a case of a war arising from the invasion of one democratic nation by another. This has led some scholars to postulate that war will not occur between two democratic countries: if every nation in the world were to become democratic, the world would be a safe place, and the ideals of global peace could be realized.
The second inference, and this has become all the more clear since the Sept. 11 attacks on the US by Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda, is that many nations in Asia, Africa and Latin America have all joined this third wave of democratization, and there are now, in the post-Cold War period, over 100 democratic countries in the world, as opposed to only 20 or so before it. Only in the Arab world in the Middle East have we not seen any countries following suit (although some would see Turkey as the exception).
As a result, a number of scholars believe that not only is Islamic fundamentalist terrorism intimately related to Islamic civilization, but that it is also closely related to the culture's authoritarian, undemocratic nature itself. This view coincides with the theory of oriental despotism of Karl Marx and Karl August Wittfogel.
From Marx and Wittfogel's profoundly influential idea of oriental despotism to the theory of China's paternalistic authoritarian political culture put forward by Lucien Pye of Harvard University, and from the May Fourth Movement led by Hu Shi (胡適) and Chen Duxiu (陳獨秀), to the River Elegy of Tiananmen Square activists such as Fang Lizhi (方勵之) and Su Xiaokang (蘇曉康), all hold that the 2,000-year-old imperial authoritarian culture is deeply entrenched in China. Even though the modernization and democratization of China is not completely impossible, these theories suggest it is certainly not going to be achieved easily.
Also, there will be no democracy on the political level without a prior democratization of the culture. Both Islamic and Confucian civilizations are classic examples of oriental despotism, and it will be very difficult, and some even say impossible, for them to become democratized.
Al-Qaeda did exactly as they said they would, making terrorist attacks throughout Iraq on the day of the election. One of its leaders, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, declared war on the Iraqi people. No longer were the insurgents targeting Americans or people of other nationalities: any Iraqi seen supporting, organizing, participating in, or voting in the election would be considered to be an infidel and a traitor to Islam, and consequently fair game.
Prior to the day of the poll, no one was very optimistic about the elections. They were held in a cold, dangerous and chaotic situation, with car bombings and artillery shells going off everywhere, and where the lists of candidates and voting stations were only announced at the last moment. No one believed that they could be successfully carried out or that voters would show up to vote.
Even the belligerent US President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld were not very optimistic, nor were media, academics, political leaders or commentators around the world. They all believed that the elections for the Iraqi parliament would meet with difficulties and severe casualties, that only a few people would turn out to vote, that they would lack the democratic reason and legitimacy that comes with the expression of public opinion, and that the whole exercise would be futile.
On election day, the whole world was watching (in pessimism). Completely unexpectedly, the Iraqi people saw to it that the elections were a resounding success. Despite the deadly threat of bombs and bullets, 58 percent of the electorate turned out to elect their national leader in open, peaceful, competitive and fair elections.
Al-Zarqawi and other terrorists showed they had more bark than bite, and although there were casualties, voters were not scared away from the voting stations, nor was any harm done to the democratic elections as a whole.
The Iraqi people have already taken their first step along the road toward democracy. It is still too early to say if democracy will succeed, but a good beginning is half the success. We hope that they now will continue along the road toward a democratic vision.
If we turn our gaze to China, a one-party dictatorship under a Communist Party, we see that it is far more advanced than Iraq when it comes to culture, education, economy, society and political development.
Iraq's ability to take that first step while China does not is not a matter of China being unable to do so, but rather of it not wanting, not daring to do so.
The Chinese people should demand that President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) and other leaders show that China is better than Iraq, not worse, and initiate rapid democratization in order to elect China's leaders in open and free elections.
Chiou Chwei-liang is a visiting professor at Tamkang University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER AND PERRY SVENSSON
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers