José’s cite of The Obama Doctrine provided some interesting food for thought. I think the idea of moving away from any rigid orthodox definitions of democracy will have to be at least considered, given history and culture.

I think there is something to increasing welfare and stability. I had the good fortune to talk to a retired Canadian Forces general who returned from Afghanistan as a military consultant. A major short-term objective for Canadian Forces is to stabilize areas to allow for humanitarian aid.

I think that Soderberg and Katulis’ thesis is a compelling one. I think of how transfer payments to Cuba by the USSR allowed an infrastructure to be maintained that fostered stability. There’s also the timeframe, since prosperity is subject to causal ambiguity.

I would imagine that enhancing prosperity can be used in concert with efforts to build civic engagement. The question is whether or not US policy can allow systems to evolve that aren’t entirely democratic. I say this since I feel that civic engagement needs to follow the extant socialcultural milieu. In Iraq, I wonder how to create a post-Saddam polity that would have sociocultural legitimacy. Inserting Western-style democracy in countries with no history of this seems like a recipe for disaster. I recall this said of a Middle East expert at the Sorbonne:

“The war to democratize Iraq was the most valuable gift the American administration has ever given the dictator regimes in the Arab world. It is a practical example of what democracy means as seen by the Americans. Arab nations see the war in Iraq as an exercise to secure oil supplies from the region and to destroy an Arab country for the best interests of Israel.”

I’m sure these local perceptions would seem to be coming out of left field for many.