The Problem with Overthrowing Governments

Hi Readers,

With the election of a moderate Islamist party to power in Tunisia, no doubt many in the Western world are breathing a sigh of relief that the Hamas scenario didn't repeat itself in Tunisia. But with the upcoming elections in Libya and Egypt, what will happen there?

Better question: what can we do when the results are not to our liking?

America preached self-determination when it allowed the Egyptian regime to fall, and even provided the political ammunition for the Libyan rebels to overthrow its government, in the form of NATO. Now that these people have seized self-determination (and lost much stability at the same time), it is unlikely that they will consider being puppets to another foreign power. The desire for self-determination and human rights may be a commonality between American culture and other cultures, but the it is important to consider that both are a spread spectrum rather than the parochial black and white.

The overthrow of US-supported Shah of Iran in 1979 led to the democratic creation of the Iranian theocracy. This is not unlike the situation that occurred in Egypt, where Hosni Mubarak has been supported by the US for decades, in order to suppress Islamic extremism and give Israel some breathing room in the Middle East. Now that he is gone, the Muslim Brotherhood are poised for major gains in the government, a notion that already has many Americans worried.

America, along with much of the western world, lacks foresight in their decision making. They assume that just because something worked here, a one-size-fits-all model will work for everyone else. There have been many similar failures in history, where the Western heavy-handedness in treating less-developed countries has resulted in failure.  The Green Revolution actually decreased Africa's agricultural output, as countries abandoned their traditional successful crops and tried to grow "better" crops without success. 

The problem is, when there is no quantifiable result to measure the outcome, who is to say what is "better"? We can say that the Green Revolution failed Africa, but can we say that Egypt is worse off if the Muslim Brotherhood is elected? Are Libyans more satisfied now that they have democracy, even though it came at a price of widespread political chaos and violence?

Sure, to the people who are actually fighting and dying for a cause they are passionate about, such uncertainty is a trivial price they pay for their desire for positive change. But Americans seem more akin to computer gamers who are not actually affected by what goes on in the game. We live in an insulated society and have a relatively naive viewpoint of how the world operates. From that viewpoint, it doesn't seem like we should be dictating how other countries govern themselves unless people's basic rights are being massively violated without their consent.

-FCDH