Stability in the Middle East: Egypt’s New Reality and Israeli Democracy

Israel Agriculture

The Middle East has never been a very stable place. Armies have marched across it for centuries, laying waste to thriving communities, slaughtering the indigenous people or enslaving them, and then, over time, being overwhelmed themselves by other invading armies. In 1948, a people with an ancient history on the land, created a brand new nation with its name taken from the Biblical texts – Israel. It was founded as a Jewish nation, the only one in the world, and it introduced a kind of democratic government that has stayed stable for the last 65 years.

While most of the rest of the region has succumbed to turmoil, revolution, and social chaos, Israel has developed a thriving economy, providing the world with a stunning array of innovations that have changed almost every aspect of the way we live.  Meanwhile, Israel maintained the orderly transfer of governments from election to election, despite a history of wars with hostile neighbors.

Egypt, now in the throws of political turmoil, could take a page from Israel’s book, creating a government based on law, and an economy based on twenty-first century realities – based on the development of innovations in agronomy, industry, and technology. Egypt, which desperately needs new food resources, is an ideal environment to benefit from Israel’s agricultural technology, which was created out of the desert (an example of which is seen in the photo above). Israel has been partnering with other African countries for many years to help them develop their agriculture.

The opportunity presents itself for Egypt to be reinvented for the world of today, not the seventh century. The question is, will it have the will to do so.

—–  Ilana Freedman, Editor


What Egypt and the Guardian Can Learn From Israeli Democracy

By Adam Levick


When the nineteenth Israeli Knesset was sworn in March, it represented merely the latest chapter in a 65 year history of non-violent democratic political transitions in the Jewish state.

Though Israelis of course disagree on any number of domestic and foreign policy issues, extremes within the country remain at the margins, and the centre continues to hold.  And, whilst there are factions lobbying for evolutionary change in social policy, and with regard to negotiations with the Palestinians, the country’s economy is exceptionally strong, their democracy remains robust and there is no serious political faction agitating for revolutionary change.

As the dramatic developments unfolding in Egypt now demonstrate, democracy isn’t one single event but rather a persuasion – a political habit of mind nurtured by the behavior of a nation’s citizenry, its cultural, media and religious gatekeepers and political class. It generally can not be imposed by a foreign power, nor brought to life by a (temporary) strongman. Political parties with no ideological propensity towards progressive, representative forms of government can not be trusted to govern in a manner which show fealty towards such democratic norms as the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, and a system of laws which fiercely protect the rights of women, minorities and political dissidents.

As the brief reign of the reactionary movement known as the Muslim Brotherhood shows us, political Islam – as with the Pan-Arabism and statist dictatorships which preceded its rise within the region – is fundamentally at odds with truly liberal political aspirations within the Arab world.

Interestingly, the Guardian earlier today published an editorial not only criticizing the military coup by praising the Muslim Brotherhood as, yes, defenders of constitutional democracy, demonstrating again – as with their defense of Hamas’ ‘democratic’ legitimacy – the institution’s inability to recognize the difference between democrats (those who seek representative forms of government) and demopaths (those who seek democratic legitimacy in order to destroy liberal society). As one Arab pundit recently observed about Morsi’s ‘reforms’ which had the effect of merely solidifying Brotherhood control of the country and codifying illiberal Islamist doctrine: “Morsi proved that political Islam seeks to use democracy only to seize power only to bury the democratic dream later.”

Salim Joubran Israel Supreme Court justiceAdditionally, if the strength of a democracy can in part be measured by how well the nation treats the proverbial ‘other’, Morsi’s government – which nurtured a society in which the beleaguered Christians and Bahais (and even Shiites) faced increasing discrimination and violence – failed miserably.  Further, while it may be a bit cliché to note that the health of a society can be gauged by how well they treat their Jewish minority, the following passage, from an essay written by a Muslim named Ahmed Hashemi, commenting on the increased antisemitism in Egypt (a nation with a Jewish population of, at most, 40) after the revolution, rings true.

“…if we are going to establish a healthy, tolerant society that respects differences, and pursues a pluralistic democracy, we have to accept that Jews and the Jewish community have been part and parcel of our own communities. This affirmation of coexistence represents the essence of today’s civilization. 

An ‘Arab Spring’ without religious tolerance, that rests on strong anti-Semitic attitudes, cannot bring about genuine democracy and freedom. In a peaceful and democratic Middle East, everyone can prosper and flourish.”

[Editor's note: By the same token, Israel's acceptance of its Arab population can be demonstrated at the highest levels of government participation, including Supreme Court Justice Salim Joubran (left), who has sat on the high court since 2004.]

In reading the Guardian daily, it seems that the most pronounced effect stemming from their largely uncritical advocacy on behalf of Arabs (including Palestinian Arabs), and their hostility towards Zionism, relates not to its injurious influence on Israel, but the harm it inflicts upon their Arab protagonists by legitimizing their sense of victimhood and their immutable grievances against the Jews.

As the most successful democracy in the region, Hashemi added, “possessing a strong and diversified economy and a dynamic multiparty political system in a tyranny-affected region, Israel can be a role model.”

The Guardian’s ideologically inspired legitimization of the Arab world’s hostility towards Israel nurtures their continuing social pathos and sclerotic economies, and ensures that, whatever party takes power in the next Egyptian government, the shining example of diversity, tolerance and sober, reflective and liberal self-government to their north will never be leveraged to their advantage.

The anti-Zionism of fools makes it more probably that the ‘Arab Spring’ will continue to be merely a chimera.

Adam Levick is the managing editor of CiF Watch, an affiliate of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA)

Read the original article here.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in A5, Flashpoint, Middle East
One comment on “Stability in the Middle East: Egypt’s New Reality and Israeli Democracy
  1. mac says:

    democracy is not the same as freedom. the middle east may have voted democratically (maybe) but they have not evolved to understand freedom. we in the US are suffering from a slide to the democratic vote and in the process losing our freedoms as the uninformed and the ‘give me free stuff’ public vote and the questions of voter tampering lingers along with so many other ‘conservative talking points, like is our un-veted president really a legal citizen’. thank you for your coverage

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>