The lebanese civil war

With all this talk about democracy in the Arab world I thought it would be important to talk about one democracy there that blew up. It existed through a fragile system called confessionalism. However after the founding of Israel and the flooding of Palestinian refugees, it all went to hell in a hand basket. I think Lebanon demonstrates the inherent problems of democracy in a multi-sectarian country and this could be a real problem for countries like Syria. Any thoughts?

You can't blame the system for it's own failure.

Democracy in a multi-sectarian society? That's the United States in a nutshell. We're fifty countries united by one big, imposing government.

We haven't had anything near what could be qualified as a civil war in 150 years—to the year—and we have yet to have power change hands with bloodshed involved.

I see no reason why they can't do it, besides the individual groups own pettiness and inability to understand that religion + government = shit.

In the US it's different as people come here from all over the world and assimilate into a "American" one (for the most part) However in a country like Lebanon it's totally different as each one of the sectarian groups views itself primarily in that light and has for hundreds of years. And it's harder to impose a Lebanese identity when Lebanon is a artificial construct created about 90 years ago by the French to make a Christian nation out of Syrian land.

Well, I already said, it's their own fault for it not working. Not the idea of democracy itself. They are like the Articles of Confederation version of the US. Either they realize that they can't survive separated and must work together, or they will fall and the nations around them will take them over, thus creating another ethnic timebomb...

Yeah the people of Lebanon cannot make democracy work. The idea of democracy just won't work there. I just wanted to point this out, as it's neighbor Syria which is going through transition right now and is pretty similar in it's sectarian problems (though not how it dealt with them and has ethnic issues with the Kurds to boot which Lebanon does not have).

Frankly, the whole Middle East needs to get over itself and get into the modern world, where government is secular, religion is free, and people don't kill each other over hundreds-of-years-old books.

Since that isn't happening anytime soon, they'll continue to be the Butt-Monkey of the world...

I am a pessimist when it comes to the Middle East.

USAF: well with the uprisings from the younger generation, it looks like that is happening, slowly but surely. A couple more generations, maybe.

To be honest no. A lot of those uprising are done by Islamists, who probably wouldn't be interested in things like that. In any case there are two main problems I see with the region. First, the birth rate is two hight, in oil rich countries this isn't as much of a problem, but in countries that aren't it hard to support all these people, that's why unemployment is so high in Egypt, to many young people. Second, religion is taken why to seriously by these people.

Isn't a huge chunk of these "uprisers" composed of secularists and regular joes, though?

Probably, but Islamists are a significant portion of them.

...The sane sort, mostly?

People who want religion in the government are not sane. Remember Khomeini seemed sane enough that the French let him into the country.

there a hope that it will end up with sane one in charge

• Iran Revolution and Green Revolution have give bad name to Islamist Government theory
• salafist often associated with Saudi Wahhabism which is seen as foreign
• Muslim Brotherhood strength is because its the only one with organization to oppose the government, with weakened gov its possible the moderate / young will separate or winning in inside brotherhood politics.
• a lot of people who support shariah probably did not mean they support same version on it, many use it to just mean "good government"

muslim Brotherhood certainly ended as biggest party, but its possible they took Turkey Islamic path

Yeah, but in the meantime they're a nuisance and a threat...

In Turkey they took power in a democracy, not so in these Arab countries second, these revoltions are not a victory of seculartism. They are against secular regimes. In Syria the Ba'ath regime is a secular one that treats women well for the standards of the region.

Well, its a hope.

Egypt and Tunisia still have secular military and Muslim Brotherhood is moderating and distancing themselves from Salafi.

Indonesia managed to not become Islamist state after throwing Suharto.

In Egypt the Brotherhood is slated to win elections.

Before citing Lebanon as a reason why democracy won't work in the ME, you might want to consider the entire situation there. For a significant part of the country's existence as an independent nation, they've been occupied by Syria, who then as now is not exactly keen on the notion that autocratic dictatorships might not be the way to go.

That the Arab world has used the Palestinian issue as nothing more than a tool in a cynical political manipulation to support their anti-Israel stance doesn't help. More than a few of those countries could easily afford to help Palestinians with humanitarian aid and such both directly and to the host countries, but because it doesn't suit their needs they continue to let the Palestinians suffer*

edited 22nd Aug '11 9:35:14 AM by Nohbody

Shit started before Syria intervened. The Syrians were actually invited in.