High Hopes, Hard Facts

[NATO AIR]

included within is the "required" (for Newsweek and other MSM publications) criticism of the post-war planning, as well as bush's "personal" relationships with men like putin and crown prince abdullah...

however, zakaria writes a hell of an ending that should give pres. bush and all of us pause as we ponder what we are going to be doing (and what we should be doing) the next 4 years and beyond (outside of the middle east, where the push for democracy and open government must happen)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6857505/site/newsweek/
....... We live in a democratic age. Many countries that are not liberal democracies are often strange mixtures of freedom and unfreedom. Russia, for all Putin’s faults, is a far more open society and economy than any communist country ever was. China, often described as a totalitarian state, is actually a similar kind of mixture: a country in which people can increasingly live, work, travel, buy, sell, trade and even worship where they want, but without any political freedom. Talk to a young Chinese official, and he will tell you that his country will loosen up those restrictions over time. This does not make Russia or China free, but neither are they the totalitarian tyrannies of old.

For much of the world, the problem is not the will for democracy but the capacity to build and sustain a stable, effective and decent government. Pakistan, for example, has not lacked a will for democracy; it established one in 1947. But since then, because of weak social structures, economic stagnation and political crises, it has often veered toward dictatorship and, even worse, collapse. Recently, while democratic, it was careering into an almost-failed-state status. Dr. Rice now says that it is on the path of moderation, but it is doing so under a military dictator. The United States has tried to bring democracy to Haiti almost a dozen times, in different ways. None of them has stuck.

For much of the world, the great challenge today is civil strife, extreme poverty and disease, which overwhelms not only democracy but order itself. It is not that such societies are unconcerned about freedom. Everyone, everywhere, would choose to control his own destiny. But this does not mean as much when the basic order that precedes civilized life is threatened, and disease and death are the most pressing daily concern. Much of Africa is reasonably free, holds elections and is far more open than ever before. The great challenge in, say, Senegal and Namibia is not freedom but an effective state. The author of American liberty, James Madison, wrote in The Federalist papers that “in framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” Order and then liberty (we might have remembered this in Iraq).

The writing is on the wall. The remaining tyrannies will eventually perish. And the world will move slowly toward greater and greater freedom. The United States is right to push this trend forward. The president is wise to articulate the path ahead. But we should also note the trends toward chaos, plague and poverty, which consume the attentions of much of the world. These are also great evils, and we should propose ways to lead the world in tackling them. That, too, would make for an interesting and important speech.