Supporting Tyranny has lead to the current situation

Submitted by Schills (United States), Jul 3, 2012 at 13:19

Sara,

I do not hold the position that democracy is a panacea which will end terrorism. My position is democracy is the only avenue for lessening terrorism's appeal. Terrorism has flourished under dictatorship. Arab terrorists were born of a desire to overthrow Arab dictators. After decades of unsuccessfully trying to overthrow despots, the terrorists refocused their efforts on attacking Americans and Europeans because of our support for Arab dictators. We sought stability at the price of Arab liberty. We got instability and the hatred of hundreds of millions of people. Perhaps if we supported democracy in the Middle East for the amount of time we have supported tyranny, the situation would improve.

A case in point is Iran. The Iranian people overthrew Shah Reza Pahlavi and established a nationalist government. That government went on to expropriate the holdings of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company now known as BP. We worked to overthrow the nationalist government of Iran and installed Shah Muhammad Reza Pahlavi who went on to establish a police state and repress all forms of opposition. The result was mass discontent leading to the establishment of Islamic Republic of Iran. If we had supported democracy in the first instance instead of tyranny, the world would be without BP. We would also be without the Islamic Republic of Iran, the main destabilizing force in the Middle East and supporter of international terrorism.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".