In the Arab world discussed two major movements that determine the future political face of the planet. One who has spent nearly 20 years of existence is Al Qaeda, with its branches, franchises and independent supporters extends to part of the Islamic world against the great enemy outside the West but also against the Arab States, the enemy within that cooperates with Western powers, in grave apostasy of true Islam, and the other is the popular revolt in North Africa and the Middle East, apparently on track in Tunisia and Egypt, mired in Libya, motor agitation for now children in Morocco and Algeria; massacred in Syrian-Iranian regime edge, constantly on the verge of victory in Yemen, and relatively weak echoes in Jordan and the Gulf emirates.
Movements are not homogeneous, but matches have factual. In the revolt against the Arab dictatorships are confused extreme Islamists, in limited numbers, with common of marchers ask for bread, justice and freedom, probably in that order, although much greater monitoring report. The fall of the oppressor is a goal shared, but a fraction of Islamists promoting the installation of ultrarreligiosos powers that could compete one day with the most conspicuous tyrannies.
And if the extremist terrorist attacks while the West and its Arab henchmen, the revolt was also un-American policy and stops when it overthrows the president Hosni Mubarak, which served as barking to U.S. interests and Israeli contagion. But both are incompatible in the medium term. Or is imposed revolt supposedly democratic base, which would eliminate or offset the popular hummus that thrives in resentment against the West, or the waste of this opportunity to show that Islam is as democratized as any other monotheism, would enhance the options rigor of the terrorist.
A new false start, after the disastrous experience of parliamentarism, or socialist and neoliberal dictatorships in the Arab world in the twentieth century would witness the struggle for modernity in the hands delbinladenismo now without Bin Laden. In Israel it has been commonly held that the basic problem is the inability to assume Arab democracy, based on the theory that democracies do not war.
But if the Arab capitals, especially Cairo, moving towards democracy, it creates a totally new situation. Initially, relations between Egypt and Israel, as is happening, they had to cool down. The eventual unification of Palestinian and Iranian ships transit the Suez Canal and freeze the peace signed in 1979, although it is unlikely that the country of the Nile comes to denounce the treaty, because that extremely angry at Washington.
But the vindication of the Palestinian Authority not only did not give up, but it would be greatly enhanced by democracy. In the medium term, however, things could be different. The Israeli-Jewish nation suffers the understandable paranoia of being surrounded by Arabic. And although it has always much stronger militarily than their assailants, the conviction that even the shadow of defeat threatens their existence works flawlessly in most of the population.
Only when that sentiment no longer sustainable disappear popular powerful instincts that underpin the territorial expansion of successive governments, left and right, Israel. Today, the real prospects that negotiations will bear fruit, whatever the efforts of President Obama about to reveal a new peace initiative, appear slim.
The mere fact that the AP in September announced the request to the UN General Assembly to approve the creation of a Palestinian state ghost shows how useless it believes further talks in which Israel has never shown an official map of what is ready to return to the original inhabitants.
The democratization of that part of the world completely undress the position of Israel to the international community could facilitate, but not tomorrow, training a future generation of Israel, which was announced early in the nineties as a post-Zionist-able to think their environment and think otherwise.
To do this, however, it seems imperative that the riots of the Atlantic to the Euphrates introduce real democracy in most of the Arab world, and certainly in Egypt. 
Movements are not homogeneous, but matches have factual. In the revolt against the Arab dictatorships are confused extreme Islamists, in limited numbers, with common of marchers ask for bread, justice and freedom, probably in that order, although much greater monitoring report. The fall of the oppressor is a goal shared, but a fraction of Islamists promoting the installation of ultrarreligiosos powers that could compete one day with the most conspicuous tyrannies.
And if the extremist terrorist attacks while the West and its Arab henchmen, the revolt was also un-American policy and stops when it overthrows the president Hosni Mubarak, which served as barking to U.S. interests and Israeli contagion. But both are incompatible in the medium term. Or is imposed revolt supposedly democratic base, which would eliminate or offset the popular hummus that thrives in resentment against the West, or the waste of this opportunity to show that Islam is as democratized as any other monotheism, would enhance the options rigor of the terrorist.
A new false start, after the disastrous experience of parliamentarism, or socialist and neoliberal dictatorships in the Arab world in the twentieth century would witness the struggle for modernity in the hands delbinladenismo now without Bin Laden. In Israel it has been commonly held that the basic problem is the inability to assume Arab democracy, based on the theory that democracies do not war.
But if the Arab capitals, especially Cairo, moving towards democracy, it creates a totally new situation. Initially, relations between Egypt and Israel, as is happening, they had to cool down. The eventual unification of Palestinian and Iranian ships transit the Suez Canal and freeze the peace signed in 1979, although it is unlikely that the country of the Nile comes to denounce the treaty, because that extremely angry at Washington.
But the vindication of the Palestinian Authority not only did not give up, but it would be greatly enhanced by democracy. In the medium term, however, things could be different. The Israeli-Jewish nation suffers the understandable paranoia of being surrounded by Arabic. And although it has always much stronger militarily than their assailants, the conviction that even the shadow of defeat threatens their existence works flawlessly in most of the population.
Only when that sentiment no longer sustainable disappear popular powerful instincts that underpin the territorial expansion of successive governments, left and right, Israel. Today, the real prospects that negotiations will bear fruit, whatever the efforts of President Obama about to reveal a new peace initiative, appear slim.
The mere fact that the AP in September announced the request to the UN General Assembly to approve the creation of a Palestinian state ghost shows how useless it believes further talks in which Israel has never shown an official map of what is ready to return to the original inhabitants.
The democratization of that part of the world completely undress the position of Israel to the international community could facilitate, but not tomorrow, training a future generation of Israel, which was announced early in the nineties as a post-Zionist-able to think their environment and think otherwise.
To do this, however, it seems imperative that the riots of the Atlantic to the Euphrates introduce real democracy in most of the Arab world, and certainly in Egypt.
No comments:
Post a Comment