The Foreign Service Journal, December 2006

the Middle East and elsewhere, at least until we have resolved some of the conflicts that are destabiliz- ing whole areas of the world. Where serious and longstanding conflicts are unresolved, our insis- tence on democratic elections — an admirable goal in the abstract — has brought to power more ex- treme groups that are antagonistic to the U.S. (with justification) and has marginalized those we might find more amenable to compro- mise. Some thoughtful people feel strongly that it is wrong to try to refashion other societies in our own image. But even idealists shouldn’t ignore the often deleterious con- sequences of such uninvited interventions. The democ- ratization program risks the destabilization — even over- throw — of regimes we need to work with to resolve ongoing conflicts. This can easily happen prematurely; that is, be- fore the states have achieved the status of civil and secular societies in which real democracy can flour- ish. Free, fair and democratic elec- tions are necessary, but only after the terrain has been prepared — something that can only be done by the people concerned themselves. It cannot be imposed by outsiders. In some cases free and fair democratic elections have brought to power or participation in gover- nance Islamist groups that we consider hostile to our interests and therefore refuse to recognize or deal with. But if we truly support democracy, we have to accept the outcomes of the elections that we promote. We should not ostracize the winners, boycott them, try to starve them or encourage their ouster. F O C U S D E C E M B E R 2 0 0 6 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 47 A “war on terror” makes as little sense as a “war on bombing,” or on artillery, or on invasion, or on occupation, or a “war on assassination.”