What suits the West does not necessarily ennoble the rest
Technological advancements and abidance by democratic mechanisms lends western nations a degree of political and economic authority
“I strongly believe that this is the ultimate solution” is a phrase that politicians often use to frame and mobilize their followers. But when this phrase is stated by a politician attempting to impose a solution on another country, we must challenge his proposition! Western politicians, unfortunately, have become quite conceited about their ideas and policies.
Convinced that if it suits them it must be good enough for others, they often attempt to enforce these ideas on the rest of the world. Their superiority has given them a universal political advantage that is undeniable – but unjustifiable.
Technological advancements and abidance by proper democratic mechanisms certainly constitute a blessing that lends western nations a degree of political and economic authority. However, this superiority does not mean that their respective politicians’ international outlooks are always correct, entitling them to force their ideas on others.
Western political elites whose ideas shape the world are often unaware of the political dynamics of other countries and do not truly care to enhance their knowledge in this regard. This obviously includes newcomers to the political scene, such as US President Trump who, in fact, has no political background.
Applying the western world’s thinking mechanism and tools to other parts of the world has proved to be an abject failure! The political and economic dynamics in each part of the world is often unique; inherited cultures, citizens’ perceptions, and their readiness to digest and adapt new mechanisms vary from one country to another.
Western politicians and thinkers often debate ideas that have major implications for other countries. While some of them have had more international exposure than others, it remains true that the entire western society operates within its closed circles and abides by its own thinking tools that are not always suited to the rest of the world.
Decision-making in the western world is quite clearly structured; politicians’ ideologies and goals are patently clear and their political circles of influence are known well in advance. By contrast, in regions such as the Middle East for instance, countless hidden factors often implicitly affect many of the region’s national policies.
Ruling a nation entails clear principles of political accountability, whereas interfering in formulating solutions without being accountable as a ruler is often perceived as a violation of the sovereignty of other countries that is aimed at promoting western political interests.
Western leaders achieve their political status empowered by their citizens’ votes. The fact that they don’t have followers in other countries and, obviously, are unable to micromanage other nations’ challenges is, by default, a shortcoming that should devalue their ideas forthright.
Ironically, western politicians tend to magnify their successful interventions and to attribute the blame for all failures to domestic issues – completely ignoring the part played by their initial and continuing interventionMohammed Nosseir
Internal political mechanism
At home, within the framework of their democratic process, Western politicians tend to act softly, offering their fellows many promises; with regard to external issues that are often isolated from their internal political mechanism however, their behavior is ignorant and arrogant.
Most of the challenges that we are facing in the Middle East are the direct results of our shortcomings. Nevertheless, westerners’ interferences have complicated many recent regional crises that have led to the current catastrophic conditions in each of Iraq, Libya and Syria; western intervention has contributed substantially to the political and economic deterioration of these countries.
Ironically, western politicians tend to magnify their successful interventions and to attribute the blame for all failures to domestic issues – completely ignoring the part played by their initial and continuing intervention.
Apart from the moral question of whether any given nation is entitled to interfere in the political development of another country; if Western nations insist that they are entitled to engage in other countries’ political development, they should at least openly assume the responsibility for their failures.
I am not anticipating that western politicians will read this piece and refrain from international interference, but I do hope that they will consider broadening their vision to better understand how other cultures operate.
Mohammed Nosseir is an Egyptian liberal politician who advocates for advancing liberalism, political participation, and economic freedom. Mohammed was member of the higher committee at the Democratic Front Party from 2007 to 2012, and then member of the political bureau of the Free Egyptian Party till mid 2013. Mohammed advocates for his work through providing the Egyptian government with a number of schemes to better reform its government institutes, as well as he is a regular contributor to various Egyptian newspapers. Mohammed also has extensive experience in the private sector, working with a number of international companies assisting them in expanding their businesses in the Middle East. Mohammed graduated from Faculty of Commerce, Ain Shams University, Cairo (1986); he participated at Aspen Seminar on Leadership, Values and Good Society (2011), Eisenhower Fellow, Multi-National Program (2009) and Stanford Fellow for Democracy, Development & Rule of Law (2008).