It’s time to therefore time to take a step back in both the Pakistani and Iraqi situations, re-evaluate, and instead pursue the near term "compromise" between the two continuum extremes of "Instant Democracy” (i.e. “Jammed” Democracy) and "Dictatorship". That compromise is an approach the author will coin "Phased (in) Democracy", leading to longer term "True Democracy".
To that point, “Phased Democracy” rather than "Instant/Jammed Democracy", should too be the same new realistic and respectful model employed towards all other developing countries going forward.
In other words, “Phased Democracy” provides for a slow but "sustained generational approach" to implementing Democracy in Pakistan and Iraq et al.
And with the acceptance and theme of "country differences", then "True" may very well be a relative term too as in "True" Democracy in Pakistan and/or Iraq may be (quite) different than "True" Democracy in the U.S.; meaning “phased-in” may not ultimately yield complete and/or perfect democracy, that is by U.S./WEAST standards anyway.”
Therefore, rather than force feeding and demanding "Instant" or rather “Jammed” U.S. style Democracy from these embryonic democracies, the U.S. might consider the recent Pakistani coalition collapse crisis and ongoing struggle of the Iraqi government to take root, as the catalysts to begin this new approach with all (other) countries, beginning first with Pakistan and Iraq. That is to deal with them with a newfound understanding that they have their own cultures, governing protocols and histories separate and VERY distinct from the U.S. They think, act and behave differently and therefore "one size fits all Democracy" is not likely, and in fact won’t work there or anywhere else it’s simply blindly thrust upon.
Perhaps then, some "derivative" country-specific version of U.S. or western style Democracy is therefore more appropriate to start with and then gradually build from there over time.
The quintessential U.S. attitude of immediate gratification and/or results in everything, including NASCAR like "Zero to Democracy" in 3.8 seconds wherever it believes strategically important to promote it, is fundamentally flawed. In countries and/or cultures with centuries if not millenniums of their own history and governing protocols, many the antithesis of true democracy, it (instant democracy) simply won't happen (overnight) and should not be the approach/goal and therefore not attempted. It’s simply to much to digest in the short term. True Democracy, like anything else, if forced in a manner akin to sticking a fire hose in one's mouth, and turning on the hydrant, is simply just to much to fast. In fact, it can have counter-intuitive undesired effect of pushing that country to more authoritarian rule, rather than less.
It's therefore critically and fundamentally important to admit and recognize that Pakistan and Iraq are not the U.S. now or even the equivalent to the situation the U.S. was in on July 4, 1776 when Democracy was born and immediately took root. Therefore, the situation must be treated (very) differently – than it has been. It is illogical to think or assume from a pure democracy perspective that Pakistan and Iraq will be like the U.S. any time soon, if ever.
The key assumption then to apply when seeking a solution to the “democracy export and import” dilemma is that the governing (military) philosophy won't change overnight or anytime soon, no matter how much "democracy now" pressure is applied or even an aesthetic change in the President's public attire (e.g. Musharraf 6 months ago shifting from “Army to Armani”). Instead, it must be substantively factored into any solution. (Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
Bottom line, this enlightened approach to respect respective country historical and cultural differences and what they are each "individually" capable (or not) of as respects embracing and digesting ideological change, in this case True Democracy and/or components thereof, will be seen as being practiced by the U.S. when the U.S. (really) acknowledges and acts like it is dealing with Pakistan and Iraq, and not Missouri and Kansas.
The question then to answer – How does the U.S. quickly get on the Pakistani/Iraqi leadership’s agenda while working them into its own Democracy creation agenda?
