Die Leitartikler der NZZ vom Samstag und vom Sonntag (H. K. und Felix E. Müller) drücken nach der Wahl der Hamas und überhaupt der Entwicklungen im Nahen Osten die Sorge aus, ob denn die Demokratie diesen Völkern wirklich etwas bringe oder nicht alles noch schlimmer am. The question is shining through in both articles, are these people ready for democracy? If Felix E. Müller calls for democracy are the structures of civil society, secular parties, freedom of speech and an independent judiciary, I have to give up on the secular right parties. There must be parties and they must stand for democracy, but they may not be religious values \u200b\u200bor religious parties committed? Of course they are influenced by their legislation the right, as the major Shiite parties in Iraq are already doing. Why should such laws do not follow the Sharia? For a Democrat is vital that the courts are independent. Seems important to me to observe that parties like Hamas remain democratic, therefore stand for re-election and do not create Islamic republic like Iran's, which is dominated by its constitution from the mullahs and the Guardian Council. Because the FIS do not rule in Algeria despite election victory could, we still do not know what they had done in Algeria, less democratic than today's fast any more. Face a similar dilemma, the Egyptians are with the Muslim Brotherhood. We can only assess whether they raise a democratic regime, once they are in power. But even here we must confess: The regime, which they will succeed is far from as democratic. Making matters complicated is the occupation of Palestine by the Israelis. I mean, before we put the Hamas conditions, we would have to also provide to the Israelis and that just as vigorously. Our politicians always demanded the settlement freeze, but they asked him ever so vigorously as they now call on Hamas to renounce the war against Israel. Measure because we do not have two standards? Did not the Israelis, with their settlements and the "new borders" by the security wall created a situation that - in my view - a two-state solution is no longer permitted, but an Israeli - Palestinian Federation calls? The Palestinians have a new leadership, the Israelis will soon have a new leadership, it would not make more sense to urge both parties to negotiate seriously (without pre-conditions). Why do we certify the one hand, as a quasi-legitimate status as a war party and the other only the status of terrorists?
What I often do not understand is our effort (or even arrogance yet?) To understand the cultural war that takes place within Muslim societies. We also knew this culture war from the first half century ago, in which Catholics rebelled against liberalism, and this is against the Catholic Church. In addition, we are still working hard on it (Gleichstellung!) the radicals clear away the centuries, patriarchal society built. We accept that ruling in the U.S. President, the Christian community is close to that now want to banish even the teaching of evolution from the natural history lessons. We admire the great democracy India (zurecht!) that could solve their cultural heritage (the caste system and the intolerant Hinduism) nor in any way in terms of human rights. When supported by a majority of Shiites in Iraq - making in Western eyes, a step backwards in terms of, for example, the rights of women, we have to accept it (the dictatorship of the majority!), But underestimate us (in arrogant manner?) The fight the Women are not in Islam. They fight! Even in such a conservative country like Saudi Arabia.
0 comments:
Post a Comment