ABSTRACT
International perspectives on the Middle East have been dominated since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 by a reinvigorated debate over the relationship between the region’s internal politics, on the one hand, and its generation of security challenges, on the other hand. This debate has polarized between two competing positions. At one extreme, pressure for democratic reform in the Middle East has been presented by some as the primary, fail-safe means of enhancing Western security countering international terrorism. At the other extreme, skeptics of this new focus on democracy promotion in the Middle East have warned that political liberalization would at best have negligible impact on the incidence of terrorism, and at worst actually facilitate the further flourishing of violence and anti-Western sentiment. Since 9/11, Western policies have fluctuated between these two poles, as a reinforced commitment to support democracy has given way to a return to traditional realism. This chapter argues that both positions are unsatisfactory and appeals for a more nuanced view that neither reifies nor discounts the potential strategic benefit that would flow from political change in the Middle East.
