ABSTRACT
Is there, then, a common denominator that explains the persistent failures to U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East-from the resistance of the region to stable and liberal participatory regimes, to the tendency of free and fair elections to yield governments unfriendly to Israel and the West? In every case, it is radical interpretations of Islamic law-actively promulgated for the last century by persuasive jurists, theologians, and religious scholars, both Sunni and Shiite-that stand in the way of the reforms American policymakers mean to promote by their interventions in the Middle East. In short, it is simply true (if politically incorrect) that stable liberal democracy has social prerequisites; the resurgence and radicalization of Islam, meanwhile, has created positive impediments to liberalism. Elections can be held anywhere; they will not everywhere yield government that is law-governed, tolerant and friendly to U.S. interests in the region. Absent this recognition, U.S. foreign policy will continue to flounder.
