Of course we've had our hopes raised and dashed here before, and much could go terribly wrong, but for the moment things are looking better than they have for many years. It's much the same story in a number of areas. Possibilities for positive change are emerging in places that long have been mired in intractible antagonisms. We seem to really be entering into an era of hope. At least we can hope so.
Read the article here.
AND FURTHERMORE:
Is there a common denominator in the sudden flood of positive, even if sometimes tentative, developments in many parts of the world? Some would argue not, and point to unique circumstances in each area, but Lee Smith, writing in the NYT Magazine, offers a different answer. He writes:
Despite strong clerical opposition throughout the Muslim world:
liberals seem to be gathering a little momentum. Recently, intellectuals from Iraq, Jordan and Tunisia petitioned the United Nations for a tribunal to prosecute both terrorists and the religious figures who incite violence. In Egypt, two new publications, Nahdet Misr and Al Masry Al Youm, fault the region's leaders and clerics alike for keeping Arabs from joining the modern world. The Iraqi election posed a stark challenge to regional autocrats. While Abdulhamid harbors mixed feelings about the United States' decision to invade Iraq, he says he believes that the American presence in the region is vital to the prospects for reform. [italics mine] ''We are an important part of the world,'' he says, ''and our inability to produce change on our own terms invites people in. The world is not going to wait for us.''
Read the whole thing here.
I think that the historical judgment on Bush will eventually be that he was not an agent of change so much as a figure who through his actions created opportunities for change (both positive and negative) to emerge. I also think that he sees himself that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment