Where religious and ethnic pluralism abounds, political party affiliation will closely correspond to religious/ethnic group membership and elections will become censuses of the population with the largest ethnic group repeatedly "winning." In some instances women, rebellious ethnic groups, and even regions within certain countries will be denied the right to vote. Fragile coalitions will be born only to quickly collapse engendering instability and the threat of military intervention in the political arena.

All of this has characterized Africa's recent "wave of democratization" - is there any reason to think it will be any different in the Middle East?

This shows us an unjustified belief that in the end we are good and can't be that bad. Democracy will be triumphant in the region when people get rid of US domination and US puppets.

Perhaps the most undemocratic regimes, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and formerly, Iraq have been politically shaped by Amerian support of their respective tyrants. When planes of Muslim, mainly Saudi, terrorists flew into the Trade Towers, that incident did more than anything else to start a process of some sort of reform in the Middle East. All of these countries have large numbers of unemployed young people, who will most certainly join hard line Muslim terrorist organizations, if economic equity and political reforms are not introduced. This may not play to George Bush's notion of democracy at all, however, because they very correctly view the US brand of democracy as a form of imperial and economic extension and domination.

In conclusion, the twin towers terrorists said that they did this because of the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children, the role of Israel in the occupied territories, and the presense of American bases in the Middle East, especially near holy sites. Democracy will not fly very far, until we change our foreign policy to address these very serious concerns.

The US's critical ... mistake here is to expect to transplant its values and interpretation of democracy on ancient societies which were ruling themselves [and quite efficiently] long before Columbus went to Ferdinand and Isabella to borrow money. Forms of government evolve to best suit the needs of their societies.

In Lebanon any US imposition of 'democracy' will result in civil war. There is the Hezbollah factor and centuries of internecine mistrust. It is fast approaching that level in Iraq.

George Bush must be given credit where it is due, and the example of the Iraqi people voting has had a major effect on the street in the Middle East.

Lebanon should be a little more free to express the will of its people with Syria pulling back a touch, thanks to the reality of American muscle in Iraq coinciding with European interests and frustration among many Lebanese.

The Palestinian democratic experiments owe their existence to the insistence of America and Israel on the need for a legitimate system before a legitimate state. The next elections in Gaza will bring a Hamas majority; not what Fatah, America or Israel want, but democracy at work and with its own positive potential.

Saudi Arabia and Egypt are responding to the street murmurs for change, with cosmetic avoidance ruses, which may satisfy for a while, but these countries too, will be affected by the movement towards democracy that George Bush, and Americans, have backed.

The United States did not and has not entered the Middle East with a desire to see that the locals have democratic governance. The United States is in the Middle East because of weapons of mass destruction that did not exist. The toppling of Saddam Hussein's government was because it was seen as a threat to the interests of the US, not becasue the Iraqi people demanded democracy. ...