Zbigniew Brzezinski: "Democracy cannot be imposed by bayonets"

‘Democracy cannot be imposed by bayonets’

Zbigniew Brzezinski; a very influential name in the American foreign policy, one of the architects of strategic games, America’s old president Jimmy Carter’s national security adviser and currently a trustee and counselor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), one of the prominent think tanks in America; in his statement to Zaman said that it is not possible for the relationship between America and Turkey to turn sour. Brezinski replied our questions on the latest matters briefly.

In your latest book you are stating that America has faced a choice between Global Domination and Global leadership. Considering the current government’s foreign policies, which one of these roles do you think the US has chosen?

I believe that currently American foreign policy is torn between an instinctive desire to dominate and a growing recognition that American preponderance is not the same as omnipotence and hence that America has to be much more subtle and diplomatic in shaping international consensus on behalf of policies jointly devised.

If you were the president of The US, what would your Palestinian policy be like? And how would you handle your policy with the Israelis considering the strength of the lobby in Washington? How do you feel about the current ‘roadmap for peace’?

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict obviously cannot be settled by the Israelis and the Palestinians alone. Moreover, any settlement, to be enduring, must also be fair. The recent statement by President Bush to the effect that any territorial changes in the 1949 Armistice lines must be mutually acceptable to the Israelis and the Palestinians is a major step forward because it clearly implies that there has to be some sharing of Jerusalem and some territorial compensation for Palestine for the incorporation into Israel of those urban settlements that are on the edge of the 1949 lines.

What are your feelings of Mr. Bush's unilateral decision to democratize the Middle East? A winning or losing proposal? Do you believe that the greater Middle East Initiative Project would actually create democracy in the region? Considering the latest events, how do you see the future of Iraq and Middle East?

Democracy cannot be imposed by bayonets. As the experience of Central Europe and the Far East shows, democracy can only surface if it is nurtured in a setting of political dignity and national self-determination. If democracy is imposed from outside without genuinely historic roots, it is likely to become radical and populist and very susceptible to demagogic appeals.

While the US has been calling for democratic reforms in Middle East, in the aftermath of the recent bloody crackdown in Uzbekistan, the US kept its criticism of Kerimov’s repressive regime to a low level. What do you think the reason was behind this?

The United States is obviously balancing its doctrinal commitment to democracy against its strategic interest in a stable and pro-U.S. Uzbekistan.

Many believes that Turkey’s status as an important strategic ally to the US has come to an end with the Turkish parliament’s rejection a motion that would have allowed U.S. troops to use Turkish bases to open a northern front against Iraq. Do you agree? Even though Turkey said ‘no’ to the US in a democratic way- the decision was discussed in the parliament and voted on by the parliament- do you think it would be possible for the US to adopt a less friendly approach against Turkish government?

Turkey is an important friend of the United States and the recent disagreements between Turkey and America have not changed that reality. I do not think that the United States is likely to pursue a “less friendly” approach towards Turkey because both the U.S. and Turkey recognize that each benefits from the maintenance of a genuinely allied relationship.

This question is actually from your book. Would America be able to create and maintain a peaceful, positive and constructive relationship with the Muslim world, while most of the Muslim population, which counts almost 1.2 billion people, sees America as an enemy? Don’t you think there needs to be a ideological change in America as well as in Muslim Countries?

I think America has to change its attitude towards the Muslim world; it must avoid even giving the impression that it is insensitive to Moslem feelings and culture as well as religion, and above all else it must avoid actions which deprive Muslims of their personal as well as political and religious dignity.

It is widely and often discussed that Turkey would provide a perfect model for the rest of the Muslim world that Islam and democracy are compatible. US Politicians are the ones who emphasize this point more often. Do you think that Turkey has this potential? If she has, do you think that the US is doing what needs to be done on its part to protect this model? It is claimed that Turkey has not been receiving enough support from the US on the issues such as PKK and Cyprus, what would your opinion be on this?

I think Turkey has enormous potential as a model of democratic evolution in a part of the world in which so far democracy has not surfaced. The importance of Turkey in that respect goes beyond specific political issues such as the matter of PKK or Cyprus, on which there can be specific agreements or disagreements.

During your time in the government, you were always thought of as a cold war hawk? Would you consider yourself, considering the world state today, a hawk, or dove?

A dovish hawk.

Do you feel that September 11th had anything to do with your definition in the Carter administration, of “the great chessboard” in Afghanistan?

No.

Who is Brzezinski?
Born on March 28, 1928, in Warsaw, Poland, the future national security adviser to President Carter and son of a Polish diplomat spent part of his youth in France and Germany before moving to Canada. He received a B.A. and M.A. in political science from McGill University, in 1949 and 1950 respectively, and in 1953 earned his doctorate in political science from Harvard. He taught at Harvard before moving to Columbia University in 1961 to head the new Institute on Communist Affairs. In 1958 he became a U.S. citizen. During the 1960s Brzezinski acted as an adviser to Kennedy and Johnson administration officials. Generally taking a hard line on policy toward the Soviet Union, he was also an influential force behind the Johnson administration's "bridge-building" ideas regarding Eastern Europe. During the final years of the Johnson administration, he was a foreign policy adviser to Vice President Hubert Humphrey and his presidential campaign. In 1973, Brzezinski became the first director of the Trilateral Commission, a group of prominent political and business leaders and academics from the United States, Western Europe and Japan. Its purpose was to strengthen relations among the three regions. Future President Carter was a member, and when he declared his candidacy for the White House in 1974, Brzezinski, a critic of the Nixon-Kissinger foreign policy style, became his adviser on foreign affairs. After his victory in 1976, Carter made Brzezinski national security adviser. Aiming to replace Kissinger's "acrobatics" in foreign policy-making with a foreign policy "architecture," Brzezinski was as eager for power as his rival. However, his task was complicated by his focus on East-West relations, and in a hawkish way -- in an administration where many cared a great deal about North-South relations and human rights. On the whole, Brzezinski was a team player. He emphasized the further development of the U.S.-China relationship, favored a new arms control agreement with Moscow and shared the president and Secretary of State Cyrus Vance's view that the United States should seek international cooperation in its diplomacy instead of going it alone. In the growing crisis atmosphere of 1979 and 1980 due to the Iranian hostage situation, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and a deepening economic crisis, Brzezinski's anti-Soviet views gained influence but could not end the Carter administration's malaise. Since his time in government, Brzezinski has been active as a writer, teacher and consultant.
He gave interesting clues about the world’s dynamics and balances and future possibilities in his book called ‘Big Chess Bord’ which he wrote in the 90’s. Even from those times he stressed that America should make the region where Afghanistan is, a military base. In his last book ‘The Choice’, he suggested that America should go into a global alliance with Europe to provide global security and defended this by saying that ‘Both sides need each other and both sides complete each other. With an alliance as such America will become a super power plus and Europe will become united more strongly’.

Ali Çimen
13 June 2005, Todayszaman

click here to read the interview on TodaysZaman
click here to return to main menu