対イラク武力行使

中東ではすでにエジプト、レバノン、イラン、イラクで
武装派組織やその支持を得た政党がが民主的な選挙で
着々と支持を伸ばしている。

今回のハマスの圧勝も、この一連の流れを汲んだものと
いえそうだ。米国では現実主義の専門家らによって、
ブッシュ大統領の市民社会の形成を待たないで民主化を
進めるという「認識の甘さ」が祟ったと批判している。

一部の専門家はこう断じたほどだ。

「ハマスの勝利という残念な結果は、中東の民主化と
米国の国益が必ずしも一致するものではないという事実
を明らかにした。パレスチナ社会の未熟さを考えれば、
このような結果は当然予期できたはずである」

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/27/politics/27diplo.html?ex=1296018000&en=58dfd3d0d4f7d034&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

The Hamas victory was the fifth case recently of militants' winning significant gains through elections. They included the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hezbollah in Lebanon, a radical president in Iran, and Shiites backed by militias in Iraq.

As these elections unfolded, there has been increasing criticism in some quarters ― notably among the self-described "realists" in foreign policy, many of them veterans of past Republican administrations ― that President Bush has naively pushed for democracy in countries without the civil society components to support it.

"The Hamas victory is a disillusioning result showing that democracy and American interests don't always coincide," said Nikolas K. Gvosdev, a Russia expert who is editor of The National Interest, a publication that echoes with debate about this subject.

"Given the weakness of Palestinian society, people should not have been surprised that this was the outcome," Mr. Gvosdev added.