A Mite Ambitious, No?

In the run up to UN forces bombing Libya, Tony Blair (remember him?) calls for nothing less that the complete transformation of the Arab world:

In the Middle East, those protesting agree completely on removing existing regimes but thoroughly disagree about the future. One group represents modernizing elements who essentially want to share the freedom and democracy we have; the other are Islamist elements who have quite a different conception of how the change should go.

In saying this, I am not "demonizing" the Muslim Brotherhood or ignoring the fact that they too have their reformists. But there is no point, either, in being naive. Some of those wanting change want it precisely because they regard the existing regimes as not merely too oppressive but too pro-Western, and their solutions are a long way from what would provide modern and peaceful societies.

So our policy has to be very clear. We are not just for change; we are for modern, democratic change, based on the principles and values intrinsic to democracy. That does not just mean the right to vote, but the rule of law, free speech, freedom of religion—and free markets, too.

Free markets, too, huh? Hey, go for it! And while you're at it, why not demand that Arab leaders demonstrate their good faith in the hopenchange (which, hate to be a Debbie Downer in the face of such Churchillian confidence, might encounter a road block or two because "democracy," the kafir way, is inimical to Islam)? Oh, wait--been there, done that, didn't work.