make a donation

Why Donate to FLAME?

By supporting FLAME, you help fund our ads in national media, like U.S. News and World Report, The New York Times, The Nation, The National Review, The American Spectator, The Washington Times National Weekly, and others. You help publish our messages in Jewish publications, both in the U.S. and in Israel, among them The International Edition of the Jerusalem Post. Finally, your donation helps us publish our messages monthly in over fifty small-town newspapers, all across the United States and Canada.

Facts and Logic About
the Middle East
P.O. Box 590359
San Francisco, CA 94159
(415) 356-7801


June 29, 2005

Should Evil People Be Allowed to Run for Office?

A few weeks ago, we posed thorny questions about what would happen if Hamas became a big winner in Palestinian elections or if Hizbollah did the same in Lebanon---both plausible scenarios. On the one hand, we Americans believe in the idea of a liberal democracy---in which every one can participate, everybody is treated equally, and any friend of a fair election is a friend of ours. On the other hand, what happens when well-meaning citizens elect totalitarians---people whose goal is to eliminate fair elections?

We’ve just seen so-called elections in Iran in which hundreds of candidates (an overwhelming majority) were eliminated out of hand by ruling clerics before the election. Both Hamas and Hezbollah, like Al Qaeda and Iran’s ruling party, are dedicated to Islamic totalitarianism and the eventual overthrow of Western democracies. Does it really make sense to support elections in which these people can be elected? Or would that be a form of democratic suicide?

George Bush and members of his administration, in an attempt to seem open minded and consistent with their commitment to democratizing the world, have recently made cavalier statements about welcoming Hamas to the polls and to elected office. The article below---“Can Hezbollah and Hamas Be Democratic”---by commentator Daniel Pipes, questions the wisdom of such an invitation. Pipes confronts the contradiction head on, concluding that people with avowedly evil (anti-democratic) purposes shouldn’t be allowed to participate in democratic elections. While this notion may seem strange to those of us reared in an open democracy, it has merit given the alternative---which is the possibility that a naïve populace could literally vote away their right ever to vote again.

Perhaps democracy is not as simple as we once thought it was. Could it be that all comers should not be welcome? Maybe there should be a litmus test for participation in the democratic process---say, pledged allegiance to democratic institutions? While politicians have been known to lie in the past, at the very least, perhaps, a candidate should have to commit to democracy before they’re allowed to take part. In any case, to their credit, both Hamas and Hezbollah have been lucid as to their purposes: They stand squarely against democracy and squarely for the defeat of Israel and the United States.

Best regards,

Jim Sinkinson
Director, FLAME

P.S.    I want to remind you to use the FLAME website as a resource---it houses more than a hundred concise articles and position papers on the most important issues surrounding Israel and the Middle East. This fact-based information can help you explain the truth about the current situation to your friends, synagogue and church members, and political colleagues. Of course, you’re welcome to reprint any of these materials and distribute them as you see appropriate. To explore this treasure trove of information, just go to

Can Hezbollah and Hamas Be Democratic?
by Daniel Pipes, NY Sun, New York Sun, March 22, 2005

If Al-Qaeda renounced terrorism, would the U.S. government welcome its running candidates in American elections? Had the Nazis denounced violence, would Hitler have become an acceptable chancellor for Germany? Not likely, because the tactics of Al-Qaeda and the Nazis matter less than their goals.

Similarly, Hezbollah and Hamas are unacceptable because of their goals. These organizations are important elements of the Islamist movement that seeks to create a global totalitarian order along the lines of what has already been created in Iran, Sudan, and in Afghanistan under the Taliban. They see themselves as part of a cosmic clash between Muslims and the West in which the victor dominates the world.

Washington, trying to be consistent in its push for democracy, prefers to ignore these goals and instead endorses involvement by Hezbollah and Hamas in the political process, pending their making some small changes.

These signals began last week when President Bush stated that although Hezbollah, a Lebanese group, is "a terrorist organization," he hopes it will change that designation "by laying down arms and not threatening peace." White House spokesman Scott McClellan then elaborated on this comment by specifying the two alternatives: "Organizations like Hezbollah have to choose, either you're a terrorist organization or you're a political organization."

Bush himself explained further what he meant a day later, presenting elections as a method to shed the terrorist designation:

“I like the idea of people running for office. There's a positive effect when you run for office. Maybe some will run for office and say, vote for me, I look forward to blowing up America. I don't know, I don't know if that will be their platform or not. But I don't think so. I think people who generally run for office say, vote for me, I'm looking forward to fixing your potholes, or making sure you got bread on the table.”

Hamas a Palestinian organization, Secretary of State Rice then noted, could also evolve in the right direction once it enters the democratic process:

“When people start getting elected and have to start worrying about constituencies and have to start worrying not about whether their fire-breathing rhetoric against Israel is being heard, but about whether or not that person's child down the street is able to go to a good school or that road has been fixed or life is getting better, that things start to change.”

The theory implied here is that running for office – with its emphasis on such mundane matters as fixing potholes and providing good schools – will temper Hezbollah and Hamas.

Count me skeptical.

The historical record does not support such optimism. When politically adept totalitarians win power democratically, they do fix potholes and improve schools – but only as a means to transform their countries in accordance with their utopian visions. This generalization applies most clearly to the historical cases (Adolf Hitler in Germany after 1933, Salvador Allende in Chile after 1970) but it also appears valid for the current ones (Khaleda Zia in Bangladesh since 2001, Recep Tayyip Erdo_an in Turkey since 2002).

Then there is the matter of their undemocratic intentions. Josef Goebbels explained in 1935 that the Nazis used democratic methods "only in order" to gain power. Looking at Islamists, then-assistant secretary of state for the Middle East Edward Djerejian explained in 1992, "While we believe in the principle of ‘one person, one vote,' we do not support ‘one person, one vote, one time'." Khomeini's Iran indicates that Islamists do manipulate elections to stay in power.

Washington should take a principled stand that excludes from the democratic process not just terrorists but also totalitarians using the system to get into power and stay there. It is not enough for Islamist organizations to renounce violence; being irredeemably autocratic, they must be excluded from elections.

In a famed Supreme Court dissent in 1949, the eminent justice Robert H. Jackson argued for the arrest of a neo-Nazi rabble-rouser in Chicago on the grounds that not doing so "will convert the constitutional Bill of Rights into a suicide pact." The same imperative for self-protection applies also to international politics.

Even if Hezbollah and Hamas promise a change in tactics, America – or for that matter, Israel and other Western states – should not accept them as legitimate political parties.

If you'd like a printer-friendly, text version of this newsletter click the button below.

How many times have you heard someone lament that Israel doesn’t have good public relations? By supporting FLAME, you help one of the world’s most powerful information efforts to spread the truth about Israel and the Middle East conflict. Please note that because FLAME is a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation, your donation is tax-deductible.

If you know of a friend or colleague who would appreciate learning more Facts and Logic About the Middle East, please forward this issue of the FLAME HOTLINE to them using the link below.

If you have received this issue of the FLAME HOTLINE from a friend or colleague and you'd like to subscribe, please use the link below.

Our Ads and Positions | Donate | Our Letters to Editors | Our Acquisition Letters
FLAME’s Purpose | Subscribe to Hotline Alerts | Home

©2004 FLAME. All rights reserved. | Site Credits | Contact Us

You are receiving this email because you have requested news, facts and analysis about Israel and the Mideast conflict. If you DO NOT want to continue receiving free messages like the one below, go here.