“Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -- Benjamin Franklin Ushbu so‘zlar 2005-yil 8-martda Prezident Jorj Bush tomonidan aytilgan. U Afg‘oniston, Iroq va Falastindagi yutuqlarga ishora qilib, demokratiya Yaqin Sharqda tarqala boshlaganini va “avtoritar hokimiyat obro‘sizlangan o‘tmishning so‘nggi nafasi” ekanini ta’kidlagan. Bush ma’muriyati va uning tarafdorlari Yaqin Sharqdagi voqealardan demokratik islohotlar va Amerikaning mintaqadagi mavqei haqida ijobiy baho berish uchun foydalanmoqda.

“Those that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” -- Benjamin Franklin On the 8th of March 2005, President George Bush citing progress in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine said that democracy was beginning to spread across the Middle East and that “the authoritarian rule is the last gasp of a discredited past.” The Bush administration and its supporters have seized upon the events in the Middle East to give an upbeat assessment of democratic reform and America’ s standing in the region.

Ba'zilar hatto temir parda qulashi bilan taqqoslashga qadar borishgan, boshqalari esa 11-sentyabrdan keyingi Bush tashqi siyosatining oqlanishiga ishora qilmoqda.

Some have even gone far as making comparisons with the fall of the iron curtain, while others are pointing to a vindication of Bush’ s foreign policy since 9/11.

Biroq, ritorika ortida, Bushning demokratiyani Yaqin Sharq va dunyoning boshqa hududlariga eksport qilish g'oyasi Amerikaning saylov natijalarini rad etish, mustabid hukmdorlarni qoralash va davlatlarni ogohlantirish uchun doimiy ravishda qo'llaydigan aynan o'sha demokratiya mezonidan ancha past turadi.

However, behind the rhetoric, Bush’ s vision of exporting democracy to the Middle East and other parts of the world falls way short of the very same democracy standard America routinely employs to dismiss election results, castigate despots, and put states on notice.

Demokratiyaning asosiy tamoyili shuni talab qiladi: xalq qonuniy vakillikni xolis, mahalliy qo'rqitishlardan va chet el aralashuvidan xoli muhitda tanlashi kerak. Bush bu mezonni Ukrainaga, yaqinda esa Livanga nisbatan tezda qo'llagan.

A central tenet of democracy requires people to choose legitimate representation in an environment that is impartial, free from local intimidation and foreign intervention. Bush was quick to apply this standard to Ukraine and more recently to Lebanon.

Ukraina holatida Bush bu me'yorni buzdi, chunki US elchixonasi Yushchenkoning "Apelsin inqilobi"ni boshlab berganini ko'rsatuvchi dalillar paydo bo'ldi.

In the case of Ukraine, Bush contravened this standard, as evidence emerged that the US embassy was responsible for spearheading Yushchenko’ s “Orange Revolution”.

Livanda Vashingtonning "Kedr inqilobi"ni ochiq qo‘zg‘atishi va qo‘llab-quvvatlashi hamda kelgusi saylovlar Livan Suriya bosqinidan butunlay ozod bo‘lmaguncha adolatli va erkin bo‘la olmaydi, degan talabi ikiyuzlamachilik hidini taratadi.

In Lebanon, Washington’ s open incitement and support for the “Cedar Revolution” and its demand that forthcoming elections cannot be fair and free, unless Lebanon is completely free of Syrian occupation stinks of hypocrisy.

Afg‘oniston, Iroq va Falastinda o‘tkazilgan saylovlar Amerika va Isroil bosqini ostida o‘tkazilmadimi? Nomzodlarni Amerika tekshirib, saralamadimi? Saylovlar oldidan va saylov kuni vaziyat xavfsizliksizlik va qo‘rquv muhitida o‘tmadimi? Saylov natijalari soxtalashtirilmadimi va saylov jarayoni sahnalashtirilib, boshqarilmadimi? Bu savollarning barchasiga aniq “ha” deb javob berish mumkin. Demak, bu mamlakatlardagi saylovlarni adolatsiz, noqonuniy va xalqqa majburan tiqishtirilgan deb atashdan boshqa iloj yo‘q.

Were not the elections in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine held under American and Israeli occupation? Were not the candidates vetted by America? Was not the atmosphere prior to and on the day of the elections one of insecurity and fear? Were not the election results manipulated and the electoral process staged and managed? Clearly the answer to all of these questions is a defiant “yes”. Hence the elections in these countries can only be described as unfair, illegal and imposed on the people.

Ammo Bushning demokratiya o‘lchovi bo‘yicha Afg‘oniston, Iroq va Falastindagi shubhali saylovlar katta muvaffaqiyat hisoblangan. Hatto uchinchi dunyo mezonlari bo‘yicha ham bunday saylovlar haqiqiy emas deb e’lon qilingan bo‘lardi.

But according to Bush’ s democracy yardstick the dodgy elections in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine were a resounding success. Even by third world standards such elections would have been declared null and void.

Xuddi shunga o'xshab, Bush Pokiston, Misr va Saudiya Arabistonini o'zi belgilagan demokratiya mezoniga nisbatan baholashda muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchradi.

Likewise, Bush has failed to evaluate Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia against his benchmark for democracy.

Musharraf’ning 2002-yildagi soxta referendumi, Mubarakning yaqinlashib kelayotgan prezidentlik saylovi-niqobi va Saudiya Arabistonidagi, ayollarning ishtirokiga yo‘l qo‘yilmagan shahar saylovlari faqat demokratiyaga qarshi ayblov sifatida qaralishi mumkin.

Musharraf’ s sham referendum in 2002, Mubarak’ s upcoming presidential façade and the Saudi municipal elections, which bars women from participating, can only be regarded as an indictment against democracy.

Bush o‘rniga bu davlatlarni demokratiyani buzgani uchun jazolash o‘rniga, ularni milliardlab dollar yordam bilan mukofotladi va ularni himoya qilib, yumshoq tanqidlar bildirdi. Bu, ayniqsa, Bushning inauguratsiya nutqidan keyin yaqqol namoyon bo‘ldi.

Rather than punishing these states for subverting democracy, Bush has rewarded them with billions of dollars in aid and offered muted criticisms in their defence. This was particularly evident, after Bush’ s inauguration address.

Amerika Qo'shma Shtatlari Davlat departamenti Misr, Pokiston va Saudiya Arabistoni hukmdorlariga, ular bu nutqning nishoni emasligini tasdiqlash uchun shoshilib harakat qildi.

The US State department scuttled to assure the rulers of Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia that they were not targets of his speech.

Ajablanarlisi tomoni shundaki, Eron Misr va Saudiya Arabistonini birgalikda olganda ham nisbatan demokratikroq davlat bo‘lsa-da, u rejim o‘zgartirish uchun nishonga olingan. Biroq Amerika Eronning ulkan neft va gaz zaxiralarini qo‘lga kiritishni demokratiyani rivojlantirishdan ko‘ra ko‘proq o‘ylaydi. 1953-yilda Amerika Eron neftining milliylashtirilishidan xavotirga tushib, o‘sha paytdagi saylangan Bosh vazir, doktor Muhammad Mossadiqni ag‘darib tashladi va uning o‘rniga mutlaq monarxist bo‘lgan Shohni o‘tkazdi.

Ironically, Iran, which is comparatively more democratic than Egypt and Saudi Arabia put together, has been earmarked for regime change. However, America is more concerned about securing Iran’ s huge oil and gas reserves than about nurturing democracy in Iran. In 1953, America worried about the nationalisation of Iranian oil removed the then elected Prime Minister, Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh and replaced him with the Shah – an absolute monarchist.

Amerikaning demokratiya va erkinlikni tarqatish haqida baland-baland da'volar qilishga bo'lgan intilishi, shu bilan birga despotik rejimlarni qo'llab-quvvatlashi, mashhur tarixga ega. 1947-yil 12-martda Prezident Trumen shunday degan edi: "Qo'shma Shtatlar tashqi siyosatining asosiy maqsadlaridan biri shundan iboratki, biz va boshqa millatlar majburlashdan xoli bo'lgan hayot tarzini topishimiz uchun sharoitlar yaratilsin... erkin xalqlarga to'g'ridan-to'g'ri yoki bilvosita tajovuz orqali o'rnatilgan totalitar rejimlar xalqaro tinchlik asoslarini va shu sababli Qo'shma Shtatlarning xavfsizligini barbod qiladi." vii Shundan so'ng, "Trumen doktrinasi"ga qurollangan Amerika ko'p millatli korporatsiyalari uchun resurslarni o'zlashtirish va o'zining strategik manfaatlarini himoya qilish evaziga musulmon dunyosi bo'ylab demokratiya va erkinlikni barbod qilishga kirishdi. Amerika buni turli xil dunyoviy avtokratiyalar, monarxiyalar va shayxliklarni qo'llab-quvvatlash orqali amalga oshirdi.

America‘s obsession with making bold claims about spreading democracy and liberty, while simultaneously propping up despotic regimes has a notorious history. On March 12 1947, President Truman said, “One of the primary objectives of the foreign policy of the United States is the creation of conditions in which we and other nations will be able to work out a way of life free from coercion…totalitarian regimes imposed on free peoples, by direct or indirect aggression, undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security of the United States.” vii Henceforth, America armed with the “Truman Doctrine” proceeded to sabotage democracy and freedom throughout the Muslim world in return for exploiting resources for her multinational corporations and safeguarding her strategic interests. America did this by supporting all manners of secular autocracies, monarchies and sheikhdoms.

Bushning demokratik musulmon dunyosi haqidagi qarashi Trumen doktrinasi bilan bir xil. Ikkalasida ham demokratiya va erkinlikni eksport qilish, shuningdek, diktaturalarni qo‘llab-quvvatlash Amerika korporativ manfaatlariga to‘liq bo‘ysundirilgan.

Bush’ s vision for a democratic Muslim world is the same as the Truman Doctrine. In both, the exporting of democracy and liberty, as well as the support for dictatorships is totally subservient to American corporate interests.

Amerika o‘z korporativ manfaatlarini g‘arbiy qadriyatlar niqobi ostida ilgari surgan yagona davlat emas. Boshqa g‘arbiy davlatlar, xususan Britaniya, Fransiya va Yevropa Ittifoqi ham bu qadriyatlarni poymol etishda AQSh bilan raqobatlashadi. XIX asrda qullikning bekor qilinishi va XX asrda mustamlakalarga mustaqillik berish harakati faqat buyuk davlatlar o‘rtasidagi qimmatbaho resurslarni qo‘lda ushlab turish uchun bo‘lgan raqobat bilan belgilangan edi. G‘arbiy qadriyatlarni eksport qilish ularning eng kam tashvishlaridan biri edi.

America is not alone in promoting its corporate interests dressed up in western values. Other western powers most notably Britain, France and the EU compete with the US in trouncing these values. The banishment of slavery in the 19th century and drive to grant independence to colonies in the 20th century were solely motivated by rivalry between great powers to hold onto their precious resources. Exporting western values was the least of their concerns.

Bugungi kunda Yevropa Ittifoqi va Amerika o'rtasida musulmon dunyosining resurslari, xususan uning energiya zaxiralari uchun shiddatli kurash bormoqda. Bush erkinlik va demokratiya niqobi ostida Yevropaga yo'naltirilgan yoki undan yo'l-yo'riq va yordam izlaydigan rejimlarni ag'darishga intilmoqda. Yevropa Ittifoqi va Amerika o'rtasidagi neft va gaz uchun kurashni Sudan, Marokash (G'arbiy Sahro masalasi), Iroq, Afg'oniston, Eron, Liviya va Fors ko'rfazi shayxliklari kabi musulmon mamlakatlarida ko'rish mumkin.

Today, there is a bitter struggle between the EU and America over the resources of the Muslim world, in particular its energy reserves. Bush under the cover of freedom and democracy is seeking to remove those regimes that are either pro-European or look towards Europe for guidance and assistance. The EU-US conflict over oil and gas can be found in Muslim countries like Sudan, Morocco (Western Sahara issue), Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, and the Gulf sheikhdoms.

Musulmonlarning ozgina qismi hali ham G'arb qadriyatlariga mahliyo bo'lib yurmoqda; ular shuni anglab olishlari kerakki, G'arb davlatlari musulmon dunyosining ozod bo'lishiga manfaatdor emas. Ular musulmonlarga erkinlik va demokratiya berishni ham istamaydi.

Those minority of Muslims who are still enchanted by western values need to realise that the western powers are not interested in the liberation of the Muslim world. Nor are they interested in granting Muslims freedom and democracy.

Bu musulmonlar g'arb mamlakatlarining ichki ishlariga bir nazar tashlashlari kerak, shunda ular g'arb qadriyatlari shunchaki afsona ekanini tez anglab yetishadi. Britaniyadagi terrorizmga qarshi qonunlar, AQShdagi Patriot akti, Guantanamo va Belmarsh (Buyuk Britaniya) da musulmonlarni muddatsiz ushlab turish hamda Abu G'uraib, Bagram va Basradagi musulmon mahbuslarni tahqirlash ularning qadriyatlarini aniq past qo'yadi.

These Muslims should take a quick look at the domestic affairs of western countries and they will quickly learn that western values are only a myth. The anti-terror laws in Britain, the Patriot Act in the US, the indefinite detention of Muslims in Guantanamo and Belmarsh (UK) and the humiliation of Muslim prisoners in Abu Ghraib, Bagram and Basra clearly belittle their values.

G'arbliklarga kelsak, ular o'z hukumatlari "terrorizmga qarshi urush"ni qat'iy qonunlarni joriy etish uchun bahona qilib olayotganiga jiddiy nazar solishlari kerak, bu qonunlar ularning liberal jamiyatlarini totalitar jamiyatlarga aylantirmoqda.

As for westerners, they need to take a serious look at how their governments are using the war on terrorism as an excuse to enact draconian laws that are transforming their liberal societies into totalitarian ones.

Sud oldidan sudsiz qamoqqa olish, fuqarolarni internatsiya qilish, sud tashqari qiynoqlar, hokimiyatning ijro etuvchi organ qo'lida to'planishi, saylanmagan hukumat maslahatchilari, vazirlarning sud qarorlarini bekor qilishi, matbuotga kuchaytirilgan cheklovlar, tayyor holda tayyorlangan xabarlar, axborotni bostirish va shaxsiy hayotga aralashuv kabi choralar liberal demokratiyalarning eng asosiy negizlariga zarba beradi.

Measures such as imprisonment without trial, internment of citizens, extra judicial torture, concentration of power in the hands of the executive, unelected government advisors, ministers over-ruling the judiciary, greater press restrictions, pre-packaged news stories, suppression of information and intrusion into personal privacy strike at the very heart of liberal democracies.

Amerika va Yevropa qachon totalitarizm qal'asiga aylanishi, amerikaliklar va yevropaliklar erkinlik va demokratiyani xavfsizlikdan ustun qo'yishlariga bog'liq.

How soon America and Europe transform themselves into a fortress of totalitarianism depends upon whether Americans and Europeans value liberty and democracy above safety.

2005-yil 17-mart

March 17, 2005