A reader asks:
Which would you prefer, assuming these are the choices -- a "democratic" upheaval in which a well-organized Muslim Brotherhood emerges as the dominant force, or uneasy preservation of the status quo? I know you will try to duck the issue by saying you "reject" these choices, and that you're holding out for an Arab revolution that supports universal suffrage, gay rights and "pacific" Israel bashing, but that's nonsense.
Lynch speaks contemptuously of "American and Israeli interests." Well, whose interests does he advocate? I don't view the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt with equanimity, even if "that's what the people decide." How about you?
I'd support democracy for the reasons Massie outlines. But the truth is we don't get to pick. If you believe the weak version of the theory that the world is heading towards nearly universal democracy, in fits and starts, then then the autocratic status quo in the Arab world is fundamentally unstable over the long run.
(Chart from Freedom House)