The need for guardianship in 3rd world
This news has been read 18983 times!
All authoritarian regimes, even those called progressive or revolutionary (which are neither this nor that), made mistakes in many things, and their indifference to the importance of quality education was their biggest sin.
This often happened on purpose because the politicians of those countries, such as Gaddafi, Saddam, Kim and others, who ignored good education, believed that ignorant people are easier to lead and easy to deceive, unaware of the consequences of that.
If a political catastrophe or a coup occurs, the chaos will be more general and comprehensive, because those who will take over the matter after these will often be more ignorant than those who preceded them.
Hence the statement of “Bourguiba” to Gaddafi, when the latter refused to provide freedom and education to his people, that the revolution, if it comes, it is better that it is done by an educated and free people, than by an ignorant people..
This is what happened next. Almost all the Arab Spring revolutions were taken over by those who were of less understanding than those who preceded them, so the catastrophe continues and the situation remains tragic. Therefore, we find many ignorant people bemoaning Saddam’s rule.
From the reality of the Third World countries, it seems that a number of them need to impose guardianship over them, because their politicians have caused the destruction of their countries as a result of their corruption or foolishness, and bind their peoples with debts that their economies are unable to meet.
Their tragic situation requires getting rid of the entire political class and imposing international guardianship on them in order to amend their systems and laws, reform their judiciary and financial conditions, and then hand them back to the nation when it reaches the age of maturity which cannot be reached without a package of educational reforms, and all of this requires the passage of a generation or two to reap the fruit.
This is what happened with the end of the first and second world wars.
Many oppose the principle of international political guardianship on the grounds that its time is over, and it is not permissible to even think about the control of a state or foreign powers in the affairs of another state, but what to do if these peoples suffer from a clear lack of educational and political maturity and independence of decision, and the examples before us are clear, especially if these peoples sanctify their rulers with full knowledge of their corruption, and re-elect them time after time.
It is strange, or perhaps funny, that those who reject political guardianship do not hesitate to impose guardianship on a son, brother or father if he has committed financial, social or moral behavior that offends him or his family, so they, as those affected, resort to the court in order to issue a judgment of guardianship on someone who is unaware of his behavior, restraining his hand from disposing of his life or money, and giving the “guardian” the right to act on his behalf, for his own benefit.
Yes, they accept it for themselves and their family, but they reject it for their countries.
e-mail: [email protected]
By Ahmad alsarraf
This news has been read 18983 times!
