Awaiting A democratic Hong Kong
There is no clear line of succession to the Palestinian leadership following Mr Arafat’s death.
But Palestinian leaders have agreed a plan to prevent a power struggle and chaos in the volatile Gaza Strip.
BBC: Veteran leader Yasser Arafat dies
The words, "No clear line of succession," is the mainstay for my support to the democratic cause. For the very simple fact, democracy allows for a stable transfer of power through a majority mandate. Every other system has murky rules of who takes over when a leader dies, and makes way for power struggle, coups, instability, and one big mess. Where a peaceful transfer of power is completely reliant on who happens to be around thus luck.
Look at China, and the CCP. The recent transfer of power between Hu Jintao from Jiang Zemin went smoothly as party leader, president, then head of the military in 2002 and 2004. Amist much speculations as it was the first time since the formation of Communist China in 1949 that an orderly transfer of power happened as planned. Previously it fell to death, marriage, power struggle, and whim. Previous to that, there were wars, and mandates from foreign countries. To this day, China still has no official way to choose a new leader. It is done by appointing of successors by the ‘previous” leader. Both Jiang and Hu were picked by Deng. We’re in “luck” because Deng seemed to have relatively good taste and the others within the power structure has accepted the choice.
However, even when Jiang took over from Deng Xiaoping for the longest time people questioned who really was running the state. When Deng was very sick, no one wanted to admit it (except his daughter) fearing if he died, Jiang, the party and the government wasn’t stable enough to suffer such a shock. There was the consistent rumour that Deng had died, and the government was keeping him “alive” just to keep "stability." If we had a practical system, Deng could have retired, gone somewhere sunny, and died peacefully, knowing things would be okay, and wouldn’t have to hang on to every last breath for the sake of the country, the people and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.
I dread the day if Hu dies suddenly or is sick. There is the possibility to the whole party and system, thus country falling into disarray. People say it won’t, As I said, that depends on who happens to be around at the time and whether there are internal friction within the politburo. It depends on the luck of who was chosen and if they remain sane throughout their career, and whether they are a good leader. If not, they are in power, then it all depends on who is able to kick him out. Whether if it’s through a coup, an assassination, or by sense of the politburo makes up some new rule to depose him. That is if Hu already has a successor in mind that others are willing to follow. I just prefer to be able to trust the rule of law, having it in black and white and knowing the people in power will follow procedure. Not depend on wishful thinking.
One of Mr Arafat’s weaknesses was that he did not like rivals. No clear succession was arranged.
It is possible that a new figure will emerge to make the
choices and provide the leadership. But it is equally possible that
divisions will prevail.
Palestinian leaders may or may not survive Arafat’s death. Is it not exactly the best system, (although of course the Palestinian situation is somewhat different in terms that it’s an unreconized state struggling for independence) but the fact they are also undemocratic, when a leader dies, all the people around him needs to have a meeting promising not to have a power struggle ie. not try and kill each other in the middle of the night. Then everyone sits around hoping the other is not going to renege on that promise and do a dirty on them because if they do, then they would be buried somewhere no one knows.
Now why is it so hard to convince people outside the western world that voting for a leader under a rule of law is actually the best way?
Further Reading:
BBC: Q&A: What follows Arafat?
Jiang Zemin: A new generation leader
Yan Sham-Shackleton Online 
why is it so hard to convince people outside the western world that voting for a leader under a rule of law is actually the best way? ……because their too busy ducking under depleated uranium rounds.:(
LikeLike
I laugh, yet I am crying on the inside. That is sooo terrible, yet so true. You know the Gulf war is actually a “nuclear” war for the very reason you wrote. Depleted uranium rounds. My friend was in the military (Stupid boy) and he said, that the weapons today don’t kill you, they are meant to make maximum injury so your buddies will try and get the soldier to safe place, making it three people off the fighting rather than one. How do people who make this shit up sleep at night and have any kind of normal relations?? Wait. I think they are all republicans from California… am I going to get in trouble for saying that. Probably? I feel contriversal.
LikeLike
the next 100 years in the middle east will be deadly even if peace and democracy are achieved.cancer clusters and radioactive fields everywhere.maybe not a 100 years,wonder what the half life of depleated uranium is?
LikeLike
244 thousand years to 4.5 billion years. Nice…..
LikeLike
do we hang our heads in shame?
LikeLike
Which leads back to the previous post about fallujah, that humans are the only animals that practice organized warfare with weapons……
LikeLike
you cant breed out the trait of war,its the same trait as survival.the only way to stop war is to get the people who want war and who start war to go and fight in a war.
LikeLike
Speaking from a different point of view, I’ve spoken with my father (who is a physicist) about the radioactivity (or lack thereof) of depleted uranium, and his opinion was that it has a radioactivity significantly below that of ordinary uranium, and probably not much more significant than what you’d get sitting on an airplane crossing the Pacific, or living near a hot spring. Of course, he isn’t an expert on that subject, it being outside of his normal research interests, but I think the real reason people use depleted uranium is because it’s dense. It punches ugly holes through most forms of armor, and thus is the preferred weapon for dealing with tanks and other armored vehicles.
Of course, the side effects aren’t an area that he’s studied, and there may be some other medical causes of Gulf War Syndrome et cetera beyond the radioactivity, so to speak.
Furthermore, there seems to be some evidence that some plant forms absorb uranium that is present in the soil. Perhaps now would be a good time to start looking at botany as a hobby, if you happen to be living in the Mid-East.
And as for war… we’re efficient at it because, ultimately, our ancestors didn’t get to the top of the food chain by being nice. They got there by toasting anything and everything that tried to put us on the dinner menu. We’re the sons and daughters of barbarians who conquered, pillaged, and somewhere along the way built nations. I have no belief that we can change that level of conditioning: as a species we survived by being more lethal than our closest competitors, or at least more ingenious at finding ways of amplifying our lethality.
LikeLike
depleted uranium weapons:lessons from the 1991 gulf war.by dan Fahey……the end result of the use of depleted uranium is contamination of damaged equipment and the environment with dangerous levels of depleted uranium dust and debris.respirable size particles formed during impacts and soluble uranium oxide dust formed by corroding penetraters may be transported by the wind or water,and may contaminate food and water supplies.friend and foe alike may inhale or ingest depleted uranium dust and suffer severe short term and long term health problems.hey lashlar, its cheap its harmless lets make toys for western kids out of depleted uranium?
LikeLike
hey lashlar, its cheap its harmless lets make toys for western kids out of depleted uranium?
Well they probably do in China…. :P….
LikeLike