This is sort of interesting. I do not mean to insult the man the writer interviews, but listing all of Mr. Aboulmagd's accomplishments, he fails to actually mention one that did something. Really, just one. Perhaps that is why the phrase,
"Similar opinions can also be heard these days from wealthy Arab businessmen, university professors, senior government officials and Western-leaning political analysts — the people whose support could help advance the Bush administration's professed mission: to bring democracy to the Arab world."does not really make me suddenly eager to consider the article's premise -- we should be weary of disappointing Arab elites. We should be weary of many things, but losing support of people who are more interested in status quo than anyone seems like a good move, if you want to change that status quo. Since the article implies that G.Bush does indeed seem determined to change it, I fail to see the problem. How long should one wait to see the work of these fervent reformists?
I am not really ready to get into the argument about US foreign policy right now, just want to say that this could have been a good piece, if only reporter was not afraid to ask hard questions. As is, I am underwhelmed by the pleas of rich Middle Eastern businessmen for return to "say a lot, do nothing" status quo.