As you might have heard, the United States resumed diplomatic relations with Libya, one of the most totalitarian countries in the world. To even begin trying to account for how this matches up to the stated “Bush Doctrine” of promoting democracy, and how it will benefit the people of Libya, boggles the mind. It does go to show, however, that the world is a complex place and the administration isn’t single-mindedly ideological when it comes to foreign policy. The reasons for this move therefore have little consideration for democracy, and everything to do with how the attainment of nuclear weapons by pariah states in the short-term will prevent democracy in the long-term.

It must be remembered that the Brotherly Leader Muammar al-Gaddafi has been in constant conflict with the United States for over twenty years, about the same timespan as the Islamic Revolution in Iran. He turned Libya into a state sponsor of terror and developed a secret nuclear weapons program. There was a constant threat of regime change. When President Bush toppled Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi soon realized that America was serious about preventing rogue regimes from obtaining nuclear weapons; that it would topple that regime if necessary. He sought dialogue, abandoned his nuclear program, and changed his more directly threatening policies in exchange for assurances of safety and diplomatic relations.

This brings us back to the concept that preventing rogue regimes from obtaining nuclear weapons is the most important thing that can be done to assure both the national security of the United States and the eventual democratization of such countries. It also brings us to the broader meaning of the United States’ resumption of diplomatic relations with Libya.

It is a signal to other rogue regimes, particularly Iran and North Korea, that they will not be invaded should they give up their nuclear weapons programs. The belief that they face the threat of being deposed is one of the main reasons these regimes are developing nuclear weapons in the first place. Furthermore, they will actually receive some kind of tangible benefits to go with it. Whether or not having diplomatic relations is appropriate, especially with Iran, is up for debate. The important thing to note is that it is a show of what will really happen if these programs are given up.

North Korea, constantly in six-way talks, is probably the most likely to take notice from such a move. Its regime can by no stretch of the imagination be considered truly ideological, but based on a cult of personality manifested in Kim Jong-Il. It’s leadership is pragmatic in the sense that it does not truly adhere to communist ideas, but simply wants to stay in power by any means possiblel; hence the development of nuclear weapons. Though while nuclear weapons will thwart an invasion, the North Koreans must also realize that their economic system will collapse one day. If they take the hint, they will realize that they will not be invaded should they give up their weapons, and will get a longer lease on life in the form of aid as well. It’s not exactly the kind of pro-democracy effort I’d like to see, but currently the country an impenetrable police state so that kind of initiative is impossible. It must be opened up. Otherwise, a North Korea with nukes will never democratize. It will more likely collapse, and then there is no telling where those weapons will end up.

Iran is a completely different question. The current leadership under President Ahmadinejad is extremely ideological, which means in this case that nuclear weapons are being developed to both prevent an invasion and to possibly export them for destruction. Ahmadinejad will stop at nothing to reach his goal, as evidenced by the constant refusal to accept EU3 aid. However, this signal will certainly not be missed by the so-called reformists like former President Khatami and the so-called pragmatists like other former President Rafsanjani. It will also not be missed by the Iranian people, who while supporting the idea of having the sovereign right to develop civilian nuclear energy, are dead scared of a brewing war. There is a well-known elite split in Iran right now, with the Rafsanajani/Khatami crowd maneuvering and plotting against the Ahmadinejad crowd. This signal by the United States is meant to encourage and focus this split so that the softliners will stir civil society and win the support of the people so as to overthrow the hardliners. While the method of causing an elite split due to international pressure hasn’t been tried yet in an Islamic country, elite splits were a leading cause for the development of civil society and liberalization during the Third Wave.

As you can see, America’s tango with Libya is connected in a very direct way with the ongoing nuclear proliferation crisis. The move may smack of realpolitik, but it is one that must be made for both the safety of the democratic world. If North Korea and Iran are nuclear, they will never democratize. And if they collapse, the weapons will show up in a major Western city. If democracy is going to be pushed, then these nuclear programs must first be dismantled so that it can take root in the long-term.