Writing in Parameters, Chris Zambelis details how the failure of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East has created a situation where freely elected governments there will inevitably be loaded, at least initially, with Islamic parties.

The failure of successive governments in the Middle East to meet the demands of ordinary citizens is central to the Islamist ethos. The illegitimate, corrupt, and repressive nature of the regimes has driven disenfranchised Muslims to seek other options. In this sense, Islamists of all ideological persuasions are offering an alternative to what they perceive as an unjust status quo. Where they differ is in their methods and ultimate goals. It is in this context that political Islam emerged as the primary vehicle of social, political, and economic protest in the region.

Islamists are in the best position to exploit democratization today, and their entry into public life is inevitable given the lack of alternatives. The popular allure of Islamists stems from their effective politicization of grievances through the use of religious symbols and rhetoric. Islam essentially bolsters their legitimacy and resonates with the target population because it is an indigenous and authentic tradition.

Most support for the Islamists does not stem from their religious credentials. On the contrary, Islamists back up their words with action. Many Islamist groups run effective social welfare programs and provide other services to compensate for the incapacity of the state. The most radical organizations use terrorism and violence against symbols of the regime and their Western benefactors.

What does this mean for the U.S.? Well, fasten your seatbelts; it’s going to be a bumpy ride. But in the long run, we’ll have to prove our sincerity to a skeptical people.

If Washington is sincere about closing the gap between its rhetoric and its policy, its drive to support democracy in the Middle East represents a welcomed shift in strategy. In doing so, the United States needs to bolster its credibility in the region. As it stands today, Washington’s ailing credibility will undercut its regional reform initiatives. A genuine effort to establish an independent, sovereign, and viable Palestine�in conjunction with a commitment to support real reform�will go far to enhance American prestige in the Islamic world and dispel the claims of skeptics and extremists regarding Washington’s ultimate intentions. Official speeches praising the virtues of Islam and American democracy are way off the mark. In the end, action, not rhetoric, will win hearts and minds.

The initial stages of any reform process should concern Washington. The test will be how well the United States weathers the storm. If Washington reneges on its plan at the first signs of instability or a perceived threat, that would be a mistake. Incumbent leaders will surely attempt to counter pressures for change by highlighting threats of imminent chaos. Extremists with a tyrannical vision can also exploit democracy to attain power, only to abolish the democratic institutions that elevated them. Given the region’s experience with authoritarianism, it is unlikely that Arabs and Muslims will stand for such a move. Still, this may be enough to temper US calls for greater openness. The United States also depends heavily on cooperation in the war on terror with many of the same autocrats that President Bush has called on to liberalize. This dilemma will not go away any time soon. Indeed, Washington will be confronted with some tough choices in the years ahead.

What Zambelis certainly isn’t advocating is throwing in the towel and declaring failure at the first signs of Shi’ite parties in positions of power in Iraq and Islamic language in the new constitution.