Development vs Independence

One of the ways that the original Jewish immigrants justified their entrance into Palestine (other than the historical/biblical) was the idea that they were bringing development to the area.  While I don't think that anyone can dispute that the predominantly Jewish areas were more developed overall, this still smacks of a colonialist argument.  The British and French used the same justification for their involvement in Africa, India, etc.  However, I have to agree with the Palestinians when they say that they didn't ask for it just like the Africans didn't ask for any help.  We can draw parallels to this with the invasion of Iraq.  Bringing "democracy" to a region without their asking it is a very similar concept.  It isn't PC to imply that the people living there were not advanced enough to develop themselves.  It wasn't true then and it isn't true now, but I think that is still the underlying idea behind a lot of people's thinking.  The Iraqis were not strong enough to take control of the country themselves, so we would come in and be these amazing liberators and welcomed with open arms.  Assuming we leave an American friendly government in place, we still may have a problem with the local population resenting us and viewing any troops or bases remaining in the country as well as the government as a vestige of imperialism.  I think that Americans and Iraqis may have a better chance at reconciliation in the near future than Israelis and Palestinians, but the underlying concept is the same: the Western, developed world thinking that they need to make the rest of the world like ourselves and forcing our ideas on them.  I think there are plenty of places where this fusion has happened organically and Western culture has been invited in to blend with local customs and ideas naturally.