We are happy to be able to re-post an article written by Friend of the Site Anthony Elghossain regarding the current turmoil in the Middle East. The article, originally posted January 26th, can be found on Anthony's blog here.
In 2005, millions of Lebanese marched for their freedom. The streets of Beirut captured the world’s attention and seemed likely to trigger a wave of Arab democratization and reform. But despite glimmers of hope in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria, the much-lauded “Arab Spring” soon fizzled out.
In some countries, homegrown activism was absent or fell short of a critical mass. In other places, foreign support was inadequate or insincere. Even the Bush Administration, which publicly adhered to a “freedom agenda,” could ill-afford widespread democracy promotion. After all, authoritarian regimes of one stripe or another governed – and still govern – strong American allies like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan. In not-so-friendly countries like Syria or Libya, fears of an Islamist wave or civil strife kept Western democracy promotion at bay.
Now, six years after that fleeting spring, is the “Arab Summer” here?
In the span of a few weeks, protests have unfolded across the Arab world. In Tunisia, a string of protests toppled a decades-old regime, forced President Ben Ali to flee the country, and triggered military measures to re-impose order. In Egypt, a bombing of a Coptic Christian church sparked riots that have exacerbated Christian-Muslim and state-society tensions. After months of turmoil, thousands of Egyptians have now begun demonstrating in the heart of Cairo, presenting the Mubarak regime with the most serious and organized threat to its rule in years.
In Jordan, protests over food prices form part of a growing pattern of clashes. Kuwait’s crisis arose when security forces attacked on a group of academics and lawmakers. While the Jordanian government managed to quell unrest, and while Kuwait silenced dissent by announcing that it would distribute $4 billion to its citizens, dissenters may find their voice if regimes across the region continue to crumble.
These events may appear different on the surface, but their underlying causes are the same. Arabs are increasingly dissatisfied with oppressive regimes that have failed to deliver economic growth, political representation, or social freedom. In a sense, these protests are bound by fortune too. Each success or failure in a given Arab capital, and every image or word that flickers on Al-Jazeera or Twitter, affects the prospects of change elsewhere.
Of course, the “Revolutions” of 2005 and the “revolts” of 2011 differ significantly. First, democracy advocates – in Washington and in Arab capitals – have yet to brand, promote, and support the latest waves of dissent. In contrast, for instance, the “Cedar Revolution” of 2005 emerged under polished steering and marketing, which harnessed the Lebanese people’s free-minded impulses, made the case for international support, and ultimately secured change.
Second, the hope of 2005 has given way to rage. During the “Arab Spring,” millions of Lebanese marched engaged in peaceful protests against Syrian occupation. In nearby Damascus, academics and other dissidents issued a declaration calling for democratic reform in Syria itself. Although Lebanon’s fortunes have soured, Syrian dissidents continue to languish behind bars, and Iraq’s future remains unknown, the hope of 2005 was real.
This time, protesters are venting their anger. Left unharnessed, such anger – and the violence it engenders – may reinforce fears of instability that have long driven Western support for decrepit Arab regimes. If so, the prospects of change will suffer. Indeed, aside from the stunning developments in Tunisia, the regional status quo has survived (for now).
The “Twitter effect” is another difference. Social media tools have had a paradoxical impact thus far. On the one hand, demonstrators have used social media to communicate with each other and with the broader world. On the other hand, social media have diffused leadership of these potential movements. Without direction, prospective revolutions could die out, run into more organized state security apparatuses, or descend into mayhem.
Despite these cautions, the “Arab Summer” offers a second chance. Arabs must stop blaming oppressive rulers or American foreign policy for their problems. By taking ownership of their futures, Arabs can challenge their regimes and present the U.S. with a moment of choice.
If that moment comes, the U.S. must not fall on the wrong side of history. The Obama Administration should truly embrace the message it has tried to impart on friends and foes alike. False choices – between bread and freedom; between justice and stability; between democracy and security – lead only to empty stomachs and shackled hands.
No comments:
Post a Comment