In the realm of revolutions
Feb. 22nd, 2012 08:34 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
nairiporterSome people are hurrying to bemoan the Arab revolution as a failed attempt already. Maybe they were hoping that the Middle East would be looking like the West by now. But let us not forget how things developed in East Europe and let's try to make a parallel with what is happening in the Middle East now. Is this the end of the revolution? In Tunisia and Egypt the elections were won by the Islamists, in Yemen the old president Saleh still has a lot of influence via his clan, and al-Assad is still clinging to power through the old oppressive methods. So has the counter-revolution successfully suffocated the Arab spring?
As much as these sceptical statements are understandable, they reflect only one side of the Arab reality. This scepticism is fueled by the observation that the emerging "new order" in North Africa does not match the desires of the West that the East could become like a new version of Europe or North America, if even a remote one. But this is just too unrealistic to expect. Many people in the West obviously still do not fully understand that Islam as a religion and even more as a culture should not be viewed as a subject of Western preaching and attempts to shaped it in the West's likeness, because it is ready to react by vigorously defending its own identity and specifics against any meddling from unwelcome outside factors.
When more than a year ago a Tunisian street vendor set himself on fire and this started the Jasmine revolution, no one would have thought that the Arab world would be swept by such transformations. All those dictators were looking unshakable. But now Tunisia's dictator is gone, Libya's dictator is gone, the Egyptian "pharaoh" has lost his power and will stand trial. In Yemen, despite all his manoeuvres, Saleh will have to relinquish power next month, and in Syria al-Assad and one of the most brutal secret services in the region are under severe pressure to step down.
How can this be called a failure? Let us not forget how the revolutions in East Europe happened. Today in the Arab world there is a process that is gradually dismantling the Middle Eastern type of despotism, in all its versions and intricacies. Despotism has existed in the region since the age of the pharaohs, and although the modern world has accelerated the transformations elsewhere, in the Middle East it is a much more complex process that takes a lot of time. The Arab revolutions have only failed in the eyes of those who expected from them too much, too soon.
We should also keep in mind that there are very different starting conditions for the different countries. The Middle East is very diverse culturally and politically. It is no coincidence that the new order made the biggest inroads in Tunisia, a Francophone country that has been in close interaction with South Europe for centuries. It is no coincidence that the changes are happening with such difficulty in Egypt, a country which has been generally ruled by various versions of the military caste ever since the Mamluk dynasty 800 years ago. Egypt is still a nation largely controlled by its military. How can we expect all that to change overnight?
Obviously the struggle for Syria will be the focus of the events during the second year of the Arab revolutions. There are some specific conditions in that country, related to its complex system of alliances with some of the big powers (Russia, China, Iran), the ethnic and religious balance in the Syrian society, and the fact that al-Assad's regime is still enjoying a lot of support among large portions of the population - especially by the religious and ethnic minorities.
We should note that the oil-rich Arab monarchies (with the exception of Bahrain) have remained almost unshaken by the revolutionary turmoil. Apart from the immense prosperity and some cosmetic concessions, this could be explained with the traditional Bedouin culture, whose power structures are not being perceived as a given, therefore not too undesirably oppressive, by the local population. The rest of the job (for the time being) is mostly being done by the cheque-book.
As much as these sceptical statements are understandable, they reflect only one side of the Arab reality. This scepticism is fueled by the observation that the emerging "new order" in North Africa does not match the desires of the West that the East could become like a new version of Europe or North America, if even a remote one. But this is just too unrealistic to expect. Many people in the West obviously still do not fully understand that Islam as a religion and even more as a culture should not be viewed as a subject of Western preaching and attempts to shaped it in the West's likeness, because it is ready to react by vigorously defending its own identity and specifics against any meddling from unwelcome outside factors.
When more than a year ago a Tunisian street vendor set himself on fire and this started the Jasmine revolution, no one would have thought that the Arab world would be swept by such transformations. All those dictators were looking unshakable. But now Tunisia's dictator is gone, Libya's dictator is gone, the Egyptian "pharaoh" has lost his power and will stand trial. In Yemen, despite all his manoeuvres, Saleh will have to relinquish power next month, and in Syria al-Assad and one of the most brutal secret services in the region are under severe pressure to step down.
How can this be called a failure? Let us not forget how the revolutions in East Europe happened. Today in the Arab world there is a process that is gradually dismantling the Middle Eastern type of despotism, in all its versions and intricacies. Despotism has existed in the region since the age of the pharaohs, and although the modern world has accelerated the transformations elsewhere, in the Middle East it is a much more complex process that takes a lot of time. The Arab revolutions have only failed in the eyes of those who expected from them too much, too soon.
We should also keep in mind that there are very different starting conditions for the different countries. The Middle East is very diverse culturally and politically. It is no coincidence that the new order made the biggest inroads in Tunisia, a Francophone country that has been in close interaction with South Europe for centuries. It is no coincidence that the changes are happening with such difficulty in Egypt, a country which has been generally ruled by various versions of the military caste ever since the Mamluk dynasty 800 years ago. Egypt is still a nation largely controlled by its military. How can we expect all that to change overnight?
Obviously the struggle for Syria will be the focus of the events during the second year of the Arab revolutions. There are some specific conditions in that country, related to its complex system of alliances with some of the big powers (Russia, China, Iran), the ethnic and religious balance in the Syrian society, and the fact that al-Assad's regime is still enjoying a lot of support among large portions of the population - especially by the religious and ethnic minorities.
We should note that the oil-rich Arab monarchies (with the exception of Bahrain) have remained almost unshaken by the revolutionary turmoil. Apart from the immense prosperity and some cosmetic concessions, this could be explained with the traditional Bedouin culture, whose power structures are not being perceived as a given, therefore not too undesirably oppressive, by the local population. The rest of the job (for the time being) is mostly being done by the cheque-book.
