The Middle East Political Challenges
Hadiza Wada, DBA
…June 4, 2011
The winds of
change, as many outside the Arab world have come to describe it [while the Arabs
prefer to call it The Arab Awakening after Al Jazeera], began to blow in the
Arab world late last year, beginning with the Crisis in Tunisia that saw the
downfall of the Tunisian government led by Zine al Abidine bin Ali. The change does indeed remind one of
the democratization ripple effect that swept across a great many nations of the
world, shaking many communist nations in Eastern Europe.
That movement
began under the Ronald Reagan Administration of the United States, and many have
attributed the credit to him and his government, while others have also credited
the persuasion and subsequent Glasnost “openness” ideology introduced in Russia
by the Gorbachev government. Soon
not only the Soviet Union, but many other independent countries of Eastern
Europe such as East Germany, Hungary, Poland etc., as well as China in Asia were
all affected; the most outstanding incident in China being the Tiananmen Square
incident [citizens frantic campaign for democracy that was forcibly crushed in
Beijing in 1989].
Today also, the
same kind of movement seems to be happening after the first of the two nations
mentioned above [Tunisia and Egypt].
Soon after the two nations other neighboring nations practicing similar
“non-democratic” forms of government caught wind of it, and while imagining what
such changes could bring to them, followed suit.
Soon the Arab world was in turmoil and their rulers in panic. They were in panic because majority
of the Muslim nations of the middle East run virtually the same kinds of
government i.e. they are either nominally elected, military, or monarchies where
their commanders in chief stay on for unlimited terms, with possibilities of a
family member of such leaders inheriting the position of head of state or
commander-in- chief from the father.
“The shift in
the strategic and political balance in the Middle East in favor of Turkey and
Iran is the result of a combination of factors, some domestic, some regional and
some global,” writes Haroon Moghul, a fellow at the Institute for Social Policy
and Understanding. One such challenge is; like most third world countries, the
Arab world does not have any strong regional bodies they could rely on in times
of trouble be it economic, political and most especially military body with the
might to effect anything significant for the group of nations within its block.
The crisis engulfing most nations of the
Middle East has emphasized that reality.
Despite the
stark differences in almost all areas, be it cultural, religious, political or
social between the developed nations and the Arab world, it is an irony that
that region of the world has virtually been the guinea pig for Western Policing
of the world, even while the idea was being first discussed at the introduction
of the “New World Order” ideology in the late nineteen eighties and early
nineties when the world was undergoing the Eastern Europe democratic revolution. Those Middle Eastern nations seem to
have bought and accepted the idea of allowing other nations to police its
waters, and come to its aid with military might whenever that becomes necessary.
This appears to
be what Mr. Moghul alludes to when he writes “Too often, its consultative bodies
are reduced to irrelevant bystanders, its local powers unable to have civil
dialogue with one another (see: Bahrain), and its biggest problems all but ask
for foreign intervention since there’s no local mechanism to resolve the
conflict before it explodes out of all proportion.”
For the first
time however, since the outbreak of the revolution taking place in that region,
more nations, while playing survival game have started to become more proactive. As recent as two days ago, Saudi
Arabia has received the departing Yemeni leader who headed to the country in
search of medical attention after reportedly getting hurt in a fire set by
demonstrating citizens. While his Vice President presides over issues, it was
reported that the government is closely working with Saudi Arabia to find ways
of diffusing the crisis in Yemen.
Also while probably fighting for its survival; Saudi Arabia has for the
first time become directly involved militarily in another nation [Bahrain].
In Egypt meanwhile, as the dust settles, the
nation appears to still be caught up in finding ways to implement some of the
changes demanded by the mammoth crowds that invaded Tahrir square looking for
such changes. Regardless of the
outcome of the processes in motion in such a nation, the outcome may not be
drastically un-similar from the ones that occurred in Eastern Europe, i.e. the
effect of such changes on individual nations will depend on many internal as
well as external factors.
So one should expect diverse outcomes from
different countries, just as we witness today, where some nations of Eastern
Europe are more advanced democratically, politically and economically than
others. The rate of change, the degree of changes, as well as the type of
changes, will differ based on the strength of commitment of those in position to
effect changes, the willingness of citizens to see it through and the support
from neighbors and others across the world that such nations receive. We can observe this also from the
former mass democratization process.
Some of the countries that stood out include China, a communist nation that
seems today to be a giant among giants in economic growth and commerce, who some
two decades ago is one of the most prominent of communist nations.
Today, with the
beginning of the same movement in Middle East, Saudi Arabia, a leading nation in
the region for example, has taken the unprecedented decision to become involved
militarily in global affairs. It has
now deployed forces in a foreign country in defense of a monarchy. “Along with five hundred troops from
UAE, a thousand Saudi troops entered Bahrain to engage the protesters there
demanding a democratic transition in Bahrain.”
Saudi Arabia
used to be one of the staunchest in maintaining the status quo in the Middle
East writes Dr. Muqtedar Khan, an Associate Professor of Islam and Global
Affairs from the University of Delaware.
“While Egypt fought three wars for the Palestinian cause, Saudi Arabia,
despite its rhetoric on Islam did not fight for Jerusalem, ever. [And] Saudi Arabia has never used the
oil weapon against Israel or the West. Even during the oil crisis of 1973, Saudi
Arabia moderated its impact by exceeding its own oil production beyond its OPEC
quota.” But all these are changing
fast, writes Dr. Khan.
Meanwhile,
another professor proposes “Five reasons why Arab regimes are falling.”
Moataz A. Fattah is an Associate
Professor of Political Science at Cairo University. Using Egypt as an example to
demonstrate his premise or idea, Mr. Fattah’s first reason was labeled “the
Biological challenge” (The generation gap).
With the high unemployment rate among the biggest percentage of the
population [youth], tension between generations is bound to explode. That 65%
youth population segment for Egypt for example, could not connect politically
with a government that has been in power since most were born. That is practically true across the
region.
Most Arab
leaders have been in power for many years and have lost touch with even the
older generations, let alone the youth. “Currently, around 65 percent of
Egyptians are under 30 years old with an unemployment rate of 25 percent among
those who are between 18 and 29 years old.“
Second of the reasons, is the geological challenge where the issue of
income from the nation’s natural resources has not generally translated into
development and improvement of life for majority of the nation’s citizens.
As UN Human Development Indexes show, for
example, “Mubarak’s regime has generally failed to convert monetary capital into
social capital.”
The third
challenge according to Fattah, relates to the struggle between democratization,
secularism and religion, while the fourth is the rise in technological
adaptation. Today’s social network
has been effectively used to mobilize such youths to action, and is still making
great impact in such movements. And finally is the “Ideological challenge”
(Nasserism and Islamism are out). Like most regional countries facing challenges
today, according to the Professor, Egyptians continue to move away from
political demagoguery as practiced by earlier leaders, as well as the use of
Islam and islamization popular with Nasser’s regime beginning in the 1950s and
1960s. They continue to move towards
moderation.
(c) The Optimist Voice. All Rights Reserved.
..
