Revolution in North Africa
First Tunisia. Then Egypt. Where next?
Tonight the Egyptian regime is teetering on the edge of collapse. A lot of commentators are suggesting that the fall of Hosni Mubarak is inevitable, though I’d be wary of underestimating the man’s tenacity. The domino-effect is somewhat overrated and to simply assume that the pattern we saw in Tunisia will automatically repeat itself in Egypt is to be guilty of questionable generalisation. Certainly opposition movements across the Middle East have been inspired by the Jasmine Revolution, but the complex and unique internal dynamics of each nation cannot be ignored. These aren’t all “the same place” though they may face many of the same problems.
My family lived in Cairo for a couple of years during my mid-teens so I know the city fairly well. Or rather, I knew 80s Cairo fairly well. Much has changed in the intervening years, though the images being broadcast today were of roads, bridges and buildings with which I am very familiar. Watching an honest-to-goodness revolution unfold on streets I once thought of as “home” has been a peculiar experience to say the least. It’s made me think about where else such events might happen.
One thing that hasn’t changed about Egypt since my time there in the mid-80s is the guy in charge. Hosni Mubarak, 25 years older and with saggier jowls, is still running the country. Which is what you’d expect in a “democracy” where the president tends to stand unopposed in elections. And as today’s events demonstrate, that isn’t because he’s universally loved. Mubarak is shrewd as hell and has a much larger and better equipped security apparatus than ex-President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia. It still wouldn’t surprise me to see him emerge from this chaos with a firm grip on the reins of power in Egypt. Though I suspect his dream of installing his son as successor is now over.
That said, I’m not suggesting things are looking good for Hosni Mubarak. There are rumours that he has already fled the country but while the odds are certainly stacked against him, they aren’t quite as heavily stacked as they were for the guy twelve hundred miles to his west.
The Devil You Know
Here’s where I get controversial. And please do me the favour of accepting my words at face value rather than trying to read some kind of veiled pro-Mubarak sentiment into them, or suggesting I’m putting forward a pro-western neoliberal neocolonial agenda. Those who know me will understand that’s not where my concerns are coming from. Those who don’t will just have to take that on faith.
Firstly let me state, unequivocally, that the Egyptian regime is corrupt, despotic and guilty of more human rights abuses than any of us will ever know. If the world was a truly just place, Hosni Mubarak would face trial for (and be convicted of) crimes against humanity. The people of Egypt deserve much better. And I fully support their attempts to achieve it.
However, the unintended consequences of those attempts could have ramifications far beyond the borders of Egypt. As I listened to reports of today’s protests on Al Jazeera, something was said… just once and not repeated… that made me feel a little uneasy. “Several members of the Muslim Brotherhood have been arrested in the past 24 hours” said the reporter. I have no idea whether the Muslim Brotherhood is playing any part in the current situation. In reality, even if they have nothing whatsoever to do with it, Hosni Mubarak’s “round up the usual suspects” approach will have made them targets. What I do know is that some members of the Egyptian opposition have called upon the Brotherhood to form militia units to maintain order in the absence of the police. Mubarak’s efficient suppression of opposition groups will ensure a power vacuum if he is ousted in the next few days, and it seems very possible that the Muslim Brotherhood will be best-placed to take advantage of that vacuum.
Now, before you accuse me of anti-Muslim sentiment let me point out that my problem is with hardliners of any religion having too much political influence. Israel’s self-definition as a Jewish State gives me the creeps. The subordination of Iranian politics to the clerics appals me. And they both pale into insignificance compared with how appalled I am by the thought of the Christian Right gaining any more power in the United States than they already possess. The grip that Catholicism had on my country, Ireland, was nightmarish and I don’t wish to see a similar fate visited upon any other nation.
I do not see The Islamic Republic of Egypt to be a better option than what the Egyptians had last week. And there’s a real danger that could emerge from this situation. Neither are desirable of course, but the former — and this is the crucial point — seriously increases the possibility of another Arab-Israeli conflict. And that would be a disaster for the entire region, if not the world.
The Fall of The House of Saud
Meanwhile, during my time spent online today, I’ve encountered numerous tweets and blog posts and facebook comments excitedly anticipating the spread of this revolutionary fervor to Saudi Arabia… a regime far more brutal and oppressive than Egypt. I’ve also spent time there, and if ever there was a nation in need of regime change it’s Saudi Arabia.
However, while the dangers of the relatively secular Egyptian society falling under the spell of theocrats are real but not massive; the fall of the Saudi Royal Family would almost certainly result in the rise of a hardline Islamist government. See, people have this idea of Saudi Arabia being run by Islamists, but in fact the reality is more complex. Yes, it’s a society run along fundamentalist islamic principles, but the people right at the very top are cynical realists rather than True Believers. They pander to the religious tendencies within their culture, but they work hard to keep things on an even keel with regards to foreign policy. Purely for their own purposes, you understand, but it nonetheless maintains a certain level of peace in the region.
I want you to consider two crucial facts about Saudi Arabia… One: They are by far the largest oil exporter on the planet. Two: By percentage of GDP, they have the largest defence budget of any major country on the planet (and in real terms are the 8th biggest spender on weapons… spending almost 3 times more per annum than Israel on guns, bombs and planes).
I suspect that a Saudi revolution could lead to a radical Islamist government, and I suspect that in turn could lead to war with Israel. Nobody is more convinced than me that the world needs to wean itself off its addiction to oil. And I’m also convinced that Israel’s policy towards the Palestinian people needs to change. I’m just not sure that a Saudi-Israeli war is the optimum way of achieving those ends.
In summary
I don’t for a moment want to give the impression that these are “predictions”. They are very much worst-case scenarios and I will be overjoyed if a wave of revolutions sweep the Middle East and North Africa leaving stable secular governments in their wake. Republics that fully maintain their Islamic cultural heritage while remaining pluralist, tolerant and non-confrontational. That would be my ideal and if Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution turns out to be the spark that set off such a beautiful flame, then it will be long remembered as one of the most positive developments in the history of a region for too long dominated by ruthless despots, unaccountable royal families and corrupt bureaucracies.
But history teaches us that revolutions rarely end up at the glorious destination envisioned by those who participate in them. Let us all hope that this time round, history won’t repeat itself.
UPDATE: As if on cue, a spokesman for the hardline Iranian government has come out in support of the uprisings in the secular Arab states and expresses his “optimism” about the situation in Egypt.
UPDATE 30-01-2011: Meanwhile Tunisia’s Islamist leader returns home after 22 years in exile.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Bosca, JimBliss. JimBliss said: @justmckeat @punkscience Re: House of Saud. It proved impossible to address the point on Twitter. So: http://bit.ly/egzboY […]
January 29th, 2011 | 12:24am
by Tweets that mention The Quiet Road -- Topsy.com
Why would Saudi launch a war against Israel that it can only lose? Israel, too, is governed by an insane theocracy. The difference is that Israel has nuclear weapons and the backing of the world’s least principled superpower. I imagine the Yanks will be overjoyed to occupy the smouldering remains of Saudi for the purposes of “peacekeeping”, once the Israelis have nuked the shit out of it.
I also think that you’re underestimating the ability of the Western World (particularly, but not exclusively, America) to manipulate events and promote certain political entities over others. Remember how Hamas won democratic elections in Palestine? Lets not pretend that the West is at all respectful of democracy. I’m from the UK.
I imagine that, in the event that the uprising is successful, El Baradei, an eminent moderate, will be propelled into power by the west. I can’t really say though, being relatively ignorant of politics in the country. Even if the Muslim Brotherhood sieze power I don’t think for one second that they will be allowed to retain it in the face of the CIA’s usual counterrevolutionary playbook. Egypt is a powerful ally and controls the crucial strategic asset that is the Suez Canal. The ‘civilised’ world won’t stand to see their trade artery held to ransom by some upstart Arab nationalists. Oh no. They have quite some form on that issue, if you read your history.
January 29th, 2011 | 10:04am
by punkscience
I’d considered writing something about Egypt, but you seem to have done the job for me. Good work. I hope and secular-pray that the resulting government is moderate.
On Saudi – they don’t have nukes or chemical weapons, and they do have all the oil. The only possible scenario that means “New Western-led Mid-East war” is “Islamist revolution in Saudi”. Remember, Iraq failed because the Americans tried not to install a tame despot but tried to live up to their lies about “war for democracy” – Saudi is too important to even pretend that kind of thing.
January 29th, 2011 | 12:40pm
by john b
punkscience, I’m aware of our sordid history in that area. My point — and the point of the Iranian spokesman referred to in that update — is that we may be looking at a significant shift in the power politics of the region.
In a post-peak oil world where the US military has become bogged down in two disastrous wars in the region within a decade, I’m just not sure they have it in them to handle a third. That’s a judgment call — and I accept that — but there you have it.
You suggest I’m “underestimating the ability of the Western World […] to manipulate events and promote certain political entities over others.” I’m just suggesting that you (and a lot of others) may be overestimating that ability; that Western power is waning and this may prove a conclusive demonstration of that fact.
Again, let me stress that I’m not predicting this. I’m saying it’s a far greater risk than many of the jubilant liberal commentators in the west are prepared to admit. Islamist governments in Egypt and Saudi, in combination with Iran could — and I suspect would — attempt to radically shift the situation in the region with respect to Israel. And the outcome of such an attempt would be disastrous.
As for “Why would Saudi launch a war against Israel that it can only lose?” you answer the question yourself in the next sentence when you use the phrase “insane theocracy”. As much as we love to characterise Saudi in those terms today, it’s simply not true. The House of Saud is as skilled in the art of Realpolitik as anyone you care to mention. Replacing them with a genuinely insane theocracy — which I believe would be a significant probability should there be a Saudi revolution (whereas in Egypt it’s just a slight possibility) — with huge military and economic power would, as I say, set the stage for a clash with Israel.
And if you envision the Americans being “overjoyed to occupy the smouldering remains of Saudi for the purposes of ‘peacekeeping’, once the Israelis have nuked the shit out of it” then we are clearly not seeing the same outcome to such a clash. If Israel nukes the nation containing Islam’s holiest site, they will effectively be signing their own death warrant (as well as lighting the touchpaper for Islamist revolutions in any Islamic nation that attempts to sit idly by… Turkey?). The mindset of the suicide bomber isn’t one that responds to nuclear deterrants. Mutually assured destruction is their entire modus operandi.
And as a footnote to all that talk of military carnage; a word about the economic issue of radical Islamists gaining control of Saudi oil. Even if they decided not to directly confront Israel, I just don’t buy the notion that they would pass up the opportunity to isolate Israel by threatening an oil embargo against any nation that supports them. And this isn’t the early 1970s any more, when US domestic oil production was still near its peak. A combined embargo by a radicalised Saudi and Iran would completely torpedo the US economy. It seems unlikely to me that Israel would sit idly by and watch America being forced to choose between support for them and their own economy.
Which brings us back to military action…
January 29th, 2011 | 1:17pm
by Jim Bliss
I, too, share your concerns. Whilst happy to see Mubarak forced onto the political scrapheap, certain alternatives are decidedly worse. At present, el Baradei is something of a loose cannon, with his ‘National Association for Change’. He may be Egypt’s best hope, though his acknowledgment – if not, embrace – of the Muslim Brotherhood is a little disconcerting.
January 29th, 2011 | 3:10pm
by R J Adams
The events were triggered by Dajjal on Aug 18th 2007 with the rising of Venus in Hydra. They (WW3 & WW4) will culminate with Venus in Pegasus.
January 29th, 2011 | 10:13pm
by Klaudio Zic
No Klaudio, they weren’t. Neither Dajjal (which is the Islamic equivalent of the Christian Anti-Christ myth) nor astrology had anything whatsoever to do with current events in the Middle East and North Africa. You are, however, entitled to believe whatever you want.
January 29th, 2011 | 11:48pm
by Jim Bliss
The Egytian revolution seems to have all the ingredients ready but who is the chef??
The hardline anti-Jewish Muslim Brotherhhod or the moderate Western modelled El Baradei? The ascendance of the the Mulsim Brotherhood as it appears likely will only have Israel polish their weapons for a possible future confronation as the Egypt’s new rulers will want to cancel the agreements of Camp David and El Baradei seen as a stooge will perhaps not survive the assasins’ bullets in the first year or the Hariri like roadside bomb strategy.
And if any of the above happens, then the power vacuum will create lawlessness that will be strategically exploited by the Al-Aqaeda as the new breeding ground for terrorists!!
February 1st, 2011 | 7:57am
by Gerald Okware
I do share some of your concerns, Gerald, in the sense that the anti-Mubarak sentiment could certainly evolve into anti-Western sentiment. But given the human rights abuses perpetrated by the Mubarak regime, and given the enthusiastic support that regime received from the west (as well as the hands-on support those human rights abuses received from western intelligence agencies and military aid budgets) I wouldn’t for a moment blame Egypt for any anti-Western sentiment that emerges.
You have to understand, while I do think an anti-Western / anti-Israel Egypt would pose serious risks to peace in the region (and beyond); I would not for a moment blame the people of Egypt — or even the Muslim Brotherhood — for shifting in that direction. It was the West who supported a tyranny in their nation, so why on earth wouldn’t they be anti-West? If they get pushed into the arms of radical Islamists… well, it was the US and her allies that did most of the pushing.
A brief glance at the history of that region illustrates that whatever whirlwind we may be about to reap, was undoubtedly sown by the colonial (and neocolonial) powers.
Having said that; the fact that Egypt has been a relatively secular society for several decades means that the rise of Islamist power there is by no means inevitable. My great worry, as mentioned above, is that this revolutionary fervor spreads to Saudi (which frankly is a country ripe for regime-change). And given the history of US involvement in Saudi Arabia since World War Two, it would be utterly bizarre if the House of Saud was not to be replaced by something overtly anti-Western. And once again, the blame would lie squarely with the Western powers.
An analogy. You see a neighbour beating your kid. You try to intervene but the local cop-on-the-beat arrives and stops you doing so. He handcuffs you to a railing, and watches approvingly as your neighbour kicks the shit out of your child. Then he tells you he’ll be back every day to do the same and that there’s nothing you can do about it.
It’s not long before you hate the cop just as much as you hate your neighbour. And if you plot revenge? Who the hell would blame you?
February 1st, 2011 | 1:18pm
by Jim Bliss