Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Democracy protests spread through the Middle East


Protesting Libya at the White House (Ted)
Over the past few months, democracy protests have broken out across the Muslim world.  In December 2010, protests broke out in Tunisia following the police abuse and subsequent suicide by immolation of a street peddler.  Less than a month later, Ben Ali, Tunisia’s dictator fled to Saudi Arabia. 

From Tunisia, the democratic protests spread to Egypt.  Protesters crammed the streets of Egypt’s major cities demanding the resignation of Hosni Mubarak.  As the Egyptian army looked on, Mubarak announced that he would not seek re-election this September and promised reforms.  On February 11, President Mubarak finally stepped down and handed over control of the country to the military.

The protests do not stop there.  Democracy advocates in Yemen are demanding reform.  In Jordan, the king dismissed the cabinet and appointed a new prime minister in an attempt to mollify protests against his government.  There is still opposition to the Iranian government in spite of the regime’s crackdown on protests there in 2009.  Protests against entrenched Muslim dictatorships have even reached Syria, where students rallied against security forces after police beat a young man in the capitol.

Will Gaddafi be the next Muslim dictator to fall?
Most recently Georgians have watched in horror as protests against the governments of Bahrain and Libya have turned violent.  The two countries are very different.  Bahrain is a wealthy ally of the United States, while Libya is a poor country ruled by Moammar Gaddafi, a longtime sponsor of terrorists.  The governments of both countries have apparently been unnerved by the events in Tunisia and Egypt and have decided that heavy-handed crackdowns on the protesters are the only way to preserve their power.

The Muslim world, characterized by authoritarian governments and a populace that ranges between a few extremely wealthy and the majority who are extremely poor, has long been ripe for revolution.  It is not surprising that the people of these countries would look at the prosperity of the rest of the world (even in a recession) enviously.  The US unemployment rate is over 9%, but the unemployment rate in these Arab countries is often much higher.  The peddler who started Tunisia’s revolution was a college graduate and father who could find no other job than selling food on the street.  Unemployment and low wages couple with rising food prices put average Arab families in a precarious position.

When pro-democracy Muslims saw the success of democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan, it undoubtedly inspired them to seek change in their own countries.  When the people had their first success in Tunisia dominos started to fall in other Muslim dictatorships.  The success in Egypt further emboldened democracy protests around the Middle East.  The domino theory is in action as one dictator after another is threatened and falls to a popular uprising.

Many Georgians are understandably concerned where the Middle Eastern upheaval will lead.  Many Georgians have already been actively involved in two wars in the Middle East.  There is justifiable concern that radical groups like the Muslim Brotherhood will hijack these democratic revolutions in favor of Islamic theocracies. 

It would be a mistake for the United States to continue backing unpopular dictators out of fear of a takeover by radicals or higher oil prices.  The people of the Middle East are willing to risk their lives to fight for what America possesses and has long believed is the best choice for the world:  freedom and democracy.  It would be hypocritical and tragic of the United States not to aid proponents of democracy (as we failed to do in Iran in 2009).

The Muslim revolutions echo the revolts against communism in 1989. (Kpalion)
What the US can and should do is to aid democratic movements around the world.  As dictators topple, US democracy advisors should be dispatched to help newly free people learn to preserve their freedom.  This tactic was used in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union successfully.  Democracy and capitalism have taken root in several countries there, many of which already have lower taxes than the US!  By giving support and aid to democracy groups, we would also counter the support that Iran, al Qaeda and others will undoubtedly be giving to radical groups.

Now is not the time for the US to abdicate our responsibility for spreading democracy and freedom around the world.  The revolutionary wave sweeping the Middle East is a once in a lifetime opportunity.  The people want freedom and they are willing to die for it.  If the opportunity is missed, or seized by Islamic radicals, it may mean that more Georgians will one day have to fight wars in Middle Eastern deserts.

The question is in which Middle Eastern country democracy will strike next and whether the US will be ready.




Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Is the Egyptian revolution good or bad?


http://www.flickr.com/people/81043308@N00
As the people of Georgia watched the Egyptian crowds rallying in opposition to Hosni Mubarak, many probably wondered what will come next and what it means for the rest of the world.  While Georgians from Egypt Community in Effingham County to Cairo in Grady County likely are happy for the newfound freedom of the Egyptians, it is equally likely that they profoundly hope that it does not lead to further violence that will require American involvement.

As the protests in Egypt turned increasingly violent today, many in this country and around the world are asking what comes next.  The answer to that question largely depends on who comes next.  At this point there is no credible leader to replace current Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.  Mubarak recently bowed to public pressure and announced that he will not seek re-election in national elections this September.

Elbaradei (iaea.org)
The most visible candidate for the job is Mohamed Elbaradei.  Elbaradei, who recently announced his openness to running, is the most visible opposition leader.  Elbaradei served three terms as Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).  During his tenure at the UN, Elbaradei faced US opposition because of his belief that Iran was not working to build a nuclear weapon.  The big question today is whether Elbaradei backs the democracy movement or the Muslim Brotherhood.  Many observers, including Middle East expert Joel Rosenberg, believe that Elbaradei is sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran. 

The Muslim Brotherhood is a radical Islamic organization founded in 1928.  The group was founded by Hassan al-Banna, an admirer of Adolf Hitler.  The Brotherhood espoused Wahabism, the same form of Islam touted by Saudi financier and terrorist Osama bin Laden.  Wahabbi Muslims believe that jihad should be used to spread Islam throughout the world.  The Muslim Brotherhood has long been banned in Egypt because of its insistence on enacting sharia law (although some Brotherhood members were elected to Egypt’s parliament as independents).  Members of the Brotherhood assassinated Hosni Mubarak’s predecessor, Anwar Sadat, in 1981 in retaliation for Sadat’s decision to sign a peace treaty with Israel.  It was also a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who helped form Egyptian Islamic Jihad and became a leading al-Qaeda cleric. 
Emblem of the Muslim Brotherhood

If the Muslim Brotherhood were to take over Egypt, the country might well become another Islamic theocracy like Iran or a terrorist state like Gaza, where terrorist group Hamas won democratic elections.  On the other hand, some in the West believe that the Muslim Brotherhood is capable of becoming a peaceful political organization.  Disturbingly, the Obama Administration has hinted that there might be a place for groups like the Muslim Brotherhood in the new Egyptian government.  Today there is no charismatic leader of the Brotherhood akin to Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini which might help to prevent the group from seizing control of the country.  Likewise, the Egyptian uprisings seem to be spontaneous, secular, and democratic rather than inspired by religious fundamentalism.  The Brotherhood has admitted that they are not responsible for the uprising, although they are a dominant part of the opposition to Mubarak’s regime.

But if the Muslim Brotherhood lacks a national leader, so does the democracy movement.  Like the American Tea Party, the Egyptian protests seem to be a grass roots movement made possible by the internet and modern telecommunications.  It can be a drawback, as well as a strength, of such movements that they have no national leader.  The Tea Party had an established national opposition party to work with, but Egypt’s democracy movement will be starting from scratch.  A popular uprising can throw a dictator from power, but a country cannot be run by a mob.

The final major player in the coming Egyptian history is the army.  The army could have cracked down on protesters as the Chinese did at Tiananmen Square in 1989 when the People’s Liberation Army killed thousands of protesters.  The Egyptian army has been involved in politics for decades since overthrowing the monarchy in 1952.  After being involved in several disastrous wars against Israel, it is likely that the army would want to preserve Egypt’s secular government and act to prevent the country from becoming a radical Islamist state.  The army might also eventually move to restore order if the violence between opposition and pro-Mubarak protesters becomes too prevalent.

At this point, no one knows where the future of Egypt will lead.  What is indisputable is that the country is at a crossroads.  In one direction lies the prosperity and freedom of a democracy.  In the other lies the possibility that an Egyptian equivalent of the Taliban or another strongman will spin the country into more auth