The pro-democracy revolutions in Northern Africa and the Middle East have been a big problem for the region’s assorted dictators, but may well be an even bigger problem for the US, whose leaders don’t have the luxury of simply fleeing to Saudi Arabia with a big chunk of the national treasury when things turn sour.
The only comparison for the US can be to the 1979 Iranian Revolution, in which the US backed Shah was ousted in favor of a Shi’ite theocracy. In this case, however, President Obama must contend with unrest in not one, but several key allied nations.
For decades it seemed that the US was able to keep its authoritarian allies propped up more or less indefinitely, but the simmering unrest combined with crumbling economies across the region have combined to produce a region-wide phenomenon, where every US-backed dictator appears at risk.
But in the near term, it is two of the most important President-for-life figures, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Yemen’s Ali Abdullah Saleh, that are at the most risk. In each case the US is giving lip-service to the notion of some “reforms” but are conceding they won’t want anything that might threaten the rule of their allies, particularly any pesky elections.
Officials are concerned with what sorts of governments might emerge in those nations, surely, but the bigger problem is that giving a meaningful political voice to tens of millions of people who have spent decades being repressed by US-backed dictators is going to yield governments, regardless of their general policies, will insist on independence from US regional policy.
what??? The administration that insists it must follow in the exalted footsteps of it's predecessor and spread democracy is not happy because democracy is spreading?
The main reason these governments are backed by the US is to stem the tide of Islamic fundamentalism that might sweep over these countries if their governments collapse. Remember that democracy does not necessarily equal freedom. The correct analogy is the 1979 Islamic Revolution but you gave the wrong reasons. The 1979 Revolution was in its conception a democratic revolution; Khomeini drew as much from ancient Greek philosophy as he did from Shiite doctrines.
I also doubt that these countries, if their governments do fall, will diverge all that far from US policy. They need a patron and China is the only other viable option as a Great Power. If they truly break free of US patronage then what will stop a radicalized Egypt with the Muslim Brotherhood in control from attacking Israel? I thought this was an antiwar site not a prowar one; think through the policy implications before you get all excitable like Andrew Sullivan or the neocons.
This site is pro-war because of what you assume MIGHT happen? Do you work for the state department?
I think there is a high probability it could happen. Egypt's last president before Mubarak was killed due to his peace deal with Israel. The passions of the street usually tend toward the extreme and whatever future president Egypt has (assuming Mubarak falls) may be too weak to not give into Islamic fundamentalism or fervor and may target Israel.
War is imminent. There is NO government in egypt, which means the treaties with Israel are invalid! Egypt is PROOF that the US is bankrupt. The Israelis are gonna sit back and see what the US does and if they see the US will do nothing they will take matters into their own hands and attack lebanon or egypt or jordan etc. etc. Major WW3 is imminent. It's not hard to understand. If mubarek and his goons are forced out like the shah, then you will without a doubt have a anti-israel government which will force Israel to pre-emptively go to war. Saudi arabia and jordan are just a matter of time.
Spoken like the Iranian muslim that you are.
No wonder so much of the muslim world despises Iran.
"I also doubt that these countries, if their governments do fall, will diverge all that far from US policy. They need a patron" –Ah, is that how the neocon followers make excuses for the Washington-Tel Aviv axis now? "It's all right that we control these nations to muffle Arab objections to the Palestinian genocide. Because they need a patron!" And what do they need a "patron" for? To receive foreign aid, is that it? The money ends up in the pockets of the NWO crowd and their Zionist advisors, like André Azoulay, the advisor to the oppressive Maroccan king. Egypt receives more U.S. foreign aid than any other country – except Israel of course, the #1 money recipient – so that it will starve the Gaza Strip, isolate the Palestinians, and oppress the Muslim Brotherhood (NOT a radical organization, but run mostly by academics). Yes. But that aid has done nothing to improve Egypt. What would really improve their lot would be a war on the corruption that chokes competition in the marketplace in favor of the NWO's favored oligarchs. Egypt needs to provide some basic services for the poorest and get the market economy going without corruption favoring the regime-loyal oligarchs. And for the sake of all, they need to open the doors to the Gaza Strip. Shiver, neocons and other Zionists.
Do you know how the international system is structured? It is an anarchical self-help system, therefore smaller and weaker states need to bandwagon with stronger states in order to survive. Egypt has done this throughout its history, so why would it change now? Also what makes you think I am a neocon did you read the rest of my post?
Before Azoulay came to Morocco no one heard of it before..
Azoulay contributed to Morocco's economy (this is a fact not opinion)…
NWO BS is the new Antisemitisme and yes, I am Moroccan Jew…
Morocco's developments is directly related to Azoulay's work.
When are we going to have a pro-democracy revolution here in the U.S.?
Not sure about the US being disconcerted by the revolutionary wave across client regimes in the Middle East.
There is evidence to suggest that CIA and Soros WikiLeaks intelligence psy-ops are actually behind the ongoing destabilizations:
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2011_01_01_archive….
what we are seeing these days in tunisia, egypt etc is totaly normal. It goes along with de crumbling state of the (american) empire
It's the Washington-Tel Aviv empire that seeks control of the Middle East though – any regime there that keeps down objections to the Palestinian genocide is favored, while those who have provided financial or diplomatic help to the Palestinian resistance – Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan – are targeted. That is the deciding factor that shows why some dictators are supported while others are not.
It is not an American empire. Most Americans are dupes, just like most West Europeans, East Europeans, Middle Easterners, and so on. If the facts about the NWO control in the Middle East and Central Asia – from Marocco to Pakistan – were presented to the American people, and they were allowed to vote on which policies to keep, then you would see the control crumble.
But as it is most Americans don't know what is going on. And so they are easily duped when al-Qaeda bombs an embassy somewhere, duped into believing that "They hate us for our freedom."
What's happening in Egypt is a truly nationalist movement. It could easily happen here. Low voter turnout, heavy apathy, disenfranchisement, everyone consumed with the grind of daily life and making ends meet…that was Egypt before these protests, this revolution, broke out.
*This* Is Hope and Change you can believe in.
Oh! The burdens of empire!
Doesn't automatically mean there will be democracy. The Arab world is deeply dysfunctional. Even if democratically elected the governments may be extremely non-free by our standards. Demographic pressures are behind this. You have millions of bored unemployed young in these countries. The best bet? STAY OUT OF IT.
Go figure!!!
democracy means rule of the mass is that not correct, maybe just maybe living under a western liberal democratic model is not just that attractive to muslims, who maybe just maybe may be interested in a government that responds to their hopes and dreams, as opposed to the hopes and dreams of foreigners who have no idea of what it means to be a muslim…..maybe just maybe, those people are tired of the west messing with them, and maybe they've had enough, and just for your consideration, slavery in the southern states was defended as the freedom of the white man to live as he saw fit, but gave no consideration to the slaves and their freedom……so one man's freedom can very well be another man's slavery.
Chalmers Johnson predicted all of this in his books Blowback, The Sorrows Of Empire and Nemesis: The Last Days Of The American Empire.
watch him predict it more than 3 years ago…
peace:)
Maybe, just maybe, living under a misappropriated and degenerating western liberal democratic mob rule is just not that attractive to anyone who would be free.