People's Democracy

Editorial

Indeed, History Is In the Making

 In The Middle East

AS we go to press, the `march of a million’ has engulfed the Tahrir (liberation) Square in Cairo.  The virtual sea of humanity defying curfew and marching without being intimidated by the army tanks and soldiers standing by, is demanding the ouster of the three-decade long regime of Hosni Mubarak and democratic reforms with the hope of creating better livelihood conditions for the people.  

Even as Mubarak swore in a new cabinet in order to defuse the crisis and convey that he is willing for some cosmetic reforms, the statement issued by the army must have come as a big blow to his efforts to continue to stay on in power.  The statement said: “The armed forces will not resort to use of force against our great people.  Your armed forces, who are aware of the legitimacy of your demand are keen to assume their responsibility in protecting the nation and the citizens, affirms that freedom of expression through peaceful means is guaranteed to everybody”.  It warned that it will not allow outlaws to loot, attack and terrorise citizens, thus, preventing any agent provocateur from creating anarchy which could well be used by the regime to rob the legitimacy of the popular uprising.  Irrespective of how these developments will finally unfold, it is clear that a very major transformation process is underway. 

These momentous developments in Egypt come in the background of the popular upsurge in Tunisia which ousted its president, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, who remained in power for 23 years heading an authoritarian regime.  The demonstration and riots began over issues of unemployment, food inflation, corruption, curtailment of democratic rights and poverty.  The impact of this `jasmine revolution’ spread infectiously across other countries in the Middle East.  WikiLeaks revelations showed the opulence of the ruling elite in stark contrast to the manner  in which the vast majority of the people suffered leading to a self-immolation by a youth that triggered the uprising. 

In Yemen, thousands of students and opposition activists ignited a continuous protest demanding an end to the authoritarian rule of Ali Abdullah Saleh.  Saleh was president of North Yemen since 1978, became president of unified Yemen since 1990 and became president of the re-unified Yemen in 1999.

In Jordan, where executive power lies with the King, the Hashemite dynasty has been ruling for over ninety years.  The people’s protest in January 2011, under the slogan of `bread and freedom’, highlighted growing inequalities and growing nepotism.  In order to salvage the situation and contain popular discontent, the King has dismissed the government and reconstituted a new one as we go to press.

Similar protest actions are also being reported from other Middle East countries like Morocco, Algeria etc.  The Arab Television channel, Aljazeera, battling many a ban and arrest of its correspondents provided a spellbinding live telecast of these protests. 

Apart from being subjected to authoritarian rule for decades, the people of these countries have suffered severely during the last two years of the global economic crisis. Egypt and Jordan have been touted as darlings of economic reforms by the IMF and the World Bank and are deeply integrated with the global economy.  The global financial crisis had a devastating impact as three million in Egypt and  half a million in Jordan are directly employed in this sector.  Egypt’s revenues from the Suez canal, tourism and exports took a deep hit leading to a sharp decline in the GDP growth.  Youth unemployment which was already 34 per cent in 2005 sharply increased.  Jordan’s economic growth fell from 7.9 to 2.8 per cent between 2008 and 2009.  The impact of these hardships is the immediate backdrop for these popular protests. 

Clearly, the `new world order’ that the USA sought to create post-Cold War is crumbling.  More importantly, the USA’s capacity to determine world events appears to have weakened considerably.  Imperialism, in the past, had intervened unscrupulously in many countries, particularly in the Middle East, to safeguard its strategic global interests.  The overthrow of Mossadegh by a CIA-led coup in Iran after it nationalised oil (1953), the Anglo French  invasion of Egypt after Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal (1956 ) and the installation of pro-US regimes permitted imperialism to safeguard its three basic concerns – holding the reins  of control over the oil resources; control of the Suez canal so crucial for the movement of western cargo and US military movements; and cementing Israel’s pre-imminent military superiority in the region.  Egypt was to serve as the lynchpin for this strategy to succeed.  In return, since the 1978 Camp David Accord, Egypt received over $ 35 billion of military aid, the largest after Israel. It receives on an average $ 2 billion a year as `other’ aid. 

It is, therefore, not surprising that the self-declared protector of human rights, democracy and human values, the USA is very cautious in its reactions.  Tunisia, Yemen and Jordan – all have pro-US regimes but they are a different kettle of fish from Egypt. On January 30, the New York Times reported   that president Obama, “at least for now” is talking short of calling for Mubarak’s resignation. However, as is by now familiar to the world, he has spoken of  the `universal rights’ of the Egyptian and people of Middle East etc etc without exerting either pressure or influence to ensure this. 

While not openly articulating a regime change in Egypt, the USA is preparing to retain its strategic control through various alternatives.  Clearly, the Islamist scarecrow of projecting a Muslim Brotherhood takeover has not worked.  Mubarak’s appointment of his long-serving Intelligence Head, Omar Suleiman as vice president, ostensibly to neutralise the army and his announcement of not contesting next elections are not seen as any meaningful reform by the people.  Now all eyes are turned on the former IAEA chief, El Baradei, who returned to Egypt after a long stint abroad, heading what he calls the National Association for Change.  Needless to add, USA would try to use him as it did with IAEA under his leadership for its Iraq military operations, leading to occupation.

For generations, the peoples of the Arab countries, despite their longstanding sacrifices and struggles, have been repeatedly let down on previous occasions, due to a variety of factors including the opportunism of its leadership and the blandishments of imperialism, from achieving a radical shift in their countries.  There is a legitimate fear that the current popular upsurges may eventually end up this way. 

One way to ensure that this popular upsurge does not lead to a relapse of a new type of an authoritarian Islamic regime was articulated by a progressive Tunisian Party, Ettajdid, represented in the new government, which said, “We must protect the revolution but we must also protect our gains in women’s rights and secularism”. 

Democracy, highlighting gender equality and secularism, can be the only firm foundation upon which a new egalitarian society can be built. The hitherto imperialist vision of foisting pro-US dictatorial regimes which paved the way through the decimation of any genuine democratic opposition to the rise of fundamentalist Islamic regimes can be foiled only through the establishment of such a democratic dispensation.  The memory of the ouster of  Mossadegh and the installation of the Shah by the USA leading eventually to the emergence of the Islamic revolution in Iran, continues to remain  a foreboding  shadow on the Middle East. 

We wish the people of the Arab world all success in their efforts to create a new history for the region.   

(February 1, 2010)