Arab Spring overplayed & underestimated

This week, as I made my way to the region, I've been following the dramatic downturn of democratic governance in Egypt. A few initial thoughts before I hear more informed  perspectives:

PEOPLE POWER

While President Morsi's Mubarak-esque combination of autocratic proclivities and astounding detachment from reality are deeply alarming, the Egyptian people are again rising up in protest. So, the biggest beneficiary and hallmark of the "Arab Spring" is proving to be More Of the Same, but the democratic spirit of the movement -- the citizens themselves -- is unabated. They still expect functional, legitimate democracy, whether from Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood or someone else. And anyway, few reputable analysts were banking on Morsi's prospects as a democratic visionary. But elections do have consequences, especially when they're held too early.

THERE IS ANOTHER

We need to excise Morsi as the face of the Arab Spring, lest his blowout come to symbolize the whole Arab Spring. If Egypt's experiment fails, this by itself does not prove the Arab Spring was a ruse or a mirage -- as some of my fellow American observers have been blogging in recent days. Owing to its size, intellectual history and strategic importance, Egypt easily took first place as the symbol of the Arab Spring. Egypt may still prove to be the big test of this sweeping movement, yet other countries are also processing their own versions. 

Tunisia, where the democratic tide started last year, is showing the kind of measured progress that Western news anchors take for granted, and thus makes for few headlines. Despite continued uncertainty, including the recent Benghazi attack that killed four Americans including the U.S. Ambassador, Libyans remain optimistic and supportive of their new democratic-trending government. 

In Bahrain, last year's protests and the ensuing crackdown were largely limited in time and scope. The grievances remain and will need to be addressed one way or another, but this is not the garden-variety Arab Spring, especially since Bahrain is sandwiched between Iran and Saudi Arabia -- two of the least democratic regimes in the region. 

Syria's Assad regime is holding fast, for now, amid popular unrest and armed rebellion. Much will depend on Bashar Assad's individual mindset: He could hold out until the end, leave town just after his kids open their Christmas presents, or start using chemical weapons against his own citizens. That third option could provide a casus belli for U.S.-NATO intervention, which will horribly escalate the violence but may also end the dictatorship and keep Iran out of the post-Assad politics.

THE KINGMAKERS

The role of non-Arab states within the Middle East will also help determine the direction of political change in the region. Iran's support for Assad and its opportunistic use of Morsi's election in Egypt have been a negative influence on the Arab Spring, and should inspire greater resolve by reformers rather than a Western retreat. Turkey, once the moderate Muslim referee, needs to regain its composure and recapture its influence with Egypt and Syria in particular. Its recent military counter-attacks on Syria, its second fiddle at Morsi's Gaza cease-fire negotiations and the angry posturing against Israel are keeping the Islamist government from realizing its potential as mediator and guarantor among its neighbors.

The Arab Spring is definitely incomplete, even dangerous in spots. But this is the Middle East, after all. And the story remains unfinished and -- in too many cases -- untold. Instead of dismissing the significance or permanence of the democratic moment, Westerners should be joining with Arabs and others to see where and why the Arab Spring is faltering, and what we can do together to facilitate real, measurable and even lasting results.

The Arab counter-revolution... finally

For better or worse, the other shoe has finally dropped in the Arab world. It only took a half-century.

So far, the regimes that have fallen at the hands of the new Mideast phenomenon known as "Arab Spring" all originated as part of decolonization that began in the late-1940s and continued through the 1960s. The despots being overthrown this season have largely profited from a legacy of defiance against the West, and new claimants to that title have challenged their rule. So far, no Arab monarchy has fallen or faced a serious existential challenge from the current movement for change.

From Arab Spring to Persian Summer?

Democracy breaks out across the Arab lands, and Palestinians take it out on Israel. Iran supports democracy for its enemies, dictatorship for its allies. Israelis hunker down.

Palestinians seem to be in an earlier stage of statism than their fellow Arabs in Tunisia, Yemen, Libya, or even Syria. Their resentment and their yearning for freedom can still be channeled against Israel at least as much as against their own leaders. As Syrians finally turn against the Assad regime, resident Palestinians have advanced the ruler's agenda by defying the fortified Israeli border. In the West Bank and Gaza, hard-core demonstrations against Israel have similarly spared Fatah and Hamas the worst kind of insurrection being witnessed around the Middle East. Palestinians certainly have grievances against Israel, but so did the Syrians and Egyptians who have risked their lives to overthrow their own leaders. For now, their adaptation of the Arab Spring is serving to bolster their established elites. 

Iran continues to support Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as Assad in Syria -- while hailing the fall of Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, who was no friend of the Islamic Revolution. Also, the Islamic Republic continues to crack down on the innate dissent within Iranian society, lest the Arab Spring turn to Persian Summer.

Israel, of course, has little influence over the sweeping changes across its neighborhood. While championing democracy as a goal for the region, Israelis are fearful of radical movements that may use the resulting vacuum to take power in on or more of these nations. They prefer the devil they know... The fact that the Israeli government -- and consequently the Israeli public -- seems increasingly disinterested in negotiating with Palestinians certainly does little to keep the pragmatic Palestinians from being overruled at home. This is one bet Iran may be winning.

Libya can save U.S. in Mideast

Rather than compounding the military campaigns to which President Bush originally committed us a decade ago, the intervention in Libya can become part of a broader transformation that ultimately stabilizes the region, restoring and even breaking new ground in the credibility and legitimacy of U.S. influence and power in the Middle East.

Libya seems to be a perfect fit for U.S. intervention. Despite the Bush administration's rapprochement with Libya, unlike Mubarak in Egypt, Muammar Qaddafi is hardly seen as Washington's ally, so there's little of that imperialist baggage or angst. The United States is acting under a genuine coalition, including participation of Arab forces. The Arab League, and China and Russia, have stepped back from their original assent to the Libya intervention, but they were fully aware that the UN Security Council resolution was authorizing more than a simple "no fly zone".

The United States was too involved in Mubarak's fortunes to intervene in Egypt, and Bahrain is home to our Fifth Fleet and it's Arabia's new Achilles' Heel. Qaddafi has established himself as the quintessential isolated fanatic dictator, and not without merit. Also, enabling the rebel tribes to remove him may open opportunities for further mayhem, but in reality Al Qaeda has failed to manifest itself in any of the Mideast turmoil, including in Libya where Qaddafi and other critics of international intervention have revived Osam bin Laden as the poster child for status quo tyranny.

Downplaying violence of Libya's rebels helps no one

The Libyan rebellion could end today, if Muammar Qaddafi decides to take some deal from the international community and the forces opposing him, or it could continue for some time. What distinguishes Libya from the other countries being overtaken by popular frustration and protests is that Qaddafi's opposition is armed, organized, and dangerous.

Non-violent protest is a noble undertaking, and where it inspires or succeeds, all the better. In Libya's case, tribal allegiances have been suppressed for 40-plus years, the regime has been especially brutal, and Qaddafi unleashed his wrath and fury early in the peaceful phase of demonstrations. The American Revolution was certainly violent, and it had to be, though the British oppression that provoked it was mostly economic and political rather than physical. Non-violence is not a prerequisite for legitimacy.

The outcome is far from certain, even if the rebels succeed. Will there be anything resembling a democracy that respects minority rights? There seems to be no military guarantor of security and stability, as has so far emerged in Egypt. Although many nations, including recently the United States, have traded with Qaddafi's Libya and supplied weapons, the West cannot be considered his sponsor in any substantive sense. His downfall need not be a rebuke against Washington, and NATO, the European Union and the United Nations Security Council seem to be mostly on the same page.

Aside from possibly establishing a limited "no fly zone", we need to give the rebels some space to wage their own battle for Tripoli. Whatever Libyan government results will likely be no more lethal than Qaddafi has been over the years, and there will probably be more opportunity for collective leadership and transparency.

Overall, the press coverage and commentary have downplayed the two-way violence in Libya, exception for concerns that weaponry might find its way into the hands of terrorists (imagine that!). Discounting the rebels' use of force does a disservice to the Tunisian and Egyptian transformations still underway, and to the murmurings of change elsewhere in the region.

There is no shame in a violent uprising, especially if it is justified and moreso if it is objective reality. The price of liberty is not just martyrdom, it can also be violent combat and ruthless aggression against a tyrant. It would be valuable for a Western audience to be reminded of this once in a while.

Mideast myths die hard, but when they do...

The USSR and its satellite states were all premised upon a common ideological myth and an interlocking security framework, so when Poland pushed back and the Berlin Wall fell, there was no stopping it. Each Mideast state has its own form of monarchy, Ba'athist or theocratic underpinning, and military coordination has been shoddy since… forever. So it won't be so easy, though some countries are already far more open economically and culturally than anything that existed behind the Iron Curtain.

Many of the region's leaders have used fears of Israeli or imperialist threats to maintain their regimes. Their opponents have used the same tools to try to discredit them and the corrupt status quo. Recent developments in Tunisia and Egypt have been relatively free of such paranoia and thought control, or at least the people have broken through it. One of the Egyptian military's first acts since shedding its golden Mask of Mubarak was to reaffirm the peace treaty with Israel.

Arab Putin? Or real Mideast democracy?

Before stepping aside, a President abruptly annoints a veteran intelligence officer as his transitional successor. Where have I heard this before? Yes, I remember now:  Around 6 a.m. on New Year's Eve, the last day of 1999, I was jolted out of bed by news that Boris Yeltsin had thrown in the towel on what might have become 11 post-Soviet time zones of democratic evolution.

After centuries of feudalism and decades of Communism, Russia had a shot at pluralistic democracy. Now that corporatist, ideology-free technocracy has taken hold, there's little chance that human rights and free markets will be instituted for the next few generations. If the Middle East is to move forward and begin reclaiming its heritage as a crossroads and incubator of civilization, it will need more than failed states, oil platforms, and duty-free hubs.

By trying to stop Egypt's revolution halfway, through an "orderly" transition guided by Hosni Mubarak's own loyalists, we now risk losing democracy where it matters most. There are no second chances, no do-overs, no new post-War shake-ups to anticipate.

Egyptians have seized an opportunity to set a new course. It will not be easy, nor its success assured. But half-measures run the risk of squandering a once-in-a-century chance, not only for Egypt but for the entire Middle East. The Cold War and de-colonization ended one and two generations ago, respectively. The house that Nasser built back in the 1950s and '60s can either fall entirely or merely change owners. 

Whose "Twitter revolution" is this?

There are limits to advertising. Timothy Hutton should have known better than trivializing the sacrifice, aspirations and beauty of Tibetans just to promote "Groupon.com" (which itself sounds like a cause of mad cow disease) during the Superbowl. Last week's outrage was Kenneth Cole trumpeting its disregard for democratic struggle and suffering in Egypt. #TwitterFail. Hopefully, Hutton will be subject to suitable opprobrium from the Hollywood set. There's nothing illegal about either ad campaign, but don't expect me to be a customer in this century.

Has our TV-addicted/Facebook-captive/hashtag-based multi-tasking lifestyle so removed us from reality, that it's reasonable for marketing experts to treat us all like star-struck adolescents? Are politicians also reading us correctly? Perhaps the past week's pair of offensive ads will provoke us to evolve beyond the superficial, point-and-click infancy of our cyber-topia.

Also clear from the past few weeks, is that Tunisia and Egypt have not fit the model of "Twitter revolution", or Facebook, or any "social media" other than word of mouth and spontaneous outrage. However, these new media have allowed millions worldwide to follow and support the emergence of democracy on the ground. It is helping to sensitize us and break through our WiFi- and BlueTooth-inspired haze. What we read on our feed can have a deeper meaning, and help us match names to faces, and real people with real consequences.

We've been slapped twice across the face, once by Kenneth Cole and once by Timothy Hutton. Thanks, guys, we needed that.

Mubarak can stay, but only in disgrace

For many years, Hosni Mubarak has sold himself to the West and the Israelis -- and the Egyptian people -- as a force of stability and moderation.Since Tuesday, he can no longer make this claim with even a veneer of credibility, nor present himself as a hero to his fellow Egyptians. His violent crackdown against peaceful and overwhelmingly anti-Mubarak protesters moves him from tolerable autocrat to embarrasing pariah.

This may sound heartless, but many countries find themselves allied with dictators, especially in regions with few if any democratic governments. It's a Devil's deal -- keep your repressive enforcement tactics below the radar, make some pretense of representative government, and we'll focus on your positive attributes. 

A line is crossed when a leader openly overstays even his own pretext for power. In Tunisia, the revolt happened too quickly for most nations to renounce then-President Ben Ali. In the case of countries like Cote d'Ivoire, Zimbabwe and Belarus, we don't need their friendship enough to keep looking the other way when that line is crossed. Because of Mubarak's role in sustaining bilateral peace with Israel and promoting broader Mideast efforts -- and the inextricable billions in U.S. assistance -- it will not be so easy to break with Egypt and our leverage over him is limited. But neither can we keep looking the other way. The genie is out of the bottle.

Mubarak has lost the confidence of his own people, and he is willing to attack and impoverish them. He is willing to sack the Egyptian Museum's 5,000 years' worth of Egyptian cultural heritage. He is willing to take Egypt down with him. Unless he loses the support of his own military sponsors or gives up on his own, Mubarak will probably get to stay in power, but without the aura of domestic legitimacy and international respectability.

Egypt, Tunisia, and shifting options for Israel

Unlike Iran, Egypt's revolution is not primarily a revolt against foreign domination. The next Egyptian government will have no reason to pick a real fight with Israel. The United States will not cut off vital cash assistance to Egypt, since most of the funds constitute a perpetual offset for Egypt sticking its neck out in the Arab world to make peace with Israel. Israel will not violate the terms of the peace treaty.

One lasting lesson of Camp David may be that Israelis could never get such an agreement with whatever government replaces Mubarak, but the treaty they have will be honored by Egypt and guaranteed by outside powers -- so lock in your terms now, while you still can.

Whether from a sense of necessity or opportunity, the Israeli Government may see this as the right moment to reassess its approach to negotiations with the Palestinians. Until this week, the assumption of the right-leaning coalition and its right-leaning voters has been that time is on their side. However unrealistic that may have been in the long run, now the short run is rapidly catching up with them.

This week it's Tunisia, but remember Zimbabwe?

Tunisia is in the middle of a stunning, popular revolution, and democracy advocates are pushing for Egypt to be next. The leader of Cote d'Ivoire refuses to cede power following his electoral defeat. South Sudan is on the verge of independence and possibly further violence.

One man has special reason to be pleased with this turn of events: Robert Mugabe, the onetime revolutionary turned corrupt despot, who has overstayed his tenure as President of Zimbabwe. Remember him? I had almost forgotten about him. Last autumn, all eyes were on Zimbabwe, where Mugabe was violating the terms of his power-sharing arrangement with the winners of the last election. He is no longer the Most Despised African Leader, and Zimbabwe is not even in the news.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy admitted this week that he was caught off guard by the democratic fervor in Tunisia, a former French colony. So were we all. Every now and then, there are mass demonstrations throughout Africa and the Middle East, and Western leaders cannot afford to risk security and economic stability on the chance that one freedom movement might succeed. But we do love to celebrate their success, after the fact.

Will nations commit more funds to developing civil society internationally, as a result of Tunisia's early success, the challenges of Cote d'Ivoire and Zimbabwe, or the near-totalitarian stasis in Egypt? Will they make democracy and human freedom true priorities of their foreign policy? What put Tunisia over the top was its own population and its own civil society, not some organized strategy of the international community.

Tunisia, Sudan, Cote d'Ivoire: Opportunities for Africa

Change is sweeping across Africa this month, from Tunisia in the north to Sudan a little south, to sub-Saharan Cote d'Ivoire.

None of these unfolding and uncertain situations is linked. But their cumulative impact of Arab, Middle East and African politics is significant. The public is becoming more hopeful and confident, while dictators are torn between giving in to popular demands and locking down further. Did the regime in Tunisia fail to open up in time, or was the response to protestors too soft?

Even though these events are influencing the perspectives of the rulers and the governed across the region, every country has its own specific circumstances and considerations.

In Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak has carefully quashed the secular opposition, so the only viable alternative to his party is the Muslim Brotherhood. This makes Mubarak the bulwark against extremists, but it also makes it more likely that any post-Mubarak government might be run by radical Muslims. And Mubarak has doubled down by promoting his son to be his successor.

Politically, Sudan is uncharted territory. Southern Sudan's referendum could lead to the first split of an African since... Eritrea? It won't be pretty, but it also involves a genocidal dictator, so there's another blow for "democracy" or self-determination, if the south succeeds.

Cote d'Ivoire was coming out from under civil war and some latter-day French imperialism, then its president decided to ignore the results of an election that would have ended his tenure. Because of the turmoil in Sudan and a swath of failed states in central Africa, the African Union and Western powers are already pressuring President Gbagbo to step down before the road to stability is washed away in a spiral of violence and poverty.

Word is, President Obama plans to focus more on foreign policy and on Africa specifically this year. Just the holding of the Sudan referendum was a tribute to U.S. diplomacy, so the timing couldn't be better. Let's hope the results measure up.

Tunisia and democracy - stay tuned...

Events in Tunisia are unfolding by the minute. From President Ben Ali's pledge to retire in a few years, to the army's reported demand that he step down now, and all the demonstrations and violence in between, Tunisia still has an opportunity to move forward.

Twenty years ago, Tunisia seemed like the next best hope for Arab democracy. Morocco has produced slow progress without sacrificing stability, while Algeria has failed. Tunisia was still moving in the right direction, opening up slowly enough to develop strong institutions of civil society without leaving a vacuum to be filled by religious or ideological extremists. Unlike Algeria, it was spared the worst traumas of decolonization and retains a sophisticated global outlook.

Tunisian society and culture are predisposed to the continuation of civilian rule, and to an upgrading of inclusive, participatory government. Tunisia is not a failed state, and it need not become one. Its fate has not yet been sealed. The next several hours and few days will largely determine its future: Will the President either regain control of the situation or leave office? Will the military commit itself to safeguarding a democratic outcome? Will the Arab, Islamic, African and European powers act responsibly and in coordination?

The results in Tunisia will have ramifications for the Maghreb, as well as the rest of the Arab world. In the long run, a more vibrant Tunisia can be a major player in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, fighting terrorism and extremism, and transforming the Middle East into a democratic region. The stakes are high, because the possibilities are so great.