At the moment, the Arab political scene
is in chaos and no one can predict how things will begin to look,
especially in such homogenous societies marked by socio-cultural, ethnic
and religious diversities and in a region where authoritarian regimes
have been ruling with an iron fist for decades of social violence and
totalitarianism. The region is also characterized by its central
interest in the agendas of the international community due to the
process of establishing a peaceful acceptance of Israel, an aim that has
still not been achieved.
The moment of explosion, which began
from the invasion of US to Iraq until the rise of the Arab Spring, has
actually re-distributed the power and the roles of historical supporters
and at the same time has driven the region to turmoil. While
nationalism featured as a threat to the political stability in
particular to Israel, its second face was colored in red due to the
bloodshed and dictatorship against individuals and anti-regime political
groups. However, all of those ethnic, political and religious
differences have been vanished by force in favor of that common enemy
defined by those regimes as a threat to national identity and revealed
them as strugglers and warriors; the talk here is about Iraq, Syria,
Egypt, Yemen and Libya.
The collapse of the Arab nation state,
as described by many thinkers and pundits following the Arab spring,
highlights the subject of ethnic and religious minorities and their
future within the new states being formed and whether democracy could
help really preserve their rights. Consider the Kurds, Shia, Doreuse,
Christians, Amazigh and other ethnic or religious groups who suffered
under the nationalism ideology. Will the Arab revolution satisfy their
demands and rights? Or should we experience the same scenario of
Yugoslavia after the World War II that caused Yugoslavia to split into
seven small states following the bloodiest fighting In Europe. Avoiding
cynical views, I would say that the task is very complicated and the
violent fighting and wars that are still happening in Syria and Iraq
highlight the worst scenario. Sudan’s split into North and South Sudan
after deadly civil wars is an example.
Revolution as a process of changing the
political order and its social and economic proxy is always a historic
crossroad that affects the lives of people and states, as well as the
nations in connection. This is why the interveners in defining the
future image of peoples in revolution could be as numerous as the number
of beneficiaries of the old systems. In the case of Syria, which has
turned tragically into a bloody battlefield only when people had woke up
and started protesting peacefully against dictatorship for the sake of
liberty and democracy. Unfortunately, democracy and freedom here is not
compatible with the strategic purposes of the historic allies. Russia is
playing an important role in the Syrian war, along with its Iran and
Hizb Allah movement, so as to maintain the regime of Allassad from
collapsing. Whereas in the other side, the US and Israel along with
their Arabian allies are fighting to secure Israel and dwarfing the
expansion of Iran in the region.
I believe in freedom and democracy
efficiency and in non-violent struggle toward the realization of those
values. This is why dictatorships always fear from the inner peaceful
revolutions and prefer indeed dealing with an armed enemy, in the sense
that the tactics of non-violent protests are more effective than those
of the armed groups. But who will believe in these theoretical and
abstract hallucinations especially in these days of extreme violence and
hatred? Only those human and rational individuals and groups will do
that. The very remarkable example is a group of Syrians who formed a
non-violent movement trying to work on the other side of war, such as
preserving children rights to food and study, and lately they published
their numeric activity map along the country.
We must, indeed, extract lessons from
history and revolutions all over the world, because there is always
something in common and maybe the Arab revolution learned more from
ancient experiences, though there are obvious differences in political
backgrounds. The events happening recently in Egypt, the army coup
against the brotherhood government democratically voted by people,
highlights again the unwillingness of the army institution and their
allies to leave people design their future for better wellbeing
development. Whether the brotherhood had breached the democratic
mechanisms or not, but at least it is the duty of the civil
anti-government to reveal that and fight with the legal tools against
the amplifying of the state.
Democratization of the Arab world after
the post-revolutionary period needs hard work not only from the
political parties but also from the civil community whom is the first
concerned and the most benefited. However, obstacles still exist -and
always actually- against the changing of the well protected political
order. The so-called, “Opposite revolution” revealed the protesters as a
destroyers of the social and economic order and tried fueling the
sedition between religious and ethnic groups so that to revive the
sectarian conflict and block the path to success of the revolution.
I do agree that revolution is not
panacea as well as democracy is, but they are of extreme importance in
societies as we live in. What we need now in this transitional period is
a national agreement to collaborate all together between all political
activists to form a national unity government, avoiding all political
sensitiveness and building new societies of strong institutions,
liberties and human rights.
Edited by Allison Kraemer
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Morocco World News’ editorial policy
No comments :
Post a Comment