You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Africa North
The greed of the Arab regimes has led to the revolt
2011-02-01
[Ennahar] If the Iraqis got rid of Saddam Hussein in favor of an American invasion,
Is that what happened? Somehow I remember it differently.
other Arab people take their destiny in hand against regimes accused of using their absolute power to manage the state as their personal property, say analysts.

Bourhane Ghalioun, director of the Center for Arabic Studies at the Sorbonne in Gay Paree, noted the appearance of a "corrupt elite, backed by Western countries." "His only motivation was the accumulation of wealth, while their predecessors showed a willingness to change the lives of poor people," he said.
Huh? Clearly, I've lived in a different universe.
Here, try these rose-tinted glasses...
"In addition, leaders who cling for over 30 years in power want their offspring to succeed them. It is a provocation to the people," said the professor of political sociology of Syrian origin.

The fall of Tunisian President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali after 23 years in power, and unprecedented challenge confronting geriatric President Hosni Mubarak is the sign of "failure of a model that combined a wild opening of the market with medieval despotism, "says he.

The democratic index established by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) in 2010 shows that "the Middle East and North Africa is the most repressive region in the world as 20 countries, 16 can be characterized as authoritarian."
Let's see: Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan -- but they're still at war... Turkey, perhaps?
Iraq, Leb, the Paleostinian Authority and Israel are considered "hybrid regimes", and all the other as authoritarian governments. All Arab countries arrive in the second half of the global picture, with 167 countries.
Interesting choices. But he does mention Israel and Iraq.
For Ghassan Salamé, professor of political science in Gay Paree, if the Arab world is familiar with tyranny since decolonization, there was a calamitous evolution over the past 30 years.

"Bourguiba and Boumedienne led an austere life and did not regard the state as their property," he says.
Perhaps that was a North African thing. The same cannot be said about Nasser, Arafat, Hafez al-Assad, Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein and his forgotten predecessor...
The father of the independence of Tunisia, Habib Bourguiba, has governed for 30 years from 1957 and Houari Boumediene has ruled Algeria from 1965 to 1978.

According to the expert of the Arab world, "it is from the 1970s that these regimes have begun to throw themselves in neo-liberalism to divert funds and establish corrupt governance by taking over whole sections of the economy".
Neo-liberalism? That's a fancy term.
The revolt is born of the refusal to see a minority in power richer while the majority live in poverty, and confiscation of speech.

"Arab societies were ready to explode for years, and it was by chance that the spark has occurred in Tunisia and the fire spread to Egypt," said Paul Salem, director of the Carnegie Center of Middle East based in Beirut.

"What is remarkable about these riots is that the slogans that have forced thousands of people to act in Egypt and Tunisia are the human rights
... which are not the same thing as individual rights, mind you...
 and those of citizen, social democracy and economic justice. It's a democratic and non-ideological program," he underlines.

While it is difficult to assess the wealth of these leaders for years have appeared dynastic republics. Bashar "Pencilneck" al-Assad
... hereditary dictator of Syria ...
 replaced his father who died in 2000, Hosni Mubarak wishes to hand over power to his son Gamal, and Libyan leader Muammar Qadaffy has the same ambition.

"These last 30 years, the only real opposition to authoritarian regimes was the Islamic movement, but in fact, movements in Egypt and Tunisia have been successful in a few weeks what the Islamic parties have failed to do for decades," says M. Salem.

"This proves that democracy has a current resonance stronger than Islamism, Arab nationalism or leftist ideas," he said.
Posted by:Fred

#14  ...is that the people get the government and the society the majority wants.

People get the government they tolerate.

. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed - Declaration of Independence.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2011-02-01 22:51  

#13  I dunno. When people think of the benighted finally getting themselves some of that good democracy, they think it means the lucky country will become like, maybe, Long Island.
What it means, if it works, is that the people get the government and the society the majority wants.
The question is...what does the majority want in Egypt? Sharia? The Bill of Rights? Peace with Israel?
Posted by: Richard Aubrey   2011-02-01 22:10  

#12  ..so much as the corruption and a culture that seems to despise science.

That does not appear to be a monopoly of Arab ruling castes.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2011-02-01 22:02  

#11  Its not the greed of the Arab regimes so much as the corruption and a culture that seems to despise science.
Posted by: rjschwarz   2011-02-01 21:03  

#10  ...or the Red Ring of Death too.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2011-02-01 19:38  

#9  All the accomplishment you guys mention are great for foreigners, not so much for Egyptians.

I'm not as worried about the Muslim Brotherhood as many other 'burgers, since alot of the "conflict" with Mubarak is like professional wrestling. I don't think the MB will do well without Mubarak's secret games.

As for Bill Gates: Don't be so hard on him. How many 'burgers would know the joys of the "Blue Screen of Death" if it wasn't for his software? :p
Posted by: Frozen Al   2011-02-01 17:08  

#8  The main source of the Egyptian protests are the failure of the Egyptian economy to produce jobs for the huge cohort of young men of combat age. There would be far fewer in the street if they were all busy making money. That's the secret the Chinese learned. Their problem will come when their bubble bursts and their young men can't find either jobs or brides.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2011-02-01 16:35  

#7  Unlike Bill Gates, who has changed the world, what has Mubarak done?

Managed to keep Egypt from becoming another Iran for 30 years.
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2011-02-01 15:51  

#6  #5 - your points are excellent. Government by consent of the governed and Islam/Shariah are not compatible until proven otherwise. The same criticisms used against Mubarak can be used against the mad Mullahs of Iran.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2011-02-01 15:46  

#5  Unlike Bill Gates, who has changed the world, what has Mubarak done?

Oh, I dunno. Kept Egypt from making war on Israel? (Muslim Brotherhood can't tell you how many Egyptians are alive today because of that. Not to mention how many Israelis.) Kept Hamas from getting all the weapons they want? (How many Palistinians would have died? Not to mention how many Israelis.) Survived numerous assassination attempts? Kept the oil flowing through the Suez Canal? For 30 years? So that's about a billion a year.

So he wasn't perfect. His successor won't be either. You want democracy? I think that's a pretty tall order in a Muslim country. As far as corruption goes, I think we have enough in this country so we don't have to go looking for it in Egypt.

Sorry for the rant. I'm just not all that crazy about Bill Gates.
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305   2011-02-01 15:04  

#4  Mubarak may be a special case. Here is an article from the Telegraph detailing the wealth his family has accumulated while President of Egypt.

He, his wife and his children are worth 20 billion pounds ($32 billion at current rates). That's Bill Gates type money. He is originally from a small village in the Nile Delta. He is a career officer in the Air Force. His wife is a half-English woman from south Wales. (i.e. almost all his money has come since he became Air Marshall in 1973).

Unlike Bill Gates, who has changed the world, what has Mubarak done? You can expect that the vast majority of his money was siphoned off from government contracts or are bribes from businessmen. This vast graft is one of the main causes of the Egyptian protests.
Posted by: Frozen Al   2011-02-01 13:18  

#3  The number of elite lackeys and their ostentatious displays were, I think a significant factor in the Tunisian and Egyptian situation. So was the fact that the suppression was clumsy rather than efficient.

BTW, this article attempts to smear the west by concocting a term 'neoliberalism' to mean corruption of society.

The article also attempts to downplay the distance between Israel and the Arab world by lumping the ntimidated by a militia Lebanon govt
and the Paleo 'Abbas hanging around without a mandate' govt with Israel's parliamentary democracy.





Posted by: Lord Garth   2011-02-01 09:14  

#2  The political elites in the west have looted far more than the political elites in the middle east.

It's just that we in the west are more productive, and so it shows less. Now the ability to borrow more debt has run out, we might see regime change in the west.

Hopefully away from the rent-seeking under and upper classes.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2011-02-01 08:38  

#1  Has Jimmy Carter taken credit yet, for the "human rights" revolts?

With a 30-year time delay, of course.
Posted by: Bobby   2011-02-01 06:24  

00:00