Middle East: Independence and Dependency

 Middle East: Independence and Dependency

 Wednesday 15 June 2011, by Tariq Ramadan

Some call it the “Arab Spring”, others, the “Arab Revolutions”; still others, more cautious, use the neutral term “Arab uprisings”. It remains difficult to ascertain, and to assess, what has happened and is actually happening in the Middle East. An irreversible shift is clearly underway but no one is able to pinpoint exactly what is going on in these mass protests or to predict their ultimate outcome.

There is every reason for hope and optimism in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), and around the world. The Arab populations are on the march towards freedom, dignity, justice and democracy. They are determined to regain their historical political independence and have set their sights on modernity and democracy. “History is unfolding,” says American president Barack Obama. Hundreds of political analysts have predicted a “happier future.” This is good news; the Arab world is awakening.

We must first salute the courage and the determination of the people of Tunisia and Egypt who have been the first to challenge the dictators and their corrupt regimes. The dictators have fled; the way towards true and transparent democracy is now open. It is now time to implement the basic and immutable principles: rule of law, equal citizenship, universal suffrage, accountability and the separation of powers. Domestic debates have begun in both Tunisia and Egypt over the content of their respective constitutions, political parties, elections, etc. Never before, over the last century at least, has such positive social and political energy been so powerfully felt. We are witnessing what may well be the birth of true political independence, even though everything still remains fragile and uncertain.

We should be guardedly optimistic. These historical changes are not happening in a vacuum; they cannot be isolated from either economic realities or the geostrategic environment. The economic situation of both countries is serious; there can be no true democratic process without economic stability. But when we analyze events in the light of Western—and especially American and European—strategy, we are tempted to revise, or at east to suspend, our judgment. Political independence can only be achieved with economic reforms that lead not only to stability but also to economic independence.

However, we appear to be heading in the opposite direction: the new US and European involvement in MENA—putting aside decades of support for and complicity with the two dictatorships—will deepen Tunisia and Egypt's economic dependency. Before emerging as democracies, these two countries are to be viewed as markets with great profit potential. This has always been the case, but the role of the World Bank and the IMF in the post-revolutionary era is to set up a structure of ideological and economic dependency beneath a veneer of democratic freedoms. For the poor countries of the Global South, the adjective “liberal” does not mean the same thing as it does in the West, whether to describe “democracy” or “the economy”: the former might come close to “liberty,” but the latter implies inevitable subjugation.

Are we witnessing unfinished political revolutions wedded to economic regression? Will the countries involved end up as “controlled” democracies? Or have they experienced uncompleted revolutions? These questions are reinforced when we analyze the situation in the region. The so-called international community praises Tunisia and Egypt, while the oppressed populations of Syria, Yemen and Bahrain seem almost forgotten. How are we to explain why the Libyan opposition (including so many new leaders who were previously among the strongest supporters of the dictator Kaddafi) is receiving such unconditional assistance in removing the regime, as NATO forces daily bomb Tripoli? The mass protests and the blood being shed by the newly re-categorized Arabs do not have the same quality and value. Tunisia and Egypt, even with apparent democratic procedures in place, remain under economic and military control. Libyan oil resources are so vital that supporting a divided and nebulous opposition is a risk worth taking, even at the cost of breaking up the country. It appears that Syria, Bahrain and to a certain extent Yemen are so critical in geostrategic terms that their governments are free to kill civilians and unarmed protesters (three months passed before the UN started thinking of adopting a very timid resolution against the Syrian government). Not only is media coverage different (from CNN to al-Jazeera); political language proves quite elastic when it comes to changing regimes and advocating democracy.

The regional economic and geostrategic stakes are very high. New forms of dependency are being established and must be taken into account. True and effective political and economic reforms require, to provide autonomy and justice, a deep shift in relations between MENA and the United States and the European countries. There are new actors to be invited to participate in regional dynamics. Relying on South-South political and economic partnerships, the future must involve the active participation of the South American countries, Turkey, China, Malaysia and even India. There will be no effective “Arab spring” unless the centre of gravity of the international political and economic order can be shifted both southward and eastward. No one knows when such a shift might take place, but there are indications that it may already be underway. The regional uprising might well presage further upheavals, this time at the international level. The time has come for the Arabs to live up to these hopes and to do justice to their social, political, cultural and economic potential. They are rich; they need to be courageous and smart.