The ripple from Tunisia soon started spreading across the Arab world. As it travelled along the Nile, it turned into a massive wave of protest that lashed onto the Hosni Mubarak regime at Cairo. On the 25th of January a million or more people collected at the Tahrir square with their one point demand - Mubarak to step down and go. They were mostly youngsters, men and women, Muslim and Christians, from all walks of life. With the national flag of Egypt in most hands they were there for eighteen days in a non-violent protest, assault by police and pro Mubarak thugs notwithstanding, till Mubarak stepped down and left the country.That's how the 30 year rule by a strong man who was supposed to have brought stability to Egypt and maintained it with an iron hand, ended. In ignominy.
What happened in Egypt has been etched into its history and is now common knowledge in the world but without undermining the resolve of the people of Egypt and the grandeur of this revolution, my layman's mind has been pondering over some intriguing questions about the role of the Army. The Army was very much there at Tahrir square, but they did not intervene. If they did, it would surely have meant considerably lot more bloodshed and a long drawn battle for the people to achieve their goal. This is what is happening at the moment in Libya where another strong man is ruling for the last 40 years.
It is obvious that the Army did not support the Mubarak regime any more, but what is not so obvious to me is why. Army normally is a beneficiary in any dictatorial dispensation and must have been so in Egypt also. Still they remained silent when the status quo was challenged and finally changed. Is it some internal power dynamics in Egypt or possible international reactions ? I have not found the answer from the reports and analyses I have come across so far.
What happened in Egypt has been etched into its history and is now common knowledge in the world but without undermining the resolve of the people of Egypt and the grandeur of this revolution, my layman's mind has been pondering over some intriguing questions about the role of the Army. The Army was very much there at Tahrir square, but they did not intervene. If they did, it would surely have meant considerably lot more bloodshed and a long drawn battle for the people to achieve their goal. This is what is happening at the moment in Libya where another strong man is ruling for the last 40 years.
It is obvious that the Army did not support the Mubarak regime any more, but what is not so obvious to me is why. Army normally is a beneficiary in any dictatorial dispensation and must have been so in Egypt also. Still they remained silent when the status quo was challenged and finally changed. Is it some internal power dynamics in Egypt or possible international reactions ? I have not found the answer from the reports and analyses I have come across so far.
But the Army did earn as a result the goodwill and respect of the people. The Army is now in effective control of the State and has promised to help in the formation of a civilian government to which it will hand over power with an amended constitution in six months time. Power, however, is too alluring to give up easily and with stern measures required to handle the strikes that have reportedly broken out in many government establishments and banks by employees who could not raise their voices in the previous regime and the economy at a standstill, the Army may have a justification in continuing in power for a longer period. This has happened elsewhere before. The positive sign though is the existence now of the Trustees of the revolution, a body of academics and politicians, working as a watchdog and also the alertness and vigilance of the youth movement displayed in the gathering of nearly a million again at Tahrir square to celebrate one week of their revolution.
The other concern in many minds is about the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist movement, which was the main opposition, though banned, in Mubarak's time and has a large following particularly amongst the poorer section of the people because of the social services it has been rendering for years through its educational institutions and hospitals all over Egypt. Though the Brotherhood did not inspire the revolution nor had any leading role, it did participate in it and is likely to have a major role in any future government formation.
The youth movement was and remains secular. It happened not only because of economic frustrations but also because the people wanted to 'breathe free' as one blogger wrote. Just as they would not like to have fetters politically they may not like to have too much of religious constraints either in public life. According to a newspaper report I read today, a women's group came out in a procession yesterday in Tunis in protest against some activities by an allegedly Islamic group and the banner they held up read ' politics ruins religion and religion ruins politics'. Same sentiments may be running in Egypt too.
Under the circumstances whether there will be an Islamic sway in a country with 90% muslim population or the Brotherhood moderates its approach in tune with the aspirations of the youth or other liberal formations come up out of the youth movement directing the country's future remains to be seen.
P.S I have no expert knowledge either of Tunisia or Egypt or for that matter, the Arab world. What I have written is based on news reports, articles here and there and few blogs. What I am interested in is to watch and understand the progress of history which is in the making in our time.
The youth movement was and remains secular. It happened not only because of economic frustrations but also because the people wanted to 'breathe free' as one blogger wrote. Just as they would not like to have fetters politically they may not like to have too much of religious constraints either in public life. According to a newspaper report I read today, a women's group came out in a procession yesterday in Tunis in protest against some activities by an allegedly Islamic group and the banner they held up read ' politics ruins religion and religion ruins politics'. Same sentiments may be running in Egypt too.
Under the circumstances whether there will be an Islamic sway in a country with 90% muslim population or the Brotherhood moderates its approach in tune with the aspirations of the youth or other liberal formations come up out of the youth movement directing the country's future remains to be seen.
P.S I have no expert knowledge either of Tunisia or Egypt or for that matter, the Arab world. What I have written is based on news reports, articles here and there and few blogs. What I am interested in is to watch and understand the progress of history which is in the making in our time.
u have another blog to write :) about Libya. BTW did you know gadaffi has female bodyguards..
ReplyDeleteYes, u r right.About the bodyguards, they must be the Kill Bill type to enable him to last so long !
ReplyDeletePART 1
ReplyDeleteDwiju
It is nice to record one's version of events as they are being unfolded in front of one’s eyes. You may be able to see many years from now as to how you viewed the events then without relying on your memory. It has given me some opportunity also to air my views which otherwise I would not have done.
One can only speculate as to why things are happening now not before. It seems to have a domino effect as one does not know where it will end. There could be a number of reasons for these. The most important one I think is the technology and the advent of internet, mobile phones basically the mass communication through tweeter etc. I will come back to other reasons later.
In the olden days people were made ignorant by the political leaders as to what was happening in the rest of the world. There was a ban on television in the form of what can and cannot be shown. It is easy to control illiterate masses than the literate ones. Things are changed now.
How many times did a poor man Kolkata see in the television that there are streets in the USA where small aeroplanes are parked in the driveways rather than cars as in Europe. The media were keener to show the poverty in the USA and Europe. It suited the leaders to control the masses. In the past in the UK no adverse reports were made about the Royal family as it was a taboo subject. The News paper proprietors were part of the establishment and friends of the Royal family.
I remember an intelligent person in Kolkata some years ago argued with me that Kolkata underground was the best in the world. I felt sorry for her as it reminded me of one of the fables of the Aesop in which a baby frog saw a large bull and her mum was trying to gauge its size by comparing it with her. We know what happened to the Frog mum.
Subsequently the lady in question has seen the rest of the world and, being argumentative Indian, she still argues what is best in Kolkata.
We all are guilty. I don't know about you but somehow I had some illusions about our own standard of living when I was growing up in Kolkata because I did not see beyond Mukherjee para lane. I realised how poor we were, in comparison to India's living standard, when I moved out of India and met others including other Indians. My admiration for my parents grew significantly as I realised how they had to struggle to bring us up.
Dadamoni
Continued.
PART 2 Conclusion
ReplyDeleteRegarding reasons for the uprising in Tunisia or Egypt the world order has changed also with the changes in economic structure. Three countries have significant influences in the rest of the world today namely America, China and Russia.
America has a new leadership whose ancestors came from Kenya and he views things differently. We have seen instances where he has shown his leadership in Israel, in Iraq and to an extent in South America. We do not know to what extent Egyptian military, which gets few billion dollars in aid from the USA every year, was influenced by the Pentagon. But I would be surprised if they were not. We all know - He who pays the piper plays the tune. Additionally Egyptian military probably had realised that if the torists particularly Americans stopped coming to Egypt the tourist earnings will drop significantly making ordinary Egyptians even poorer.
With regard to China, I think the present leadership would be extremely concerned about what could happen in their own country.Mere economic prosperity of its citizens may not necessarily quench the thirst for freedom which is infectus. Previously China was insular and did not spread its wings in the rest of the world. Now this is not the case. With regard to manufacturing products China has established a prominent role. Any interference by China could affect not only their image abroad but also their business. They already guessed what may happen in Egypt and they did not want to back the loser.
Similarly Russia already has seen its empire disintegrating over the years and it continued struggle in Chechnya. It would wish to keep its own house in order. More importantly I think Russia is holding Olympics in 2016. it does not wish to antagonise the rest of the democratic world particularly America, Australia and Europe which forms the largest contingent.
I have not done a great deal of in-depth study on any of these countries but the pattern seems to indicate that the people have had enough and there comes a point they think that the life is not worth living any longer and they are prepared to sacrifice it. As is known it all started from the little known trader in Tunisia whose sacrifice will reverberate through the rest of the world for years to come.
Dadamoni
Your analysis seems quite sound. American influence may have worked even if indirectly.Incidentally, Obama visited Cairo in June 2009 and in his Cairo speech which I found in the net he had said among other things '...You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party..'.He was talking of true democracy.
ReplyDeleteYou are also right about the new technology which has changed the game.The net, cable TV and mobile phones have made mass communication easy and information flow instant.The system today is such that you can not shut them all down without affecting businesses and banks and governance itself.