Is the Arab Dream of Democracy Truly Broken?

When Bouazizi, this young Tunisian  street fruit vendor, was molested harshly by the police force of his country for doing business without a license, he felt humiliated by a repressive regime in his manhood and citizenship and, as a result, poured kerosene over his body and lit a match to put an end to his miserable living conditions. This, same match, that put an end to his life begot a gigantic dream of well-being for the Arab world: a dream of democracy and freedom from the yoke of dictatorship, humiliation and feudal traditions.

This heroic and unselfish act, heralded the beginning of new era in the Arab region, that was called the Arab Spring. Indeed, the Bouazizi match ignited, also, and most importantly, a popular uprising in Tunisia, and its strong tide, in no time, swept the dictator Ben Ali. Unabated, the Tunisian flame of change was passed on to the youth of Egypt that, through protests, direct confrontation with the police and sit-ins at Tahrir square brought down the repressive regime of Mubarak.

In a perfect domino-effect movement, revolutions reached Yemen and Bahrain creating new political realities. Later, the wave swamped the harshest military regimes of the area: Libya and Syria, where it triggered cruel civil wars, one of them still going on today, claiming thousands of civilian lives and an incredible exodus of the population.

What led to the uprisings?

Since the independence of the majority of Arab countries, in the middle of the last century, the people were ruled by two kinds of regimes, different in format, but similar in outcome:

1- Traditional monarchies, autocratic and tribal, claiming religious legitimacy and endearing the population with generous direct or indirect cash. Indeed, most of the rulers of the Gulf States, in the aftermath of the uprisings, handed generously money to their people to dump their instinct of change, if any. As for the monarchies that do not have oil, like Morocco and Jordan, to avoid popular ire, they initiated power-devolution processes, through either constitutional revamping or more liberal governance; and

2- Young republics that adopted pompous pan-Arabism theory and exhibited revolutionary socialist leanings, but cultivated repressive regimes that ruled by the means of corruption, nepotism and co-optation, as well as, intimidation and terror.

These two forms of governance ruled the population through the following schemes:

- Maintaining the endemic illiteracy of the majority of the population;

- Encouraging obedience through religious edicts;

- Triggering automatically harsh repression of discordant voices;  

- Keeping a strict control of the media; and

- Using the media in its subliminal capacity in brainwashing the grass roots in the love of stability and law an order, even if it is achieved repressively.

These recipes worked more or less for over half a century until the advent of the digital revolution that brought high-debit internet and satellite television into all homes and, thus, this, ultimately, broke the spell of absolutism. Through television, people learned about other cultures where the individual was respected and celebrated, so they started questioning their political culture in all its different facets.

After that came the digital revolution that gave the ordinary citizen ultimate power to criticize, question, but, most importantly, communicate aptly with others of his kind. Until then, of course, information was controlled by the state, it was the ultimate strength of the regimes, more powerful than crude force. Governments used it to brainwash citizens into believing that the state is their protector and that the beloved leader zaim is their caring patriarch.

Through checking various sources on the net and hearing and reading many accounts and articles, the ordinary people came to the conclusion that the zaim in question is corrupt and oppressive, so by the means of the internet they organized their resistance, quietly, until Bouazizi struck his match and kick-started the Arab uprisings, still going on, today, unabated.

The ironic thing about the Arab Spring is that the same very autocratic regimes that were, somewhat, protected by the US, like Tunisia’s Ben Ali, Yemen’s Saleh and Egypt’s Mubarak were, on the other hand, brought down by non-lethal American inventions: the internet and its affiliated social medias such as Facebook and Twitter as well as YouTube.

Regime change: no change

In the past, the change of a leader in the Arab World only happened through two means:

• Putsch: the military unhappy with the reigning zaim, for one reason or another, decide to replace him so they mount a military coup and him and his followers and family are either imprisoned in some gulag of the regime, or literally liquidated to make place to a new team, while the people watch on uninterested because they know that the plight of repression will continue on their lot, as ever; and
• - Natural death of the zaim: the leader will die, out of old age or illness, and the ruling party will designate his successor in consultation with the army.

Nobody, in their wildest dreams, ever thought that docile and “immature” Arab youth will lead successfully a popular uprising, simply because such events were always crushed in blood and in total silence. This time, however, things were different, Arab youth had a more sophisticated weapon i.e. PCs,tablets, smartphones and internet and possessed, also, lethal bullets: social media and powerful allies i.e. the world opinion.

The digital revolution has allowed every Arab young person to be, at the same time, organizer of political meetings and demonstrations and be, also, an efficient and fully-operational news agency capable of sending, to the world at large, accounts, communiqués and, most importantly, videos and images, as they truly are, and not as the dictatorships will photoshop them, normally, to lie.

Why did the Arab youth rebel?

The youth, from the word go, were imprisoned in traditional absurd systems that are archaic and unfair and belonging to the Middle Ages. The existing societal systems are basically tribal, in essence, and patriarchal in organization. In such an organization, the individual has no existence, whatsoever, he is part of an extended family ruled by a patriarch who does not accept criticism, dissent or expression of dissent of any nature. As such, the political system is a mirror- image of the social system: undemocratic and repressive. Thus, to preserve this way of life, the youth are educated into obedience and allegiance and imprisoned ,for life, in taboos of two kinds:

1- Social taboos:

Arab societies accessed modernization and modernism, but disallowed the youth their fruits. They were not allowed to have girlfriends and date and flirt with them publicly, no sex before marriage, no expression of other sexuality identities outside of heterosexuality,  no independence of thought, no profession of opinion outside of the consensus, no criticism of religious or political establishments, no freedom whatsoever for women, worse, women were considered under age all their life, etc.

2- Political taboos:

The youth are required to express allegiance to repressive regimes and extoll their goodness and show total respect to seniority,. They are taught to tone down their discontent, if any, and are barred from expressing discordant opinions for fear to go to prison or literally be killed or maimed, in retribution. So, existing regimes instilled fear in the youth for any transgression of the red lines and those who toe the line and show obedience are rewarded for their subservience with money, power and seniority over those who do not, as if to say, neutrality towards the establishment is synonymous of discordance and denial and cannot be tolerated.

Did the Arab Spring falter?

The Arab Spring did not fail, as many people would argue, it just went out of steam for two reasons:

• Firstly, the youth lack experience in the management of the post-Arab Spring political situations and as such they were supplanted quickly by the regimented and religiously-motivated Islamist groups, who, in turn, are losing the sympathy of the masses due to their harsh handling of daily life; and
• Secondly, the establishment, in many cases, introduced reforms, that may or may not be genuine, either to defuse the situation or make minimal changes to ride the storm.

However, the Arab youth has given the existing regimes a second chance, but, alas, most of them have squandered it and they have, also, given the Islamists a golden opportunity to govern ad prove they are different, but their attraction to religious absolutism made them lose credibility in the eyes of the public, and, thus, they are out, for the time being.

For the time being, the Arab spring is taking a rest in the Arab world but, its universal message is alive worldwide. Sometime ago it was the uprising of Ukraine against undemocratic institutions, the Arab Spring has, also, romanced communist China through the “Revolution of Umbrellas” conducted by the youth of Hong Kong, dreaming of true democracy, maybe, in all of China, for once.

So the Arab Spring is live and kicking and its next manifestation in the Arab world will not only finish off the political systems affected by the first wave but might, also, wreck havoc on the rich conservative countries of the Gulf and maybe reach theocratic Iran, where the ground is fertile for a change.

So, everyone is, duly, warned of what is to come, either initiate true change or end up in the trash can of history: the choice is yours.