Mad Arab
The author blogs at Mad Arab Musings. New Asia Republic thanks Mad Arab for this guest contribution.
Australia Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd shakes hands with the Foreign Ministers of the Gulf Cooperation Council
Being a mad Arab, I am frequently asked about what I think of Middle Eastern affairs, and naturally the most frequent question as of late has been the Arab Spring. To understand the Arab Spring one must understand Arab culture.
While it is true there are vast cultural and wealth differences between Arabs in the various Arab countries there exists a common denominator among most Arabs, that being their respect of strength. Arab society is a militant tribal one, and as such historically Arabs developed a cult of personality for their tribal leaders; for all intents and purposes warlords. It is only when these warlords appear weak are their positions challenged.
Want proof? Housni Mubarak, former President of Egypt, age 83 years old with cancer, deposed. Former Tunisian President Bin Ali, 75 years old and suffered a stroke in February of 2011, deposed. Former President of Libya Qaddafi, 69 years old and more or less insane, deposed and killed but not without NATO help (he was not as old or sick as the other two). On the other hand: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, 46 years old and healthy, still in power despite months of intense rebellion. Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Issa al-Khalifa, 61 years old and healthy, still in power despite years of protest and intense rebellion in the past year.
The difference between the deposed and the still ruling is the confidence of the inner circle in the strength of their warlords. The strength of Mubarak, Bin Ali, and Qaddafi was put into question based on their age, health, and mental state. The Arab rumor-based culture leads to chatter among the people which in turn emboldens the people to seek change.
Once a dictator’s inner circle begins to disintegrate, his days are numbered. In the countries where the leaders are still young and healthy, they can exercise the age old tradition of warlord oppressive control, maintaining power. The core of the Ba’ath Party has not given up on Assad, just as the Sunni ruling core of Bahrain has not given up on King Hamad al-Khalifa. On the other hand the Tunisian, Egyptian, and most of Libyan armed forces turned their guns on their sickly and fragile strongmen.
Where does that leave us? Well in the countries where the strongmen are dead there are power vacuums. As much as the West would like to see liberal democracies in these nations, that is not how Arabia works. It was obvious that the rebellions in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya had no leaders, no objectives other than deposing the old regime, and no plans to run the country.
Unfortunately the only organized groups in these countries at the moment are the Salafi Islamists. Those Islamist groups are also the most prone to violence, thus they are the new strongmen. The proof is in the church burnings, bombings, and Christian abuse happening across the middle east; most recently in Egypt but also in Iraq. These attacks not only drive out the minority, but also demonstrate to the majority that these groups are the big bully on the block. I hate to say this, but in predictable Arab fashion of respecting the strongmen, those groups will take power.
Though I wish nothing more than prosperity and democracy in the Middle East, I just don’t think democracy will take roots there. The institutions for a true liberal democracy are simply not present. Democracy is a way of life, not a process. The people of the Middle East have simply not grown up with this way of life. Perhaps in several generations and with increased interaction with liberal democracies, some of the countries of the Middle East will get there, but at this junction in their history I just don’t think it will happen. If you’re planning to visit Libya, Egypt, or Tunisia in the near future you better be prepared to follow Shari’a Law.
—
Photo courtesy of the Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade, Australia.
