Now that the autocrat Zine Al Abidine Ben Ali has been overthrown fled the country, is there cause for celebration?
Whether the Tunisian Revolution result in better or worse for the people depends on who are the players that fill the power vacuum. There appears to be no credible political alternative.
Surrounded Islamic fundamentalists and the festering instability threatening other "autocratic" modern secular governments in Islamic states, the "jasmine revolution" does not seem to bode well for secular democracy.
Iran, Iraq, ... we've seen the mayhem that follows a revolution.
So world liberals - don't hold your breath.
Quote : "
Similarities between Iranian and Tunisian revolts cannot be ignored
The Tunisian revolt, which began four weeks ago because of growing unemployment, food prices and corruption, quickly snowballed to embody the population's accumulated grievances against Ben Ali's iron-fist rule during the past 23 years.
He imposed his secular rule largely through a repressive security apparatus and good relations with France, the European Union and the United States, which backed him for maintaining political stability and promoting socio-economic development. In the process, he stifled the opposition, and personalised power and politics, with grievous human rights violations.
The circumstances of Ben Ali's overthrow are reminiscent of those of the US-backed shah of Iran, who was forced by a mass revolution to leave the country 31 years ago, also in mid-January. Just as the shah was declined asylum by his main patron, the US - ending up in Egypt where he died of cancer in July 1981 - Ben Ali has experienced a similar predicament.
After France refused him asylum on Friday, Saudi Arabia came to his rescue. Like the shah, he has left a country in a mess, with no united democratic alternative to take over.
The Speaker of the Parliament, Fouad Mebazaa, has taken over as interim president. He has asked Ben Ali's veteran Prime Minister, Mohamed Ghannouchi, to form a government of national unity until a president is elected within 60 days.
But this may not prove enough - just as the shah's installation of the reformist prime minister Shapour Bakhtyar in the 11th hour could not contain the flood of public discontent.
In the case of Iran, democratic reformers responsible for spearheading the revolution lost out to the shah's leading religious opponent, Ayatollah Khomeini, whose legacy of an Islamic government, with an anti-US posture, continues.
Tunisia is in the throes of a similar development, although the establishment of a theocracy does not seem to be an option, given the absence of a strong Islamist movement and lasting French secularist colonial influence in the country.
The US and the EU seem to have abandoned their goal of bringing democracy to the Arab world - which was once promoted fervently as a core issue in their Middle East policy - in favour of what is called security and development. Yet this is unlikely to halt people's quest for democratic reforms.
The Tunisian uprising may fail to achieve its goals but the struggle between the forces of authoritarianism and democracy will be a dominant factor in the Muslim Middle East in the years to come.
Amin Saikal is professor of political science and director of the centre for Arab and Islamic studies (the Middle East and central Asia) at the Australian National University. "
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/similarities-between-iranian-and-tunisian-revolts-cannot-be-ignored-20110116-19seo.html
http://www.smh.com.au/world/egyptians-believe-their-turn-is-coming-20110116-19smh.html
No comments:
Post a Comment