Dawn of Democracy in the Islamic West

In the heyday of Islam the region of North and North West Africa between the Atlantic Ocean and Egypt comprising the coastal plain and Atlas Mountains of Morocco together with Algeria and Tunisia and Spain across Strait of Gibraltar formed the Maghrib (West) of Muslim world.

It all began with a simple incident common in the streets of countries under despotic rule in the Arab world where the police and Army are all powerful as the arms of autocratic authority. A young fruit vendor’s cart was seized by the police, and in sheer desperation he burned himself to death. The spark from that fire of immolation spread and set the country ablaze. As protesters killed scores of people on Tunisia’s roads the President, Zein-al-Abdeen Ben Ali, and his profligate wife, Leila, finding the situation no more safe, fled the country with as much gold and money they could carry in their personal jet and sought asylum in Saudi Arabia.

Looters in the country followed suit. From the several presidential places they carried away everything that they could lay their hands upon, and stripped bare the opulent villas of the families of Ben Ali and his profiteering wife. But this opened up visions of real radical change in the country and across the region known as Maghrib that lie in North and North West Africa between Atlantic Ocean and Egypt comprising the coastal plain and Atlas Mountains of Morocco together with Algeria, Tunisia and sometimes also Tripolitania forming a well-defined zone, bounded by sea or desert. Mahgrib in Arabic means West which formerly included the then Muslim Spain across the Strait of Gibraltar.

Though Tunisia was the epicentre of this uprising, the entire region has been rocked by the dramatic developments following the ouster of Ben Ali. He ran a Mafia state for the last 23 years ever since he captured power from Habib Bourguiba, who was known as the Father of Tunisia, in a bloodless revolution. A friend of the US and a fortress against Islamist movements, Ben Ali stood firm behind President Bush in the War against Terror after September Eleven. The families of Ali and his wife Leila controlled nearly every aspect of the Tunisian economy, from banks to real estates, from car dealerships to shopping centres. The husband and wife had divided the country into two regions and plundered them with the help of the members of their respective families.

Ben Ali’s flight from his country and the inspiring way in which the Qatar-based Arab channel, Al Jazeera, ignited the hopes of emancipation of the peoples of this region from the tinpot dictators who thrived and flourished under the protection of the Washington-Tel Aviv axis that had its deep political and economic interests. The sparkling way in which Al Jazeera reported the Tunisian people’s revolt with the help of the cell phone, twitter and facebook, the revolutionary spirit spread to neighbouring countries, first, Egypt, which was another dry gunpowder barrel of despotism where another tinpot dictator had been presiding over the destinies of more than 80 million people of whom 20 per cent are below the poverty line, nearly ten per cent jobless. His three decade-long dictatorship was rocked to its very foundations.

Realising the magnitude of the deep discontent of his people manifested in the massive demonstrations at Tahrir (Liberation) Square, Hosni Mubarak pulled every stop to contain this upsurge and save his power. The cosmetic changes hastily introduced and the vague promises he quickly made had no effect on the defiant people who were determined to fight it to the finish. They found a leader in Mohamed ElBaradei, the former Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and a Nobel Laureate. As the nuclear watchdog ElBaradei had steered clear of the US bullying of George Bush and the veiled threat of Tel Aviv, and he was hailed as a Daniel come to judgment.

It was indeed a trying period for the Agency and its Director General. The obstinate position Bush, Blair and their supporters took that Saddam Hussein possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) as a justification for the immediate invasion of Iraq had to be opposed and moderated, and ElBaradei always took a principled stand to the anger of America and the annoyance of its supporters. It was this courage and impartiality that won him the Nobel Prize. People thought that he would contest the elections in Egypt last time but backed out when he realised that the poll would not be free and fair at all.

•

WHEN the people of Egypt rose in revolt against the three-decade-long despotism of Hosni Mubarak, a key ally of the US and Israel, ElBaradei thought it his moral duty to give leadership to the legitimate aspirations of his people. In spite of the threatening rage of the mob at Tahrir Square and on the streets of Cairo and other important cities of the country, Mubarak was in no mood to step down and give way to long needed socio-economic and political reforms. The people turned down outright the cosmetic solutions he proposed short of stepping down. The appointment of a Vice-President, who was his Intelligence Chief, the dissolution of the entire Cabinet and the Polit-Bureau of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) including his son whom Mubarak had groomed to be his successor, and the subsequent appointment of a new Prime Minister to form a new government—all that had no effect on the determined mood of the Egyptian people whose rage burst and flowed through the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and other cities and towns.

At the brazen-faced rigging of the last election to the Egyptian parliament what the US expressed was a mild dismay at the outrageous political dishonesty of its best ally in the Middle East. When things were spinning out of his hands, negotiations began with the President of Muslim Brotherhood, whom Mubarak till the other day threateningly held up to the West and the rest of the world as the face of Islamic terror in his country to which Egypt would disastrously succumb if he is gone. The US and Isreal propped up the unalloyed autocracy of Mubarak all these long years at the heavy annual cost of five billion dollars. In his desperation the President seemed to be willing to share power with Muslim Brotherhood and other Opposition parties effecting constitutional reforms. However, all his designs failed and eventually he was forced to relinquish power.

As Alexis de Tocqueville has wisely observed, the most dangerous moment for a bad government is when it begins to reform itself. Dictatorships find it difficult to handle change because the structure of power they have set up cannot respond to the new dynamic demands coming from the people. So these promises and proposals of reform that Mubarak holds forth cannot satisfy the strong sentiments of self-rule that has grown and spread not only in Egypt but the entire Islamic Maghrib and beyond, from Algeria to Yemen. The Jasmine Revolution of Tunisia and its success in driving away the autocratic ruler, Ben Ali, opened the floodgates of a full revolution in the region. A few other countries are already on the boil, and the traditional despotic rulers like Mubarak are finding it difficult to tackle the mass upsurge.

This massive movement would have culminated much earlier in its logical end of establishing democracies in the region now under kings, sheikhs, Sultans, amirs, tinpot dictators like Mubarak and other potentates but for the imperialistic monopolistic oil interests of the US and the political ambitions of Israel in the whole region. The Western powers under the leadership of the US and with the powerful support of the world Zionist movement have hatched plans to hijack this strong democratic movement. Even a mild democrat but inspiring leader like Mohamed ElBaradei is a dangerous person in their eyes. This is the paradox of the situation born out of the inherent contradiction of the democratic spirit imbued with the imperialistic aspirations of the US.

Dr N.A. Karim is a former Professor of English and Pro-Vice-Chancellor, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram.