BOOK REVIEW OF THE NEW ARAB REVOLT: WHAT HAPPENED, WHAT IT MEANS, AND WHAT COMES NEXT
The New Arab Revolt: What Happened, What It Means, and What Comes Next perfectly illuminates the settings and the happenings associated with the revolutions that have been taking place in the Middle East. This book is a collection of about sixty articles that have been compiled into a single volume.
It has endeavored to provide even illustrations of interview proceedings, various testimonies of congressional parties, op-eds (articles expressing a personal viewpoint written for the op-ed section of a newspaper) from various experts and other think-tanks in the field including Lewis Bernard, Anderson Lisa, Taleb Nicholas, Benn Aluf among several other experts.
It has also presented, in splendid array, highly original and influential (seminal) pieces from foreign relations/ affairs. It also contains major public pronouncements from internationally and reputed international figures like President Obama, Hillary Clinton amongst other leaders and has indeed corroborated them with other relevant documents.
Generally, this book has effectively pulled together what is necessary or desired so as to develop an in-depth understanding of the root causes and the significance attached to the new Arab uprising and other ghastly events unfolding in the political dais of Arab nations. (Khalidi 22).
In Carrie Rosefsky’s "The Muslim Brotherhood after Mubarak", it emerges, surprisingly that the Muslim Brotherhood was an Islamist group founded by Al-Banna Hassan 83 years ago to save societies in Egypt from what was perceived to be a depraving influence of the west. From time immemorial, the group re-Islamized Egypt through education and several other ‘good works’ (Rosefsky 92).
Together, the Brotherhood built a society ‘closely hewing to Islamic law’. For a fact, the Brotherhood represented a genuine political movement that was even recognized by Washington. One of its main interests was also in establishing a state based not only in a strict reading of the Islamic law but also on principles inspired by it that are inclusive and are in agreement with modernity.(Rosefsky 94).
During the tenure of Mubarak, the Brotherhood came to the realization that Mubarak’s son was being groomed to take over the mantle from Mubarak soon after he retires. During the ouster of Mubarak, the group remained a united and progressive force that was embracing for political change and modernity at the time when ostensible commitment of the Islamists to Liberalism remained more of assertion than fact. (Rosefsky 95).
Moreover, despite the tightly held protests that were massed in Egypt’s democratic front, there was a breakdown in the regime as the window of democracy had been shut.
Soon after that, mass protests ensued leading to the rocking of the entire political system that the political supporters of Mubarak could not whisk away. (Stacher 98).
This attracted sharp criticisms from foreign governments and other analysts regarding the tarnished political personality and image of the embattled Egyptian president. (Stacher 102).
According to Stacher, the viability of the state was in serious jeopardy as the “central institution in the country”, the military, for which most of the time have been giving the government the backing that influenced most of its commands and policy for the first time pulled back. (Stacher 103).
Through various repressive acts, the regime strived to keep itself stay put by using dubious means but was overwhelmed by the power of the common man. The head offices of the ruling party were charred down by angry protesters. Most of the time, protesters could be forced to run away from one arm of the regime to another as the police fired rubber bullets at them and lobbed teargas canisters at the crowds. Police officers, both in plain clothes and others uniformed and who operated on directives from above, rode on horse and camel backs and had sticks and whips that were being used to injure and intimidate those who were going full throttle in their revolution against the government of the day. All these repressive lessons bore no fruit and the common man could not be gagged by it.
In the aftermath of the revolution, anxiety and fear gripped the Israelis as their “oldest member” was suddenly moving out and they were “afraid of the consequences” (Benn 104).
The Israelis wondered whether or not political figures in the new government will keep their long established treaty on peace with Israel. Alongside other partners, Mubarak has also been featuring very prominently in Israeli peace talks for the last 30 years during which time Israel has been involved in several tussles that has seen it replace eight of its prime ministers. Generally, the stability of the region was in his hands. (Benn 106).
Moreover, public perception of Israel by other countries in the Arab world has traditionally been hostile. Most of its regional connections have been in the hands of its crème of the crop. In a tragic twist of the good diplomatic relations, Mubarak’s regime became outspokenly critical of policies that were formulated by Israel and were embroiled in several diplomatic rows and insults.
Worse still, the perception of most Israelis changed hence they viewed the peace process as a stealth maneuver at enhancing international relations with the US and Europe, and not as a route to regional acquiescence.
Until then, the political cum military establishment has overlooked democracy in Arab nations and has seen it as a treacherous adventure.
Also, as Mubarak was becoming more advanced in age, lots of questions abound as to who and how he would hand over the leadership baton. (Benn 108).
According to Danin, Jordan is not a “regional domino”. This in essence means that it socially, politically, structurally, economically, amongst other considerations; it was not seasoned for the Arab wave of revolution. (Danin 161).
After a careful analysis of the Arab nations that underwent the ‘regional domino’ it becomes manifestly clear that Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, Arab nations that were caught up in the domino, represents similar cases of regimes which were vulnerable to the revolution. (Danin 161).
In each of these countries, revolutions were fully carried out, financed, and otherwise effectively brought to a halt. Moreover, these nationalities are marked by a protuberance of the youth in the total population figures, wide disparities in social-economic status, corruption and thuggery in government and a de facto form of monarchism that was not legally instituted. (Danin 161).
As is with Jordan, there exists a different kind or nature of monarchism. Libya, Egypt and Tunisia had monarchies that were very much in practice, while the monarchy in Jordan is structurally and legally instituted giving the current regime many significant benefits of legality in action, public confidence in the government especially in the face of dissenting voices and existence of a government arrangement that is accommodating to discourses.
Because of the presence of these significant benefits in the monarchy system in Jordan, there exists very little discontent among the citizenry, most of which is answered by the existing political arrangement which has not always warranted any revolution but policy changes contrary to the establishment of new political systems as have been the case with Libya, Egypt and Tunisia. (Danin 162).
The revolution in Tunisia was for instance ignited by economic immobility and unproductiveness , the ever-soaring rates of unemployment among the youth, existence of a much wider disparity in affluence and other forms of wealth between one social class and another, escalating prices of food and other essential commodities, and a nonexistent political representation. (Danin 162). Similar interventions in Libya also resulted in “A New Lease on Life for Humanitarianism” (Patrick 274).
In Iran, those who were loyal to the Green Movement, because of their competing desires for a change of the political system, were conflicted about whether a public support from America would come to their aid or upset their cause. (Abdo 164).
Hence, Washington developed a cold foot in its support of the movement, citing the fear that it might be tainting to the opponents, especially if their involvement was to create an impression that Washington was a hidden hand in the protests which in the end lost momentum. (Abdo 167).
Conclusion
According to Lisa, all these revolutions in the Arab nationalities had a common call for a more approachable and a responsive government, recognition of personal dignities of the citizenry. This therefore calls for the strengthening of the Arab nations in terms of leadership and public perception of the government structures.
Works cited
Abdo, Geneive, "Green Movement 2.0"? How U.S. Support Could Lead the Opposition to
Victory. 18 February 2011: 164
Anderson, Lisa "Demystifying the Arab Spring": Parsing the Differences between Tunisia,
Egypt, and Libya: 20 April 2011: 322
Benn, Aluf. Overcoming fear and anxiety in Tel Aviv: How Israel Can Turn Egypt's Unrest Into
an Opportunity.8 February 2011: 104-109
Danin, Robert. Why Jordan Is Not a Regional Domino: 1 February 2011: 161-162
Patrick, Stewart. A New Lease on Life for Humanitarianism: 24 March 2011: 274
Stacher Joshua. Egypt’s Democratic Mirage: How Cairo’s Authoritarian Regime Is Adapting to
Preserve Itself. 17 February 2011: 98-103
Wikham, Carrie, Rosefsky. The Muslim Brotherhood after Mubarak: 28 November 2011: 91-97
Khalidi, Rashid. The Arab Spring. 3 March 2011: 22
