U.S. government betting on Arab monarchs to survive, Arab presidents to fall

This NY TIMES PIECE seems like an accurate description of the American approach at the moment, though I don’t agree with the approach. The Arabs living under monarchies also deserve better.

don’t forget Bahrain

A fairly dramatic protest shaping up in Pearl Square in Manama on this Friday:

1406: In Bahrain, the BBC’s Owen Bennett-Jones describes a column of demonstrators occupying a three-lane road leading into Pearl Square, which has been the focal point for anti-government protesters. He says people are marching 40 abreast and the column goes on for kilometres. He says a similar column has approached the square from another direction.

1409: Protesters in Bahrain won back Pearl Square from troops and police who had been guarding it after the authorities ordered them to pull out. This had been one of the key demands of protesters after several days of clashes left at least six people dead. The protesters also want democratic reforms, possibly leading to a constitutional monarchy. But some protesters want to see the monarchy gone altogether, says the BBC’s Owen Bennett-Jones in Manama.

reinforcements for protestors

1352: Enough Gaddafi in Libya tweets: “Reinforcements from Misrata Zawiya Zintan Benghazi have arrived at the outskirts of #Tripoli to support demonstrators #Libya #Feb17.”

the astonishing thing

The truly astonishing thing is how morally one-sided all of these conflicts have been. We’ve really seen almost no atrocities committed by the street (which is why Lara Logan’s experience strikes such a horrible sour note), and have consistently seen both atrocities and cynical lies from the governments in all of these situations. They’ve not been “civil wars” at all yet, despite (possibly justified) worries that Libya might still turn into one. They’ve been utterly justified popular uprisings against tyranny, cruelty, and dishonesty.

The vanguard of democracy is no longer in Washington, it’s on the Arab street.

article on possible Libya scenarios

A good basic rundown FROM THE BBC.

The most encouraging passage is this one:

“Tribal rivalries are intense in eastern Libya. Despite that, the level of organisation and co-ordination has been quite impressive.”

One of the strong (if inconsistent) lessons of recent years is that the modern nation-state is often a very powerful concept even in cases where it was created by totally artificial, even opportunistically colonialistic means.

Just as it turned out to be a lie that Mubarak was the only force capable of preventing sectarian apocalypse in Egypt, it may turn out to be equally a lie that only clever Qaddafi’s balancing act was able to weave together a modern nation out of dozens of mutually adversarial tribes. It’s too early to say, but the passage just cited makes it seem possible.

One of the many things I love about all these Arab uprisings is that all the theories we’ve had to hear for the past 10 or more years are going to have to be replaced by a whole bunch of fresh theories, because so many of them are being outright falsified by events on the ground.

violence exploding in Tripoli

I’m staggered that anyone actually has the courage to go out and protest there right now. But they obviously have it.

1259: Eyewitnesses in Tripoli say that security forces are now shooting at protesters in the capital’s suburbs.

1311: More on the shooting reported by eyewitnesses in Tripoli’s suburbs. Privately-owned Libyapress website reports that worshippers went out to demonstrate peacefully after Friday prayers and were met by a large number of security forces who clashed with the protesters, using live rounds against them.

1321: ShababLibya tweets: “The situation in Tripoli is NOW***** critical, gun shots tear gas and arrests.”

small-scale riot in Ma’adi over police shooting

Ma’adi is a fairly swanky, tree-lined southern suburb of Cairo; many foreigners live there, as do a lot of Egyptians.

Apparently, earlier today in Ma’adi a police officer shot a microbus driver to death following an argument. Microbuses are a common means of transport here among the poor. And Egyptian police, you already know, are not currently at their height of popularity.

In retaliation, protestors set a police car on fire, also in Ma’adi.

today in Tahrir Square

An estimated 100,000 protestors today in Cairo, and I agree with every one of their very reasonable demands. (And when have they been unreasonable yet?)

“The demands include the dissolution of the Ahmed Shafiq government, cancellation of the country’s state security intelligence, lifting the state of emergency, creation of a presidential council made up of two civilians and one army officer, and the immediate release of all political prisoners.”

I do know some pro-revolution Egyptians who think Ahmed Shafiq is an OK guy and can safely be left in place. I’m afraid I don’t see it. He was one of the cronies at the head of Mubarak’s late January “new” government, and he also made condescending speeches about the youth, along with a few other unpalatable things, including some rumors I won’t post here without more proof. In my opinion, he should have lost his job as PM on February 11, not a day later.

Chavez tarnishes himself

With this tweet:

1209: Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez tweets: “Long live Libya and its independence! Gaddafi faces a civil war!”

The idea that the protestors are the unwitting dupes (or even overt tools) of colonialism sounds a lot like what Saif Qaddafi said in his own weird speech. But I don’t see what “Libya’s independence” has to do with the kleptocratic thugs who rule Libya and the butchering mercenaries they hire with their oil profits.

The Left is capable of grave errors of judgment as well, and let’s not forget that. Chavez’s tweet is a sample. Perhaps it’s not just neo-liberalism that needs to rethink things right now.

“A revolution against neoliberalism?”

That’s the title of THIS AL JAZEEERA ARTICLE by someone named “Abu Atris” (the pseudonym of an unknown Egyptian author).

My provisional answer to the question posed by the title would be both yes and no, or rather, both no and yes.

No, in the sense that the revolution in Egypt was sparked more by demands for political freedoms. The economic situation of the country certainly helped lay the table for what we saw happen, but only late in the game (though of crucial importance) came the strikes by people primarily angry about the economic conditions of Egypt.

But yes, in the sense that I don’t think the revolution in a place like Egypt will succeed unless economic inequality is addressed. You can’t just add elections and freedom of the press in Egypt and expect everything to be fine all of a sudden. There is a major social justice problem in this country, and it’s going to have to be addressed in ways that might generate a new sort of political model. “Necessity is the mother of invention.” They’re going to have to figure it out here in Egypt, or they will soon have a new insurrection of the poor, and the Army will either have to let it happen or else they will have to be as brutal as Libya in suppressing it. I hope not the latter.