BY IBRAHIM KALIN
TODAY’S ZAMAN - Lenin is reported to have said that “there are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen.†The last several weeks in the Middle East prove Lenin right. And it proves the “end of history†cohorts deadly wrong.
For a long time, it looked like history was dead in the Arab world. Most Arab societies were characterized by apathy, lack of creativity, corruption and hostility towards democracy and human rights, supposedly the two pillars of the modern international system spearheaded by the West.
The common image of the average Arab in Europe and the US was a mixed one. On the one hand you had the oil rich, well-educated, spoiled, submissive Arab autocrats who were ready to collaborate with Western powers in exchange for their rule. On the other hand you had the Bedouin Arab, backward, violent, unpredictable, sentimental. Both served in their own ways the interests of the global establishment and the regional order it projected onto the Arab Middle East.
American neocons believed that the Arabs lacked the democratic genes and were prone to autocracy, anyway. They came from a tribal background and believed in a religion that advocated theocracy. Why bother supporting democracy, free elections and accountability when Western-friendly autocrats run their countries as told? When the Bush neocons supposedly advocated a freedom and democracy agenda in the Middle East, they had a different design in mind. They wanted the impossible: democratically elected, popularly legitimate, Israel-loving, American friendly regimes.
Things now are even more difficult. Tunisians and Egyptians showed to the world that they can change their autocrats without violence and blood -- all the violence and blood over the last month came from the establishment forces. If they succeed in making a peaceful transition to democracy, they will restart the march of history in the Arab world. They will inspire millions of others to reclaim their fundamental rights. They will show they can be the actors of their history, again.
This will be a new history, and everyone including the US, Israel and others will have to readjust themselves. What is ironic is that those who claim to be promoters of democracy in the Arab and Muslim world appear to be concerned about democratic transition in Egypt. Israeli officials and pundits do not even bother to hide their concern and even anger. They don’t care how the Egyptians will establish the institutions of democracy and move their country out of its current apathy and poverty. All they care about is Israel’s security.
Perhaps this is something normal. Israel will look after its own security concerns, and no one should blame Israel for it. But it is a historic mistake to project a regional order in the Middle East solely on the basis of Israel’s flawed security outlook and expansionist policies. Israel claims to be the only democracy in the Middle East (which is factually not true) but fears transition to democracy in Egypt. How does one explain this dilemma?
After Tunisia and Egypt, the American strategic thinking has a golden opportunity to redefine its priorities. A democratic Middle East may look uncertain and unpredictable in the short run. Democracy may not work to Israel’s favor, either. But in the long run and if the Israelis are seriously interested in making peace with the Arabs, they should not fear democracy and the popular will. Instead, they should look at themselves in the mirror and have a moment of self-examination. What or who has made Israel the most isolated country in the world?
Much of the anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiments in the Arab world come from Israel’s policies of occupation and its collaboration with and support for autocratic regimes. Israel needs to change this strategic outlook if it wants to live in peace with its Arab neighbors. Making a last-minute effort to keep Mubarak in his place is not the way to go."