CC BY
15
Aleksei Kiva,
Political analyst
DEMONSTRATION EFFECT IN THE
CONDITIONS OF GLOBALIZATION
(On the example of events in Arab countries)
Demonstration Effect as a Sign of Social Progress
The "Arab revolution" for the world, just as for the Arab countries themselves, was virtually "a bolt from the blue." The situation prevailing in most Arab countries at the time could be explained by words of a classic of political science, namely, that "those at the top were unable to rule in the old way, and those at the bottom did not want to live in the old way." In Tunisia, where these events began, the situation differed from that in Egypt. And the events in Libya took completely different turn, and besides, its position was not like that in most Arab countries.
Then, certain people began to talk of a demonstration effect, which, as they claimed, was the main reason for mass actions in Arab countries.
Yes, this effect did play its role in mobilizing people who were dissatisfied with their life, mainly the most socially active and dynamic young men. However, this phenomenon is a natural attendant of historical progress.
The role of the demonstration effect grows along with the development and expansion of international ties and the means of communication. The role of this effect was especially important in former colonies and semi-colonies.
Under the influence of the patriotically-minded officers of Egypt headed by Gamal Abdel Nasser, who came to power as a result of a military coup and pursued a course to complete national liberation, similar coups took place in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia and Sudan.
This demonstration effect is felt in advanced countries, too. For example, the so-called student revolution in France in 1968 exerted a great influence on many European countries, Germany being one of them.
The demonstration effect in the 1960s gave rise to the movement of the "New Left" targeted against "consumer society," "mass culture," conformism, unification of human personality, etc. However, soon its participants began to resort to the extremist methods of struggle against official society.
Answer of the Authorities to Mass Manifestations
of the Citizens Dissatisfied with Their Life
The answer to mass manifestations and demonstrations in Arab countries could well be predicted. Obviously, the rulers still remembered how Asad, Sr. had dealt with the rebellious citizens of his country in 1982. Having used tanks and heavy artillery, he virtually wiped off the face of the earth a big part of the whole Syrian city of Hamy and killed up to 30,000 his fellow-compatriots. And he got away with that easily. The Soviet Union remained silent because it regarded the Syrian regime its ally, but the West did not express great indignation over this brutality either. But times have changed, and people have changed, too.
The western mass media and political analysts, writing and talking of the developments in the Arab world, use such words as "Arab revolution," "Arab spring," "long-awaited changes," etc. But it is too early as yet to judge where there is revolution and where counterrevolution. What is almost certain is that instability in the Middle East and North Africa will persist for a long time to come. The situation in the Arab world is complex and unpredictable, but it is due to quite objective reasons.
The Logic of the Arab Upheavals
One can hear words even at scholarly conferences that revolutions, rebellions, irresponsible manifestations of crowds, etc. are provoked by outside forces, and more often than not the words "Washington's hand" are heard here and there. But more cautious analysts talk of Washington's attempts to "redivide" the "Greater Middle East."
The revolutions in the Arab world are one hundred percent ARAB revolutions provoked by Arab realities, but not by outside interference, which can, of course, take place, but it is not the decisive factor, and is not necessarily American, on the contrary, it may be Iranian. The Arab revolutions have been caused by a number of factors.
First, it is the worsening social situation in many Arab countries after the beginning of the world financial-economic crisis. The chain reaction of mass movements began, as is known, in Tunisia in December 2010. Incidentally, it is one of the most developed and cultured Arab countries.
In January 2011 unrest began in Egypt, which was caused by a similar domestic situation - the growing cost of life, higher prices of food, commodities and services, and increasing unemployment, especially among young people.
Secondly, corruption and a wide gap between the rich and the poor, the dictatorial style of the rulers surrounded by their kith and kin, giving over power to their children or close relatives, and disposing of their country's resources as they think fit. These rulers have lost not only connections with their people and true knowledge of the real situation in their country, but even the feeling of time. And how could it be otherwise when Ben Ali ruled in Tunisia for 23 years, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt - 30 years, Ali Abdal Saleh in Yemen - 30 years, Hafez Asad and his son Bashar in Syria - 30 and 11 years respectively, and Gaddafi in Libya - 42 years.
Thirdly, solution of urgent social problems in many Arab countries was rendered more difficult by the rapid population growth. During the past thirty years the number of people in the Arab countries has doubled. Moreover, the poorer the country, the higher the surplus of its population. For example, in Yemen it is 3.1 percent higher than the growth rates of its GDP. The situation has somewhat been alleviated by money transfers from the Yemenis working in the oil-rich countries, primarily in Saudi Arabia. Although the natural population growth in the Arab countries has somewhat decreased from three to 2.42.2 percent, the annual surplus of the GDP, except the rich Gulf states, is so small that they are unable to solve the problem of poverty and unemployment successfully. They have either to increase production or introduce family planning as is the case of China.
Fourthly, mass discontent is also caused by the rule of ethnic-confessional minorities. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was ruled by the Sunna minority (about 20 percent of the population). On the contrary, the Shia minority has ruled Syria, having the key commanding posts in the army and business. This regime is backed by theocratic Shia Iran, which dissatisfies several Arab countries, which regard Iran as their rival for leadership in the region. Besides, they still remember that in
the war between Iraq and Iran, Syria sided with the Shia regime of Ayatolla Homeini.
For the sake of justice it should be admitted that in Iraq and Syria the religious factor has not played the decisive role in public life inasmuch as the ruling Ba'ath parties (the party of Arab socialist revival) were formed on the pattern of the Communist party of the Soviet Union (CPSU). The nature of the degeneration of these parties was about the same as that of the communist regimes. But it should also be admitted that the regime of Bashar Asad in Syria is opposed not only and not so much by the democratic forces, as many people in the West imagine or claim, but by the Islamist forces, and this is why it is not known whether it is better or worse for the future of Syria.
During the past decades under the impact of a whole number of factors (the Shia revolution in Iran, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Soviet troops' participation in the civil war there, the collapse of real socialism and the disintegration of the U.S.S.R., the U.S. aggression against Iraq, and the NATO military operations in Afghanistan) the situation has changed: Islam has begun to fill the vacuum in the ideological sphere.
Fifthly, the turbulent events in the Arab world are, in one way or another, connected with globalization and information revolution. New means of communication between people have emerged in various countries and on the global scale. And a new generation of users of the social networks has come into being, who can rightly be regarded as the "fifth, popular power" and who form their own public opinion. The role of the Internet, which is not under control or under censorship and which has tremendous influence on the formation of new revolutionary consciousness, has not yet been properly described and analyzed.
As to the outside interference, it did take place, but it did not trigger off the Arab upheavals.
Miscalculations of the West
No matter what negative events happen in the world, quite a few of our citizens tend to ascribe them to the schemes of the West, primarily, the United States. Meanwhile, the Americans were able to pursue an effective policy at the time of the confrontation between the two world systems. The best American minds have been mobilized and worked successfully to evolve the methods of destruction of the Soviet Union by peaceful means from within. Having used the inability of the old and senile Soviet leadership to rule the country properly and the growing discontent of Soviet people with their living conditions, Washington forced it to allocate enormous means to prepare for the mythical "star wars," and also prodded it to invade Afghanistan. All this exhausted the Soviet economy, greatly weakened, as it was, by the prolonged arms race, and provoked the growing discontent with socialism as a system. Other means for undermining the pillars of socialism were also widely used. For example, one of the aims of the Helsinki Agreements of 1975 was to breed the dissident movement in the Soviet Union and other socialist countries. And in 1986, when perestroika was already underway in the U.S.S.R., the United States persuaded Saudi Arabia to increase oil supply to the world market considerably in order to knock down the price of oil, and thus place the Soviet leadership in difficult conditions, which did take place. Washington ably used the weak spots of M. Gorbachev and successfully manipulated B. Yeltsin, which was later admitted by former high officials of the United States.
However, the Americans could not predict the turn of event in the Arab world. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union the United States has become the only superpower in the world, and Washington, thinking that now it could afford everything, began to lose the sense of reality, making one blunder after another. These include two wars - in
Iraq and in Afghanistan. President Bush threatened to use force against the countries of the "axis of evil" - North Korea and Iran, which compelled them to search for survival in possessing nuclear weapon. President Bush could hardly foresee the most complex world problem into which his threat to Iran would turn. His near-to-maniacal striving to manufacture American democracy in countries absolutely unprepared for it could lead to grave consequences in not so distant future. There is no guarantee that Iraq will follow the path of democracy after the withdrawal of American troops from there. One should not exclude the possibility that the Shia Muslims comprising a majority in Iraq might draw closer to Shia Iran. And after the United States and its allies withdraw their forces from Afghanistan there is every possibility of the Taliban coming back to power.
Political stability in Pakistan, the main ally of the U.S.A. in Central Asia, is closely connected with the situation in Afghanistan. But after the assassination of Osama bin Laden and Benazir Bhutto the situation in Pakistan has been steadily deteriorating. The government of Pakistan has demonstrated its utter incompetence, corruptness, and inability to rule. The country is now on the verge of complete chaos.
In this connection we deem it necessary to say a few words about the idea inherent in American and European societies that democracy can function in any country if its institutions are created. However, world experience shows that representative democracy can develop and function more or less effectively only in comparatively advanced countries. It cannot naturalize in undeveloped, poor, illiterate, and predominantly peasant countries, inasmuch as the consciousness of peasants has an authoritarian character, as a rule, and is often inseparable from utopian and monarchic ideas.
As to the "Arab spring," we can say that revolutions in Arab countries always come to a deplorable end. They begin due to the
worsening economic situation and growing food prices. Popular masses come out in the street, and the authorities order the army to put down the rebellion. If the army succeeds, the revolution is postponed for several years. If not, and the army joins the rebels, and the dictator is overthrown. Then "free elections" take place which have nothing to do with democracy. Well-organized groupings seize power in the country. That was the case of Iran where radical Islamists came to power. HAMAS did the same in Gaza, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. And the Muslim Brothers now rule the roost in Egypt.
If the Syrian regime created by Asad Sr. falls down, it cannot be excluded that the Islamists will come to power there, too.
Russia and the Events in Arab Countries
If we wish to save Russia from disintegration we should maintain sound and constructive relations with western countries. This cannot be achieved without carrying on modernization, developing advanced technologies, and getting investments from the West. China has realized this quite well and is now pursuing a flexible and clever policy and avoiding confrontation with the United States and countries of the European Union. The PRC sells a lion's share of its goods to them and receives the latest technologies from them. Western investments and the latest technologies are coming not to "capitalist" Russia, but to "communist" China, where many transnational companies have created research centers. Such policy has enabled China to carry on industrialization and score great successes in the high-tech sphere within a short space of time.
Our positions in the world gained by the Soviet Union at a very high price and by great efforts are becoming weaker and narrower. The United States has ousted us from Egypt, we lost the sales markets for our arms in Iraq and Libya, and soon we will have to leave the Syrian
market, too. Do we have to strive to preserve our positions won a long time ago by the Soviet Union, the second mighty superpower in the world with quite a few allies? Will present-day Russia have enough strength to retain what little it now has, having lost industries, the hightech sector, scientific achievements, etc? Russia's GDP is now only one-tenth of that of the U.S.A. Do we need the Syrian port of Tartus where a group of our warships headed by the "Admiral Kuznetsov" aircraft-carrier has cast the anchor recently? We have four fleets and only one aircraft-carrier, whereas the United States boasts 11 such vessels in operation and 10 in reserve, Britain has three, and France and Italy have two each, not counting several under construction. We should not pretend to be a global power, but think of how to preserve Russia within its present borders and retain its present identity. We have to devote all our effort to create a modern economy. Otherwise, if our fuel-and-energy reserves come to an end or their prices drop before we solve this task, a catastrophic scenario of Russia's development will become inevitable. In its time the shortsighted Soviet leadership, in an effort to expand the area of "world socialism," muddled into the war in Afghanistan and brought the U.S.S.R. to disintegration.
The "Arab Revolution" Will End Sooner or Later, and What
Next?
We cannot say anything definite in answering this, yet some predictions can be voiced already now. The economic situation will definitely deteriorate in the nearest future. During revolutions, mass disorders, rebellions, etc. the countries gripped by them have lost about $60 billion by the end of 2011. The assistance promised by the European Union to the "revolutionary regimes" will hardly improve the situation, all the more so since the donor itself experiences acute financial problems. A difficult situation now exists in Tunisia where
there is a huge army of the unemployed. The country's prosperity is largely connected with tourism, which has suffered greatly from the world crisis.
But the most difficult situation is in Egypt, which had to accept a great many fellow-compatriots who had worked in Libya and were coming back home. A question arises whether the army will be able to retain its monolithic unity and restrain the Egyptian people from hurling the country into greater cataclysms. If it is answered positively the country will be able to get assistance from the United States as before, and, perhaps, from other countries, too. However, one thing is clear: there are no conditions for establishing democracy in Egypt at present. The country needs strong power, which can also be established by the Islamists. If they are flexible and cautious enough, they will be able to get aid from the rich Gulf states. Solution of the pressing socioeconomic problems facing the country is impossible without foreign investments, and also without the firm law and order.
Libya has objectively the opportunities to cope with the aftermath of the civil war comparatively quickly. It has great currency reserves in western banks, and if foreign specialists and workers, who have left it during the civil war, come back, the work of its oil-and-gas sector could be restored within a comparatively short space of time, and normal life will return to the country.
As to Syria, the situation there is still unclear. There is the view that Asad's departure from power will not solve the problem. The regime was created there 45 years ago, and Asad, his entourage and supporters have grown under it and are interested in its preservation. The result will be either its collapse or triumph. In the conditions of sanctions the Asad regime can last for about five more years.
What is the final conclusion? Evidently, most Arab countries will have to pass through the historical stage of Islamic regimes of different
degree of harshness. They have no other idea uniting them. The world knows of three powerful mobilizing factors: the national, the social and the religious. Nationalism, which prevailed in Nasser's time, has exhausted itself. The idea of socialism (with elements of nationalism and religion) has gone into the past along with real socialism. The idea of Islam has remained deeply rooted in the consciousness of the broad popular masses, and it is not only ideology, but also the way of life and the hope of those who have become disappointed with the secular forms of public life.
As to the idea of democracy, it seems to stay in the political arena in the conditions of globalization and information revolution. But it will either be integrated in the Islamic regime as is the case of Iran, or bear an imitation character as in many secular autocracies. There will also be such political systems in which democratic institutions will remain in the conditions of the rule of Islamic parties of a moderate character, as, for example, in Turkey.
"Strany Vostoka: sotsialno-politicheskiye,sotsialno-ekonomicheskiye i sotsiokulturniye problemy v kontekste globalizatsii," Moscow,2012, pp. 49-63.
Muslimat Gabibova,
Political analyst, Dagestani Regional Center of Ethno-political Studies CONFESSIONAL AND SECULAR FACTORS IN THE REPUBLIC OF DAGESTAN AT PRESENT
Russia is a striking example of a poly-ethnic and poly-confessional state, where confessional and inter-confessional relations are very important.
The contemporary model of state-confessional relations has been enriched by the diversity of regional models, depending on the specific 14
