“If the mind can conceive it, and the heart believe it, man can achieve it.”*
I don’t share his optimism, but he lays out his case quite well. Even if his conclusion is Pollyannaish, his points are still valid. He lives there, as opposed to the cacophonous chorus of commenters here in the US who have no real understanding of the region.
Egypt and Tunisia have sparked new life in a dead region and vigor in moribund states, making vibrant citizens of once-docile subjects. They have spurred marginalized states to reclaim a role in the world of dynamic countries. Widespread collective and individual humiliation is giving way to self-assertion; incompetent security states are giving way to re-legitimized governments and normal societies. (Khouri)My only quibble is that he lists these events as “firsts” when really they are “seconds” or perhaps even “thirds,” given our efforts at democratizing Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention Kemal Attaturk’s heroic efforts to drag his country into the modern age (OK, they are Turks, not Arabs.) Nonetheless, these events are not so unprecedented as Khouri would have us believe.
Is it Bush's Fault?
Had we not invaded Iraq and forced a regime change that put politics into the hands of ordinary Iraqis, would Tunisia and Egypt have happened? Was George Bush the imperfect grandfather of this? It’s worth noting that the unrest has not spread to Iraq. The people there have more control over their destiny than any other country in the region besides Israel. Iraqis are in the street protesting, but it is for more electricity and better public services.
The people of the Middle East have been beaten down by their rulers; further humiliations were handed them by foreign intervention. We must understand that although we took out a brutal dictator and freed over 40 million people, this is counted as a humiliation in the Arab mind. Because we did something for them that they could not do it themselves, we laid bare their inadequacies. So in this respect, Tunisia and Egypt are signal events.
Let it Burn?
Regardless of whether nefarious forces are behind street demonstrations, these people must grasp their own destiny, even if they end up crashing. At least it will be their crash, and maybe, just maybe, they can finally own their failures without instinctively grasping for a foreign scapegoat to slaughter.
Smart global strategists point to the dangers of allowing this boiling cauldron to tip over. I think we need to allow events to play out regardless of how chaotic they become. At the end of it, a people must work out their issues to the logical end. We in the west have been screaming at them that they’re doing it all wrong, to no avail. They need to work it out on their own. Will it lead to more enslavement, this time at the hands of humorless Islamists? Who knows. At least that outcome would pit the people against their mullahtocracy, instead of against the west. That is what happened in Iran.
Blood for Oil?
Like it or not, oil powers our economy. Does it logically follow that we have to keep an expensive presence in the Middle East? Jeremy Khan highlights research that says maybe not.
There’s no denying the importance of Middle Eastern oil to the US economy. Although only 15 percent of imported US oil comes directly from the Persian Gulf, the region is responsible for nearly a third of the world’s production and the majority of its known reserves. But the oil market is also elastic: Many key producing countries have spare capacity, so if oil is cut off from one country, others tend to increase their output rapidly to compensate. (Boston Globe)
Whoever controls that oil can’t eat it; they will have to sell it eventually, ending any global “oil shock.” Also, we can start drilling here drilling now to lessen our dependence even more. In the final equation, it comes down to a simple cost-benefit analysis: Which is cheaper? Staying in the region and protecting nasty regimes who hate our guts and fund Wahabbist projects in our lands, or getting out and absorbing whatever economic hits we may take due to the whatever turmoil or disruptions would occur in our absence?
I think we need to take a serious look at choosing the latter.
* - This quote is ascribed to W. Clement Stone and Jesse Jackson, among many others. It is one of Papa Silverfiddle’s favorites, and he taught it to me when I was young.
Further Reading:
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67432/james-d-le-sueur/postcolonial-time-disorder
