#What is really going on in the Middle East? (2) - Yusuf al-Misry

 
In the 50’s, the world was mesmerized while it watched the titanic changes occurring in the Middle East at the hands of juntas with different names toppling one regime after another. These juntas seem to have determined to give us one last spectacle as they now crumble one after the other.

The first part of this analysis was in fact a delayed answer to a question by a US military officer (and a friend of Col Lang) working in Cairo about the reasons Nasser chose the path he had in running Egypt. Time was short when the question was asked and I could not answer the question then.

We did talk then about what was done by the Brits on the 4^th of Feb 1942 and how the Free Officers “modus operandi” was formed during the decade that preceded those turbulent years in the history of Egypt .  But what is really important now is to try to figure out the “modus operandi” of whoever will run Egypt in the near future.

In almost all the cases where the military ruled in the region, they achieved certain degrees of development. In Egypt, the slogan in mid-50’s was to build one school every two days. That was more or less done. In the beginning of the 60’s it was “1000 factories”. Literacy was at its highest in record. Kids used to receive a healthy free meal in schools. The Aswan dam was built. Hospitals were clean and free.

But all this occurred without “democracy”. In fact, a horrifying police state was being built behind the smoke of “national victories”. East German and Soviet experts in internal security were invited to design this whole structure. But Nasser did not allow that to stop him from arresting all Egyptian communists, hanging the leaders of the Muslem Brotherhood and banning any political activity except his own.

The population applauded him in every step. They sometimes joked about his obsessiveness with security as in fact he did not need that, people really liked him, but these jokes were whispered for fear of government agents.

The political forces in the Arab World, that had existed prior to these coups could not compete with these powerful military regimes and their national achievements. In fact, they were weakened by these achievements, achievements that they had tried unsuccessfully for so long to accomplish.  The they had to watch the military accomplishing all by decree rather than political process.  The MBs went back to their Mosques which were under heavy surveillance. The Communists who were led by some foreign and Egyptian Jews were isolated when they supported the division of Palestine in 1947 and called disloyal for accepting Israel under the slogan of “Building an International Peace Camp.” Then they were put in prison. Then, they accepted the regime’s call to denounce their party and join those of the military. The Wafd was weakened when Nasser gave the business community the agriculture reform and market protectionism they wished for. He later confiscated their companies (in 1961).

In Libya, Iraq, Syria, Algeria, and Yemen it was a similar story with different levels of intensity.  The military regimes achieved some very essential social and political goals in return for a “blank check” from the population. In all these countries silence was imposed and a decorative political life was staged for deception purposes. But the equations were all the same : We will give you food, stability, education, infrastructural projects, national pride, jobs in the public sectors, price controls, etc., and you will give us total silence and submission. That was the deal.

But, times changed. The achievements were lost one after the other like the feathers of an old bird. What remained was the oppressive machine, the army that was in power, and some empty slogans. These governments could not offer anything more. They dismantled the public sector that they previously built, they made peace with Israel instead of using the “national glorious battle” against it to silence the population, they started looting the country instead of building it and it was the time for “who cannot be rich now will never be rich” as president Sadat put it once. It was the age of undoing what was done.

Why did they do that?. It was obvious that the absence of popular participation in regimes that were utterly oppressive would develop the worst in the juntas and their many civilian collaborators. Moreover, the margin of maneuverability allowed to the juntas in a bi-polar global arena was diminishing quickly. There are many opinions about this process but the important point in this context is that it was impossible to offer the people anything worthy during the decline of these experiments in the Middle East.

This specific conclusion is precisely the reason why we see what see now in that region.

In Egypt, Tunisia and Libya two factors played a crucial role in the uprising we have just seen: the brutal oppression of the government apparatus, particularly the police force, and the flagrant corruption that was the rule everywhere. These were structural issues. They were not on the “skin” that could be treated relatively easy.  And there were no national achievements to help the population swallow all that. Above all, killing off the political life and valid opposition forcesin the countries was a main objective of the juntas.  This played a role in their demise. Their actions caused a situation in which there was no way to slow the process of decay or even reveal that it existed.

In the third part of this analysis I will put forward some thoughts about what I think will happen next. The particular events that we see now will play a crucial role in drawing the features of the near future. It is however important to distinguish between what we hope for and what the the situation will be. I would say that after reading many articles in the US media I find in many of them proposals of “recipe” as to how should things be. Many of these proposals are unfortunate.      

Comments

[Ramtanu Maitra]

What I find most interesting about these uprisings is that not a single carrier of photo of Osama bin Laden has appeared either in Cairo, or Tunis, or Algiers, or Tripoli, or Bahrain, or Amman or even in, Sanaa. What does that mean?
Does it mean that Osama bin Laden and his "vice-like grip" over the Islamic militants we were told to believe was all an orchestrated lie (the pitcher-batter duel in which you got to strike out someone, not an organization, some one and that some one was Osama?), or for reasons that I do not understand, why Osama has suddenly lost all credibility to the people he was allegedly mentoring.
It is true that Osama bin Laden had from the very outset called for removal of these Arab and Islamic "despots". That was pretty much the mantra of al-Qaeda in the old days before US bgean to monopolize AQ's attention. What happened in the interim? Despite his ostensible success associated with 911, and his ability to "influence" Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, and even after his success in setting up what is known as AQIM ( al-Qaeda Islamic Maghreb), which was "reportedly" gaining grounds rapidly, as al-Qaeda was also reportedly gaining grounds in Yemen, why I do not see a single poster carried by someone among the mutlitude in the streets of turmoil?

[William R. Cumming]

Great post! While some systems (perhaps the Chinese) have traded economic freedom for its population for denying political freedom it looks like your assessment is both were denied in the countries you discussed and a repressive and corrupt police state existed. Is my shorthand statement of your essay correct?

[Charles I]

Thanks.

Would Abdeen Palace be the same Presidential palace that EGYPTIAN tanks surrounded this time?

[zot23]

This is a good series, thank you for taking the time to write them.

[Yusuf Al-Misry]

Mr Cummings..Yes. It is.

[Yusuf Al-Misry]

Charles. Abdeen Palace is empty now. No tanks can surround millions of people in the streets. That is the difference.
Watch next Friday at Tahrir Square. Another round of the arms wrestling. Million persons will gather to guarantee that the country will move in the right direction

[William R. Cumming]

YUSUF! Question? What nation-state or regional grouping other than N.African states themselves benefits the most from current "unrest" in the that area of the WORLD? And its likely course?

[Yusuf Al-Misry]

Mr Cummings. It is still a very fluid situation. It depends on the conclusion. I believe the last part of this analysis will partially address that

[Yusuf Al-Misry]

Sorry Charles..Slow understanding! I just got your point now.(about Abdeen Palace). They can not impose their will. The balance on the ground is different. My remark about next Friday is still valid however!

[Clifford Kiracofe]

YaM,
These are really fine and helpful pieces, please keep them coming.

[Peter Principle]

In all these countries silence was imposed and a decorative political life was staged for deception purposes. But the equations were all the same : We will give you food, stability, education, infrastructural projects, national pride, jobs in the public sectors, price controls, etc., and you will give us total silence and submission. That was the deal.

Basically the same "deal" imposed in the Asian Tiger countries during the '60s, '70s and into the '80s, and in mainland China now.

The difference, of course, is that the Tigers went for forced-draft, state-supported, export-driven capitalist development, which worked, instead of old-fashioned Stalinist central planning (a steel mill in every village), which didn't work.

Granted, most of the Tiger dictatorships have since collapsed. But it was generally a less violent, more evolutionary process than what we're now seeing (and may see more of in the future) in the Middle East -- thanks in large part to all that wealth that forced-draft capitalism created.

In other words, the difference between the two regions may simply be that Asian dictatorships bet on a winner, while Arab regimes by and large bet on the loser -- economically speaking.

[Charles I]

Thanks very much Yusuf, I'd certainly never heard of Feb 4 1942, this place is like the Library at Alexandria saved for me, so many interesting thoughts and little details to consider. I'm very grateful for both.

At least they're Egyptians NOT shooting at Egyptians, this is progress. There was a very nice piece on the April 6th movement on PBS last night detailing its genesis, growth, personnel and experiences. Wonderful group of savvy fearless youth, whatever else may or may not have been going on. There was not a hint of religiosity, no sign of the MB until they got on the bandwagon day three.

But April 6th certainly don't seem to be imposing their will on the army , really curious to see these constitutional amendment proposals.

Sad to me, although I know not whereof I speak, that Egypt has been so drained and constrained that it is currently unable to exert the regional influence that might avail next door.

William R. Cumming, re cui bono.

Surely a more democratic influence on foreign policy would perforce end complete subservience to the "Peace Process", include some freedom to rightfully abuse the U.S. over its complicity, e.g, the recent Settlement Resolution veto, all of which would redound to the wily and commodity hungry Chinese?

They are already busy buying up mining in Africa and expanding their influence there apace, big investors in our oil sands, spying and influencing their guts out up here in Canada, according to the odd indiscreet eruption of our top CSIS chappies, apparently miffed at the level of influence if not actual penetration, and political indifferenc to it.

This week it comes pout they hacked our Finance Ministry and Revenue Ministry computer systems, along with some Canadian defense Research Agency I'd never even heard of. Phishing emails right to the top execs, trick attachments, voluntarily compromised passwords, the whole nine yards. Bloody high school security.

[Arun]

In other words, the difference between the two regions may simply be that Asian dictatorships bet on a winner, while Arab regimes by and large bet on the loser -- economically speaking.

And perhaps because there is no Jerusalem nor Mecca in that region of Asia.

[William R. Cumming]

Charles I! Note the Chinese are attempting to evacuate their 15,000 workers in Libya. WOW!

And the PLA and state security apparatus in China has been put on high alert over rumors of a "Jasmine Revolution"! My my globalization. Not just bits and bytes of financial wizardy running aroung.

[William R. Cumming]

Juan Cole on his Informed Comment Blog reporting 90% of Libya under "rebel" control.

[Harper]

Thanks for the vital historcial background and insight to current unfoldings. I always think it's important to situate these tectonic shifts, as in the late Nasser period, in the larger global context. Yes, the inherent paradox between a genuine development impulse and the police state repression was one obvious internal factor, leading to disasters. And, of course, Nasser's setback in the 1967 Six Day War was a profound psychological shock for the Egyptian people.

But globally, things were going from bad to worse on a long trajectory downward. The breakup of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 was a fundamental change from development to speculation, globally. The IMF and World Bank really changed stripes during this same time frame, now imposing models of "appropriate development" which amounted to a new form of looting of the most advanced sectors of the developing world. The new model, the so-called "Washington Consensus," was a shift to strictly export economies, currency devaluations, privatization of state sector industries, foreign direct ownership, and a spiral of debt controls. I am reminded of the American Civil War generals who were in Egypt in the 1870s and 1880s, and witnessed and wrote of how the British and French bankrupted Egypt, through manipulation of the debt. Same thing happened again, with a vengeance, in the 1970s and 1980s, and this allied the repressive regimes with a new set of oligarchs (in Egypt, Gamal Mubarak, Ezz, etal.). This whole process has now really run its course. If the ongoing revolts are to have a happy ending, I think the lessons of this larger picture must be seriously studied. In Egypt, as late as 1982, the Mubarak government had ambitious development plans, including construction of four nuclear power plants, to be brought on line by 2010, massive irrigation projects, road, rail and other infrastructure plans, etc. These plans were crushed by external pressures to follow the prescribed IMF/WB model, and the internal corruption was too much to withstand. Only very few cases stand out of successful resistance to these global pressures and factors. Mahathir in Malaysia stands out to me.

[Charles I]

William R Cumming

15,000?!! I had no idea.

[Yusuf Al-Misry]

Harper..This is very precise

[Peter Principle]

In other words, the difference between the two regions may simply be that Asian dictatorships bet on a winner, while Arab regimes by and large bet on the loser -- economically speaking.

And perhaps because there is no Jerusalem nor Mecca in that region of Asia.

Obviously I overstated the case. There are many, many differences between the Middle East and East Asia.

I guess what I meant to say is that to the extent the Arab Revolt 2.0 is the result of a breakdown of the economic "deal" that al Misry speaks of, then the violence of that breakdown (relative to the way the process unfolded in East Asia) could be that the Arab Socialism model adopted by the post-colonial military regimes in the Middle East couldn't deliver the prosperity required to hold up their end of the bargain. Not in the long run, anyway.

One question in my mind is whether the tardy shift to "neoliberal" economics in the late 1990s could have helped stave off political collapse if it had begun earlier -- or was it always inevitable that allegedly "free market" policies would quickly sink into the quicksands of corruption, cronyism and massive income inequality.

Don't know, but the experience of the past decade sure seems like vivid proof of de Tocqueville's comment: "The the most critical moment for bad governments is the one which witnesses their first steps toward reform."

[Continental Op]

Peter Principle asks One question in my mind is whether the tardy shift to "neoliberal" economics in the late 1990s could have helped stave off political collapse if it had begun earlier . . .

Neoliberal ideology is part of the problem. Neoliberal policies skew income distribution toward the wealthy and cause unemployment among all those inefficient people in inneficient local industries. Not to mention cutting subsidies on food and privatizing basic services that lower income people depend on.