The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
Over the past few days, on the orders of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his brother Maher, the head of the Republican Guard, state security forces opened fire on anti-regime protesters gathering peacefully at a mosque, mowed down people from nearby villages who rushed in to assist the protesters, and shot mourners at the funerals of the victims. In so doing, the Assad boys reminded their people and the world -- should any of us have been in any doubt -- that they are the progeny of Hafez al-Assad, the scourge of Hama. And yet, like the Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, Bahrainis, Jordanians, and Yemenites before them, the Syrian citizenry continues to rise up, taking their lives in their hands, to evict the tyrants and transform their lives.
It's heady, inspiring stuff. We feel it in Israel, too. Heaven knows there are bad guys galore in this neighborhood, and most of us can't help but sympathize with the people who are trying to get out from under them.
We wonder, though, what will happen after the dust settles.
John Hannah, writing in the NRO, is relatively sanguine about our prospects if the tyrants fall. He says that it is they, not their subjects, who will be tempted to lash out against us as the democratic wave gains strength across the Arab world. Fighting Israel is, after all, the Hail Mary pass of every Arab despot. As Hannah puts it,
It’s the oldest ruse in the playbook, a murderous attempt to draw the moths of the international media back to the light of Palestinian suffering, and redirect the anger of mobilized Muslim masses away from their current laser-like focus on the brutal and ruinous regimes that rule over them.
Can't argue with that. We're seeing evidence of it now in Hamas's escalation of violence against us, which is tantamount to an escalation of violence against us by Iran -- a country particularly skilled at both crushing its internal opposition and deflecting foreign attention toward Israel's alleged crimes.
Where I take issue with Hannah, however, is in his suggestion that the Arab populations that are now mobilizing are any less inclined to take us on. He says that "the dozen or so mass movements that have emerged across the Middle East over the past three months have all been distinguished by the near total absence of anti-American or anti-Zionist sentiment." It is true that anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism have not been at the forefront of any democratic movement, but a simmering anti-Zionism has been evident almost across the board.
During the uprising in Tahrir Square, it was difficult to find an image of Mubarak that did not sport a Star of David scrawled on the forehead. The Star of David has become something of a motif, in fact; like the mark of Cain, it has appeared drawn on images of Qaddafi as well.
This is not trivial. On a metaphorical level, the Star of David represents that which is most despised, that which must be expunged. In Mubarak's case, there was a literal meaning as well: the Star of David represented the Devil's bargain, otherwise known as the peace treaty with Israel.
Al-Jazeera reports that the protesters in Daraa have now called out Maher al-Assad by name. "Maher," they chant. "You coward. Send your troops to liberate the Golan."
- Comment (7)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
As they met with success, the protesters in Egypt began calling for war with Israel. Islam will never willingly accept a jewish state in the Middle East. Or a non-Muslim state anywhere in the long run. Institutional Islam pursues jihad or dawa, but never peace with the infidel.
Dec '10
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
That might be ominous.
On the other hand, that might be a variation on "pick on somebody your own size," as in, "if you're so brave and tough, why are you shooting at unarmed Syrians?"
It might well be that the protesters have no real interest in "liberating the Golan" if that entails exposing themselves and their families to the risks attendant on open war with Israel -- as it would be less likely that Syrian tanks would roll up the Golan as it would be that Israeli tanks would roll down toward Damascus.
Jun '10
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
While all this is going on, Vogue is running an adulatory profile of Bashar al-Assad's lovely British/Syrian wife. Message: she's glamorous, a modern mother, and he's a nice daddy just running the country.
The reality is that the Assads are murderous thugs.
Mar '11
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
Unfortunately it is often convenient for people revolting against authoritarian and corrupt regimes to believe that such regimes are in the employ of foreign powers and the strongmen in power are the agents of foreigners, which in the Arab world are the Jews and the Americans, who many there view as one and the same. In my opinion it is wishful thinking and so quite dangerous to believe that any regime that percolates up in Egypt, or in Libya or in Syria, or in the Arabian Peninsula will be any less hostile towards Israel and the United States than the regime it replaces. And when the authoritarian regime that fell was, if not a friend at least not an enemy, then any successor regime is likely to be worse. Policymakers in the US seem to have learned no lessons from the Iranian revolution or from what happened when they supported the pious "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan in the 1980s. There's a (perhaps apocryphal) statement attributed to FDR that "[Franco, Somoza] may be a son of a bitch but he is our son of a bitch". It sounds cynical but this is the reality which many are unwilling to face.
Mar '11
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
It is in the interest of Israel, and the civilized world as a whole, that disorder and fratricide in the Islamic world continue for as long as possible. If a strong leadership emerges it will consolidate it's position through aggression against Israel; so let's hope the kleptocrats can kling to power.
Jul '10
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
Ioannis: Absolutely the case. But the US has been reliably anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and mostly hegemonic in our approach to foreign affairs. That same FDR demanded the dismantling of the British Empire as the price for American cooperation during WWII. We cannot, as a people, abide by seeing human being repressed in our name (I exclude the usual Ricos, who know who they are, of course).
FDR never controlled or ruled Nicaragua in the same sense that the British ruled India, but there were obviously power relationships there. Or in the same sense that unions rule Wisconsin. (Am I the only one that loves the audio clip of Farrakhan blasting Obama for ordering Gaddafi to leave Libya?)
Mar '11
Re: The Arab Revolution: Anticipating the Morning After
Indeed, the US has been anticolonial. As Churchill recalled, FDR during WWI, in spite their close personal relationship, was always reminding him that Britain was an imperialist power that would have to give up its colonies after the war. All I am saying is that the concept of the lesser evil does exist in world affairs and it is often relatively easy to figure out if one is paying attention. The Shah vs. Khomeini, for instance, was a no-brainer in 1979, assuming you had a brain, hence Jimmy Carter's decision to side with the ayatollahs. Regarding Farrakhan's reaction, the charitable interpretation would be that he is supporting his brother-in-Islam Gaddafi (who pretends to be faithful only when it suits him, just like the late Saddam Hussein or the Assads). The less charitable interpretation is that the spigot of Libyan money is about to be turned off and the Nation of Islam will be broke. This is probably why the OAU, which exists essentially because of Gaddafi's largess, has been vocal in its condemnation of NATO's intervention but has been silent on pretty much any other humanitarian crisis in Africa.