The sad fact is that the policy towards the West to dominate the Arab peoples have always been the policy of containment. Today, many people began cheering with the peoples of the region out to the streets to demand their rights, but until recently, the Western governments to behave much like the Arab peoples to be feared, and co-opt and control. In other parts of the world, spread democracy, but it seems that the West is satisfied in the Middle East and North Africa to support a range of Arab dictators, as long as they support the interests of the West and sponsor them. In other regions of the world, expected from governments - in principle at least - to serve their people, but the West is seen emperors and dictators the Arab world as if they guarantee "stability", so as not to cover shifts for fund popular demands. The world to promote human rights as a general rule, but the Arab world is the exception in the eyes of the world.
Spring has shown that many of the Arab peoples of the region do not like the West, with the complicity of government tyranny. These peoples, who refused to continue to play the role of submissive subjects of the rulers do not serve only themselves, began to insist on enjoying full citizenship in their countries, and to put its fate in its hands. In country after country, state repression sparked public anger on the systems it took many bloody acts. This time he got up the Arab street - the long-discussed conditions and a long silence - and the heart of the old regime. After she discovered the power and thunderous voice, the people of the region in the heart of its difficult with him back to what it was.
In Tunisia, was the catalyst to ignite fruit vendor Mohammed Bouazizi himself on fire, after a case of contempt of "routine" by the police. In Egypt, was the catalyst is the picture distorted the face of Khalid Saeed, a young man who beat him to death by police. In Syria, he was tortured teenage children in the street, wrote slogans against the regime. In Libya, was arrested Fathi treble, the lawyer for the victims of Abu Salim prison massacre that took place in 1996. These examples of the daily violations - among other examples are endless - sparked what is in essence a series of revolutions of human rights, driven by claims that governments can finally elected by their people, respect the rights of these peoples, and subject to the rule of law.
West is still trying to cope with this historic transition. As opposed to many of the democratic systems of the world in general, the violent repression of peaceful demonstrations, they are still reluctant alliance with the demonstrators, fearful of the consequences of credit to those citizens of these countries is important.
If Western governments were quick to give up her friends dictators, many nations had expressed open hostility toward the revolutions. Dictatorial governments began to tremble - which is expected - out of the previous authoritarian regimes on the peoples, and her heart. China has gone too far and acted strange, as it prevented the "Jasmine rallies" organized by the inspiration of the Tunisian Jasmine Revolution. And that North Korea is determined to hide the spring of the Arab people, to the extent that it prevented the return of its workers in Libya home. From Zimbabwe to Iran, from Sudan to Uzbekistan, from China to Russia, from Ethiopia to Vietnam, lives in fear of the despotic power of people demonstrated in the Arab spring.
They are not wrong in their expectations and fears. Popular uprisings have shown that the pursuit of the rights of public demand, is able to unify the elements of society and different generations of a single word for change. The old tools of repression - and the control of arbitrary detention, torture and murder - have only served to embolden the protesters once gained confidence in their large number. Instead of demonstrators down fear and indignation to comply, showed the crackdown on what they are tyrants, and highlighted the issue of honesty and integrity of the demonstrators. In such a horrible warning systems Acetkant the assumption that their repressive enough to always abort wrath of the masses.
There are countries that was her reaction to the Arab spring is particularly regrettable, and some of the democratic governments of the global South, such as Brazil, India and South Africa. These systems appear to concern outdated theories, such as state sovereignty, more account of the aspirations and hopes of the Arab peoples, even if it means protection of repressive regimes of international pressure, the required power and speed. Although these same countries have governments accountable and subject to the rule of law, democratic systems, the South has not only shown interest in a rare manifestation in helping the Arab world who are struggling for the establishment of systems subject to the same accountability and the rule of law. More often than not, she pointed out that democratic systems to the South possible misuse of the pressure on human rights - the fear of the use of this tool in the dominance of the North - to justify its failure to exert pressure on the perpetrators of gross violations of human rights.
This indifference to the rights of the parties to many peoples of the region must end. The best way to pressure the persecutors of the Arab peoples to stop the bloodshed is to stand firmly by the peoples of the Middle East and North Africa during the demanding their legitimate rights. Insist initial respect for rights is also the best way to help these grassroots movements to emerge unscathed from any deviations possible towards intolerance, or the fall of the law or the revenge of the elements of the legacy systems without taking into account the actions of the judiciary, the risks of taking place in all the revolutions may be achieved in the wake of revolutions.
The Arab spring a moment of transition, a historic opportunity to hold the peoples that have suffered from repression, control of long-determination in her hand. But it is not easy to shift. Peoples of the region - such as the peoples of the world - the world deserves support during the pursuit of their rights with the start of this journey is long overdue. It is time for the fall of the "exception" from the base of the Arab claim to human rights for all.
Embrace the West to Arab tyrants
Western governments have allowed the "exception" to the Arab it was believed that the best interests of serving in the region are dictators, placebo promise to "stability", and preferred this choice on the path to elected governments full of possibilities. There are five central reasons explain the acceptance of the West in the past for these presidents and emperors who believe that they will occupy chairs the sentence to the end of their lives.
The first reason is to "contain" any threat to Western interests from political Islam. Western governments and their allies have long looked to political Islam Nzertin not one look - they support political Islam when it deems useful to confront a feared enemy (the Mujahideen against the Soviets, Hamas against the Palestine Liberation Organization), or when their interests converge with the West (Saudi Arabia is an example). But when the challenge of political Islam friendly governments, it warned the West deeply.
Of the major motivating factors for this lack of trust, the non-Arab state, which is Iran, having deposed the Western-backed shah. Fear of "another Khomeini" - the more aggressive Iranian color toward the United States, cruelty and bloody with the people and supporting Hezbollah and Hamas - prompting many governments in the West to distrust political Islam took the time to the opposition movement challenging the regime ally.
Total amount of this lack of confidence in the early nineties, after a brief political opening in Algeria, it appeared that the Islamic Salvation Front, on the verge of an electoral victory. Stop the military coup of the electoral process without the slightest protest from the West. Supporters of the coup said that the secret agenda of the Islamists was allowing "one electoral process will not be repeated." Right that many of the Islamist parties have taken positions annoying violate the rights of women and restrict religious freedoms and personal and political. But so did a lot of repressive regimes supported by the West. It can not be considered biased against the Islamic movements in terms of rights principle. But, instead of engagement with these movements claim to respect the rights, the West treated her like systems do not pariah field entities to communicate with them.
This lack of trust led to the prosperity of the West's support mockery of democracy in the region. For example, in an attempt by U.S. President George W. Bush to justify the invasion of Iraq - after the invasion began - talk about promoting democracy. Bush's pressure is less pressure to hold elections of other countries in the region. But soon concluded that the democracy agenda when Hamas won in a fair election in the West Bank and Gaza in 2006, when the Muslim Brotherhood won seats in Egypt's parliamentary elections in 2005.
Despite the West's wariness, he won followers of political Islam became a stream as the first expression of anger from the corrupt rulers of the region non-responders to the aspirations of peoples. Because the mosque was usually the most freedom of the institution in a civil society repressed; mosque became a natural rallying point for angry. Arab leaders have been in most cases the threat of aggressive threat the Islamists as an alternative to them so as to ensure the West's support in their campaigns of oppression and even ignore the demands of fair elections.
The second reason to embrace the West to Arab tyrants is the perception of the West that they are able to combat terrorism. Arab extremists have no monopoly of terrorism in any way, but the policy makers in the West see certain Arab groups as representing a serious threat because they kill civilians in their own countries and in the West as well. And the name of protecting civilians, Western governments were willing to support the Arab dictators who have vowed to fight against those terrorists. The issue of torture of these tyrants and oppression of their people is a secondary issue to the West. The West ignored the fact that this suppression usually increases support for individuals and violent extremist groups.
Third, Arab dictators entrusted the West more than it entrusted the Arab peoples to achieve a state of "harmony" with Israel - which is a very important factor in the West's policy towards Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon to some extent. Many Arabs have disturbed them, of course, Israel's repression of the Palestinian people, and often protested against it. Tyrants of the region quickly learned to let these protests, but are urging, as it is a good way to empty the anger away from the mismanagement of their country. As long as Arab dictators are able to control the demonstrations, they had the support of the West. Those who have taken more steps and signed a peace agreement with Israel received massive U.S. aid, regardless of their internal policies.
Fourth, the West sees Arab tyrants the best way for the continued flow of oil. Of course, even in the era of Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Libya under Muammar Gaddafi ready to sell oil to the West. But with the case of a narrow market and high oil prices and revolutionary change, especially in Saudi Arabia, the West risked disorders with the economic turmoil the flow of oil. The West did not want to get aggressive on Iran's huge oil reserves neighboring Gulf countries. To prevent these scenarios, or any threat to the comfortable relations held between the corporate and business elites of Western and Arabic, the West preferred to tyrants who rule the people he knew on the magnitude of the whims and decisions that are not in favor of the West. At the same time, given the massive oil profits to those tyrants Qmaahtmcnhm ways to retain power without accountability to an audience of taxpayers.
Finally, the West - particularly the European Union - resorted to authoritarian governments in the region to help stem the flow of immigrants. North Africa is a huge and important transit point for illegal immigrants to Europe. Adopted by the West to repressive governments to stop the flow - to prevent migrants from leaving Htanhm, and accept their return to their countries if they left the shores, without investigating their application to immigration or asylum. European Union governments, in turn, rewarded these trade agreements and several aid.
Lie of "Arab exceptionalism"
Although selfish governments in the West to achieve its own interests, they do not want to recognize the preference for authoritarian regimes in the Arab world. But behave as if the common errors from the Arab community are real, perceptions such that the Arab peoples inactive politically and not advanced and not care about those who are governed by, and if these qualities linked to Arab civilization, or to imagine that mixing traditions of Arab Islamism made the peoples of the region is not interested in democracy or that democracy is not suited . The revolutions that shook the Arab world tend any credibility on these flimsy excuses in order to support the tyrants of the region.
Surprising that any of the reasons and motives that were not feared by the West behind the popular movement of protest, which was launched last year. There is little evidence that political Islam was the spark or the driving force of popular uprisings, it has appeared later, when the organization gave the Islamists the best and their occupation by the opposition benches for a competitive advantage over activists and parties later. As there was no prominent place in the ranks of the demonstrators to oppose Israeli policies or support terrorism or hatred of the West. It was popular uprisings mainly a firm resolve to improve the quality of life within the home rather than to flee to Europe.
The driving force of the revolution is to oppose tyranny itself. Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, Bahrainis and Yemenis, Syrians, and other peoples, had enough of repression, corruption, favoritism, and arbitrary rule and stagnant societies that provided them with tyrants. The demonstrations of anger on a group separate from reality and serve only their interests. Such as the revolutions of Eastern Europe turned upside down in 1989, the Arab revolutions inspired by visions of freedom and the desire to take people to their fate, and strive to bring the governments are accountable to the public, not controlled by the ruling elite.
The international community holds the stick from the middle
But here is the Western governments exercise "moderation" and keeping the middle of the stick at these popular movements, and responses are selective, do not know how to harmonize the satisfaction of the old authoritarian systems and rapid recognition of these days because the dictators are numbered. The United States and the European Union are the parties most committed to the principles in reaction to the suppression of Arab governments. In Libya, the United States and European Union sanctions and demanded the intervention of the International Criminal Court. Quickly and has a number of countries preparing military response to what she saw as an impending disaster on the verification of human rights. In Syria, after some hesitation, joined hands with the international forces and the peaceful opposition movement against the government of President Bashar al-Assad for sanctions against individuals.
However, in other countries, the West had to deal with uprisings people more hesitant and less certain. There were the U.S. government in the face of the president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, and was seen as a strong pillar for the "stability" of the region, to show that his fate is inevitable. Then came a long reluctance to pressure the military junta in Egypt to subject itself to civilian rule. France was committed to the same approach, the President of Tunisia, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, that is about to fall.
Similarly, Western governments did not exercise effective pressure on the government of President Ali Abdullah Saleh for the murder of civilians, and was seen in favor of a line of defense against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Condemned the West, the suppression of Bahrain to the democratic movement of Bahrain, and called to make repairs, but did not exert any real pressure on the government of Bahrain from the reality of fear for the fate of the base of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, as well as the approach was the same with Saudi Arabia, which Khst of Iran's interference in Bahrain's majority Shiite Fearing the presence of a democratic model on the Saudi border. Even within the halls of the U.S. government, the policy makers are divided on Bahrain, as the U.S. Congress to prevent an arms deal for Bahrain proposed the administration of President Barack Obama. At the same time, Western governments have called for reforms in the systems area other property, such as constitutional amendments in Morocco and promises of change in Jordan, but - these Western governments - did not say a lot about making these systems of ownership of actions hostile to democracy, such as the adoption of repressive laws in Saudi Arabia, , or imprisonment of five militants in the UAE.
It has been shown in the behavior of other non-Western same frequency and pattern of double standards. Habitually seeks Arab League governments to defend each other against any form of criticism of human rights violations. Here is now beginning to communicate more constructively, driven by varying degrees of post-revolution governments and regional rivalries (especially with Iran), in an attempt to perform the role of what the center of democratic movements in the region. In Libya, the Arab League ratified the pressure on Gaddafi, paving the way for Security Council action. In Syria, the Arab League protested the political killings and came out with a plan to end the violence Syria approved, by consent of the theory. When Syria violated its promise - which is expected - has frozen the Arab League membership and announced sanctions.
In contrast, the African Union was an accomplice in the most shameful. The Union, who founded the pretext of promoting democracy, he moved like a club pro tyrants, Vanhaz to any government in power, regardless of their behavior. With the outbreak of revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, the African Union in a better estimation of the role, and in the worst non-cooperative at all. African Court on Human and Peoples - the independent - the only body in the African Union Gaddafi ordered an end to the killings, in a ruling issued by the court in the first important issue to them.
Russia and China did not tolerate with the international movements in Libya, but when it appeared that stigmatized the political opposition to these actions will make them look tough international. But when the partners appeared to Russia and China in the indifference to Syria, for example, did not feel any guilt with the use of veto power against the international resolutions.
For its part, has been ratified by Brazil, India and South Africa - the democratic systems, the task of the Security Council - the international movements in Libya or incurred, but they are invoked to bypass NATO's alleged mandate to protect civilians as a justification for refusing to ratify any pressure symbolic until the Security Council on Syria.
This careful handling of the international community came in a time when the Arab revolutions are far from over. Revolutionary idealists face serious pressure and dominate and do not have any guarantees of victory. The rebels themselves violated in some cases of human rights, it seems, for example, militias executed a Libyan Muammar Gaddafi and his son Mutassim Gaddafi without trial, and persecuted black African migrant workers skin. The international community can play an important role in the anti these threats even go out into the light of democratic regimes that respect human rights, systems of power out of the mantle of the old and the new revolutionary forces.
Arab countries in three categories
Useful to the region during the consideration of thinking of it as loose three categories of countries. First-strong Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, which are those that ousted the old authoritarian systems (but not in Egypt, deposed the military regime in power Almtmitrs) and at this writing these countries go through a difficult phase, is the stage of building a new system of government. The task is not easy or trivial. Easier for the demolition of authoritarian institutions, it is difficult to replace them with democratic institutions. Easy to build consensus on the need to take off the tyranny, and more difficult to create a collective vision is common to replace it. In contrast to Eastern Europe in 1989, there is no temptation to join the European Union to encourage new governments to respect human rights (although the EU has provided other carrots, such as trade concessions and to facilitate visa procedures for travel). As repressive regimes that did not fall as fast as a quick fall of regimes in 1989, and not the opponents of authoritarian regimes united. A model reared its head, is the dictatorial regimes in the republics of Central Asia after the collapse of the Soviet Union, where there was anti-democratic forces and replaced repressive regimes replaced the communist government.
Subject: Time to give up dictators and upholding human rights / By Kenneth Roth: International reaction to the Arab spring 
Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:01 pm
