The Middle East....what and why now? NOT the intervention!

@Setanta,

well yes of course, what came to my mind was the situation in Bahrain being sold as "the majority" want (democracy/freedom/etc) in fact Bahrain is IMO the most open nation of the ME and includes a population of jews, christians, hindus etc along with a very large migrant labour force, Bahrain provided the right to vote to women some years ago and is quite "liberal" in western thinking, the majority Shi'a oppose this liberalization and want the old ways (Iran) are we to support the majority (democratic) rule? Overly simple example.

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

So...who is rebelling in Bahrain?

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Predictions:

There will NOT be regime change in Syria this year
There WILL be regime change in Yemen this year.
There will NOT be regime change in Bahrain.
There WILL be regime change in Libya this year (though it may take the form of a divided country temporarily).

I was either 4/4 or 3/4 depending on how you call Yemen. There was stop-start regime change in Yemen that began well within the year but the last of it came in February this year which is within a year of the post I made but a bit outside the calendar year. I'm calling it in my favor and quitting while I'm ahead because I have no idea how to call Syria over the next year.

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

fbaezer on March 28th 2011 wrote:

After a short talk with my World Editor:
There will NOT be regime change in Syria this year
There WILL be regime change in Yemen this year
There will NOT be regime change in Bahrein (the Bahreini government by itself can't control the revolt, but for the regime change to happen, the US would have to convince the Saudi Arabian regime not to intervene in favor of the Sunni minority; the US won't do that, because of their fear of Hezbollah).
There WILL be regime change in Libya this year (it may take the form of a divided country temporarily, but Gaddafi will fall before the year's end).

I guess my World Editor was also 4/4 or 3/4 depending on how you rate Yemen.

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

I would not quibble with Setanta, I would however note that western as well as ME media along with "political analysis" by both "insiders" and international "experts" have been consistently wrong. Much is made of the trivia while little is made of the major factors.

Just wanted to emphasize that comment from someone who was long a resident of the Middle East.

So far, the only real, substantive change i see is in Tunisia. In Libya, we don't know what kind of regime will come out of the current mess, nor if they will, nor how they will differ from Got-daffy's regime. In Yemen, as Saleh stepped down in February, it may be reasonable to assert that a 'revolution" has been accomplished--but as with Libya, we cannot yet say how it will turn out.

Egypt is a mess--i see no reason to assert that there has been any substantive change there. The Supreme Council of the Military still rule the country, and still own about 90% of native Egyptian corporations. I really don't think it's over over there.

Syria doesn't surprise me, apart from the willingness of the people to put their lives on the line to oppose the Assad dynasty. I doubt that he'll give up easily though, and the situation is not ripe for a western intervention such as was done in Libya.

Bahrain? No surprise there.

0 Replies

@fbaezer,

Ask him what he thinks about Syria. Right now I lean towards saying that there WILL be regime change there in the next 18 months but still have considerable doubts and think that Assad might yet be able to quell the rebellion. The next couple of weeks should make a lot clearer.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

I just asked him.

He says he thinks Kofi Annan's plan will fail. Russia will have no excuse to defend the Syrian regime anymore. Without Putin's support, Assad will inevitably fall.
No NATO intervention.
He thinks it may happen before year's end ("year" meaning 2012).

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Not sure if ANYONE knows how to call Syria.

0 Replies

@fbaezer,

What does he think is going to emerge in Egypt and Libya?

1 Reply

@dlowan,

He considers inevitable that Islamist assume power in both countries.
Only a Coup d'Etat would prevent that from happening.
Those in Egypt are relatively moderate. But who knows what will emerge in Libya.

1 Reply

@fbaezer,

Interesting...and sad, in my view.

I agree re Libya, but I'm predicting same government as before the uprising but with different names, in the short term. I'm a little bit more hopeful about Egypt, but I suspect he's right in the medium term.

0 Replies

@fbaezer,

fbaezer wrote:

He says he thinks Kofi Annan's plan will fail.

Agreed. More like there really is no plan there to solve the conflict at all, just a plan for a ceasefire that will likely not hold. How it fails is what I am waiting to see unfold in the next few weeks.

Quote:

Russia will have no excuse to defend the Syrian regime anymore.

They definitely seem to have reached their limits recently (or are at least hedging their bets about being on the right side of eventual history).

Quote:

Without Putin's support, Assad will inevitably fall.

Not sure about this one. I don't think it is automatic and a dependent on things like what the SC would be willing to do etc, because:

Quote:

No NATO intervention.

Agreed, and this is why I don't think the above is automatic. If NATO (which in this case would mean the US, really, as NATO without the US lacks the capability unless the US does the overwhelming majority of the work) does not intervene it is unclear how Assad would fall. Sanctions? Arming the rebels?

Quote:

He thinks it may happen before year's end ("year" meaning 2012).

I agree that it could, there is certainly a zenith of opposition to him right now. But if it doesn't happen now I think this issue is not going away ever again and will be something that comes up again if Assad manages to survive this round.

But he seems to think he's cornered and I don't see his opposition having the power to oust him right now, and what exactly will change this dynamic is very unclear. Do you know if he has an idea on how it might happen? Or just a general feeling that the pressures will eventually come to bear?

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

He says that Syria is a poor country that depends on Russian help more than we imagine. That economic sanctions and the withdrawal of Russian subsidies will probably suffice for Assad's resignation (probably will try to negociate somo sort of immunity)... unless Assad proves crazier than what we think.
In that case, "anything can happen". Most likely, a coup d'Etat.

1 Reply

@fbaezer,

I personally rate Assad pretty crazy to have let it get this far, but more importantly he seems to have sold the ruling minority class that quelling this revolution is essential to their survival.

I don't personally see him giving in easily, but think that if the opposition can coalesce and convince Alawis (and other minorities) that their future under Sunni rule is not as bleak as they have been led to believe (a prospect AQI is making questionable that anyone can assure). I don't think Russian subsidy is as big a tipping point as he seems to but think that the kind of sanctions that can be brought to bear with Russian and Chinese support could eventually bring about a revolt from within his own ranks and a coup is what I've seen as the most likely way he would exit, I don't really see him giving in unless there's a sweetheart exile whose requisite immunity is increasingly difficult given how many have now died. He obviously can't survive in a post-Assad Syria and there aren't a lot of lawless havens that he'd find attractive.

Anyway, should be interesting to see how the next couple of weeks develop and how the Russian and Chinese positions mature.

0 Replies

I was looking through some of these tags and came across this thread from just a couple of years ago at the start of the Arab Spring. Things have morphed in a way that weren't predicted back then. Iraq wasn't even mentioned outside of an history brief, and the Islamists have taken a prominence that wasn't forseen. No one saw the Kurds in Iraq making their move for independence that this tumult has afforded them.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

On the thread I had said that my World Editor "considers inevitable that Islamists assume power in both countries (Lybia and Egypt). Only a Coup d'Etat would prevent that from happening".

I think he was totally right.
Islamists in Lybia, coup d'Etat in Egypt.

Where was he wrong?
He expected Russian support of Bachar El Assad to falter towards the end of 2012. It didn't.
Putin's view of Russia as a re-emerging power, regardless of the opinions of the majority of nations (as we saw in Crimea) has to do with it.

What didn't he see?
He didn't see extremists gaining momentum in Syria and Irak, and trying to install a caliphate. This fact also helped lessen Western support to all anti-Assad rebels.
These extremists are so extreme, Al Qaeda militiamen have fled the areas they control.

2 Replies

@fbaezer,

And the ball ain't half done rolling yet.

How's Iran trying to a bit of co-operation with the US!?

I gather they made overtures during the US occupation but were refused. I assume an unsettled Iraq is not something they want on their doorstep.

0 Replies

@fbaezer,

fbaezer wrote:

On the thread I had said that my World Editor "considers inevitable that Islamists assume power in both countries (Lybia and Egypt). Only a Coup d'Etat would prevent that from happening".

I think he was totally right.
Islamists in Lybia, coup d'Etat in Egypt.

Where was he wrong?
He expected Russian support of Bachar El Assad to falter towards the end of 2012. It didn't.
Putin's view of Russia as a re-emerging power, regardless of the opinions of the majority of nations (as we saw in Crimea) has to do with it.

What didn't he see?
He didn't see extremists gaining momentum in Syria and Irak, and trying to install a caliphate. This fact also helped lessen Western support to all anti-Assad rebels.
These extremists are so extreme, Al Qaeda militiamen have fled the areas they control.

By "Islamists" I was thinking more along the lines of the extremists, e.g. ISIS, er, IS. The term is used, unfortunately, interchangably between the political fundamentalists and the violent extremists. During the time of the Iranian Revolution the regime was just referred to as "Islamic," and I still think of that kind of regime that way, like Morsi's in Egypt.

0 Replies

I think the situation in the middle east is far too fluid, and too subtle, to be labelled in such simplistic terms. For example, was there actually regime change in Egypt? I would say no, because the military still calls the shots, and Morsi was deposed by the Field Marshall (al-Sisi?) because the Muslim Brotherhood was poised to carry things too far from the military's point of view. Tunisia seems to be the only nation which has truly seen a change, and one which the West would applaud, as it seems to have been toward tolerance and democracy.

I don't think anyone saw the Caliphate, Sunni fanatics from Syria coming, But they are also already mythologized by the western media. They took al Anbar, which is like overruning the Sonoran desert in Arizona--there's nothing there. Then, rather than driving hard for Baghdad, which would have been the militarily correct thing to do if they really meant to take over, they went to Tikrit. That has Saddam Hussein cronies written all over it. I think they may have shot their bolt already. They are a force for destabilization, but i con't see them establishing the caliphate any time soon, and they're sucking up fanatical, young Sunnis who would be better advised to confront, al-Assad. Assad seems to me to be the current big winner in the region.

The problem which so few commentators seem not to undersand is that the extremists are the only consistently well-organized groups in the middle east, but they rarely represent majority opinion. They can take over in the aftermath of government collapse, but i doubt that they can last in the long run.

0 Replies

Just talked again with my World Editor, and he disagrees, partly.

He says that the Islamic State radicals who want the Caliphate are growing fast, recruiting a lot of people, and have a different approach from Al Qaeda. Their approach is territorial control... "and let's see who expells them". It doesn't matter if they are a majority or a minority. They are many, they are fanatical, they are heavily armed.
He thinks Assad is only a relative winner of the situation, as moderate Sunnis have nothing to do anymore, in terms of a power smackdown in Syria. Of course the West should better not get involved anymore in Syria. Even Al Qaeda has little to do. So now Assad is the Chiite's "man at the frontier".
The problem becomes more complex, as other Chiite power factors -mainly Iran and Hezbollah- must be taken into account. Neither Iran nor Lebanon want a Sunni militant Islamic State at their borders. They will end up intervening heavily.
What he foresees in the future is a "clash of Islamic civilizations" of unpredictable proportions.
And the real winner will be... the Pershmergas, who will end up having their Kurdish State, with all the negative consequences for Turkey.

1 Reply

The Middle East....what and why now? NOT the intervention!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know