Leave, was the message, loud and clear, painted on every other banner raised in Tahrir Square. The historic protests in Egypt and Tunisia saw people come out on the streets and successfully demand a change in leadership. Now, with the leaders gone, the big question facing these countries is: what next? With Syria, Yemen and Libya facing similar protests, what is the solution to the political upheaval that has taken the region by storm? Political researchers and Gulf News readers came together this week to debate whether a democratic system will actually be able to address all the concerns raised by the Arab populace through the uprisings. In the final debate of our three-part series on ‘Democracy in the Arab world’, we ask whether democracy is the answer for these countries. Tell us what you think at readers@gulfnews.com
Is chaos a price people have to pay for political change?
Mark Rush
I don’t think anybody desires chaos. But, political change isn’t always orderly and I think the real question people have to think about is what is the scope of political change they wish to bring about and what price are they willing to pay to bring it about peacefully? Democracy is just a process; it is not going to necessarily bring you the political change you desire. It is really a question of managing the different political agendas. But, that’s also a question of patience and if the people are willing to think about bringing about political reform incrementally and patiently. Even if you read much of the coverage on the Arab world, there is a general acknowledgement that it will have to be a slow, carefully-orchestrated process that will take time. The question is whether or not people are willing to wait that long. What will make it hard is that there are so many non-political problems that plague the region, that it might be hard to establish a working democracy peacefully if you don’t resolve the other problems.
James Sater
It depends a little bit on how political change is being implemented and what type of leaders are implementing them. We don’t need to have a situation where thousands of people are demonstrating on the streets to get rid of your emergency laws – you could have repealed them fifteen years ago. You can implement political changes carefully and incrementally, anticipating the movement of where the people want to be with you as a leader in the future. And there are examples in countries like Morocco where this type of political change has been implemented more carefully. That is why it has not surprised me that Morocco has been one of the countries that has faced the least amount of public opposition. So, I don’t think chaos is necessarily the price to pay, it really depends on how well the state anticipates some of the changes that need to take place.
Saeed Hamad Al Ghufli
To be honest, I think chaos is an uncivilised way to protest. But the leaders need to lay the foundation of a country on justice. Even from an Islamic point of view, justice will lead to success. If there is justice and fairness, there will be no chaos. People will be understanding and will be happy with their lives. This is why you see chaos in countries like Egypt and Libya, because of the lack of justice. This generation is more open-minded. If there is justice and fairness, if you give them time, and education and the justice they deserve, I believe that people, especially the youth, can manage their own country and Egypt will be a great nation and shine.
Ali Abdul Rahman Al Ghass
In my opinion, chaos is never the solution. However, if the country does not respond to its people’s demands then – yes – it is the only solution. For example, in Syria, the first procession they had was peaceful. Now, it has become a bloodbath and that is why the world media is focusing on Syria. If you want to change the entire system in a country then I guess chaos is the only solution. As for leadership, I don’t think it is a good idea to give complete power to a leader in a democracy. For example, if you look at Egypt, Hosni Mubarak had complete power and in the coming days he will be tried to see if he abused his powers.
Khalifa Abdul Rahman Bin Sobeih
I think this chaos was coming one way or another. Just like the global economic crisis, the Egyptians and the Mena region had just had it. It was like a bubble, which kept getting bigger and bigger and then it just blew up leading to all this chaos. Basically, democracy is a government by the people, for the people. So, when you have a government that is supposed to be for the people but is by someone else, it is not really the kind of government that people would want to be led by. Naturally there will be people who will oppose it, which may eventually lead to chaos. Having said that, I think the worst is over. I think the leaders have started to understand the outcomes of the revolution and the chaos. That is why some governments are being proactive to avoid the anger of the people.
People are considering democracy a quick-fix solution to their problems.
Mark Rush
I would hesitate to say what the people are thinking, because there is a way in which these protests have been portrayed in the media and what has happened so far is that rulers with varying charges of corruption have been toppled or they have begun to make changes. So, what you see is the first step. Toppling a bad ruler is not the same as establishing a democracy. Also, there is a big difference between social unrest and social protest. Right now you see a lot of cries for social unrest, but not much in way of nation-building. There is a lot of call to change but one of the lessons that democracy has taught us is that it takes an awful lot of hard work from the people. Democracy will never be a quick-fix and the question is: Can these countries make the gradual transition without outside help? And I think the question of the ‘outside’ still matters a lot. You can’t simply isolate a nation from the rest of the world – you have trade, media and communication, so the rest of the world is already involved. The question is what role does it play?
James Sater
We are living in a different political climate, where people are a lot more sceptical. For example in Egypt people are going to Tahrir Square almost every day, because they don’t believe that change will take place without that. This is why there is reason to be more hopeful. While democracy may not be able to end corruption, bring economic development or solve the immediate problems, it will create empowerment and dignity and these were the key words of the movement: dignity, honour.
Saeed Hamad Al Ghufli
I can’t speak for the protesters, but my perspective is that the youth are much more intelligent. I don’t think there is any short cut. It will take long, there is a lot of corruption that exists and its solution will take time.
Ali Abdul Rahman Al Ghass
There is no perfect democracy in the world but I think it will work if the power is not concentrated – it is given to a parliament, which can decide on the solutions for these countries. And I think education has made a difference, because the more educated people are the more they realise that they deserve more and you can see how the economic problems have affected them. For example in Tunisia, you could see that there were graduates who wanted a better life but the country did not give them the chance to work. That one problem spread into many more problems. And now that they have taken the first step, I don’t think they will stop until all the problems are fixed.
Is democracy the answer to the issues facing the Middle East?
Mark Rush
I suppose you’d have to ask which problems you want to solve. Democracy won’t necessarily solve an economic or demographic problem. It allows different parts of the polity to have a voice but that doesn’t mean that you are going to get everything that you wish for. The problems facing the Middle East will transcend politics in some ways. The question is how we manage these problems. Democracy is a way of conducting politics, it is predicated in certain beliefs – equality, freedom, accountability and constitutionalism. But political change can come about peacefully in a managed manner if people agree to the rules by which politics is conducted. What happens in Libya, Syria and Yemen will depend on this.
James Sater
It is a difficult question, but I would still say – hesitantly – yes. Liberal democracy is focused on individual rights and protects the minorities against majorities; because that is a common problem people have even in ideal democracies. The example being Switzerland, which banned the minarets and the majority ruled over a very important Muslim minority. A liberal democracy offers the individual a lot of opportunities to express themselves. It protects religious minorities, women from discrimination. So, with all those qualifications, a liberal democracy would be the answer. But it may also expose a lot of underlying conflicts and issues. If people understand that they are protected by the state, then I think democracy would be the answer.
Balkhair Ahmad Al Tenaiji
If you look at Egypt, there is a problem of poverty and unemployment. Also, nobody was actually going to the people and asking what they needed. This is why they started protesting. Also, their president was promising them that he would bring change and will build the nation but nothing was happening. This has made them explode.
Saeed Hamad Al Ghufli
I just have one suggestion – after all these protests, put all these events in our history books. We need to let our future generations know about these problems, so that if anything similar happens, we don’t want them to suffer the way it is happening now. We want them to be more educated and civilised. If they want to be heard, they shouldn’t do it by creating a mess on the streets.
Marwan Arif Al Zarouni
The reason they are resorting to chaos is because nobody heard them. They were just being shoved aside as sheep. I don’t think they would have done all this otherwise. The only reason there is so much violence is because no one heard them. No one really wants to create chaos, but this was the last resort.
Conclusion
The lack of an effective justice system and strong leadership will lead to chaotic political changes. The implementation of democracy or other political changes takes time and people realise that. A democratic system may not necessarily provide the social, economic and political changes people are demanding.