Arab Armies and Arab Politics
Dr. Vladimir Ahmedov
Military Involvement in Arab Politics.
(Part II)
Recent developments suggest that the Middle East region is on the verge of an era of profound political change. Arab revolutions changed the balance of power in Arab countries as well as in the whole region. That very fact creates the variety of perspectives for further developments as well as a danger of political vacuum that may be filled up by undesirable content.
The important point about events in the region today is that local leaders are feeling and responding to two simultaneous pressures for change: external pressures from the Anglo-American forces, powerful regional players like Turkey and Iran and internal pressures from revolutionary people and the remains of old ruling elites. Each of them tries to impose to Arabs their own views and press on them to accept their model of development and reforms. There is no doubt that American threats and Anglo-American military presence will indeed achieve some immediate desired changes (as it was in Libya, may be will happen in Syria) in both native regimes and behavior in the Middle East. In the end, however, local conditions in the Middle East will be determined not by the dictates of imperial foreign armies, but by the strength of the sense of collective dignity and well-being among the local folks. Indigenous Arabs pressures for change reflect a complicated combination of political discontent, economic stress, environmental vulnerability and the indignities of ordinary people who feel abused by their own security-minded national power structures, Israel, the US, global economic forces, multinational institutions and other forces and powers. This combination of complaints is usually deadly to the reformers process. Some leaders in the region who feel the pressures of change respond by making some of the political moves we witness today. Yet the causes and consequences of all this remain unclear. The best scenario would be for indigenous forces to engage in public policymaking and steer change towards genuine democracy anchored in native identities and values. Change and reform will be neither credible nor lasting if they are driven by foreign military threats, and are defined by lone Middle Eastern leaders or ruling groups who are motivated mainly by preserving their autocracies and oligarchies. Successful democracies have generally been built in societies where there is already a healthy civil society: local institutions, often elected from below long before national governments are; professional unions or syndicates; other non-governmental organizations functioning in a manner, which permits individual input and participation in the governance of at least some part of one’s life.
From the other hand, lack of democratic developments and weakness of legal institutions in Arab countries determine the growing role of political Islam and the military in ensuring control under key political processes including the reforms. The revolutionary Egypt gives good example for this. One of the first decree of the Supreme Military Counsel concerning the political parties permitted previously oppressed Islamists to organize their own political parties. Nevertheless army plays the leading role in political process. The military has played the crucial role in achieving the victory of the revolution in Tunis and Egypt. During Libyan upraising the army has split but the role of military from both sides was undoubtedly decisive in achieving the proper goals. In Syria the army (at least its bigger part) for the present under the pressure of security apparatus opposes their own population. In Bahrain the untied GCC armies (mainly Saudis) suppressed the revolutionary movement.
One of the main features of the Arab armies as important political institution their secular nature. This is very important today when the Arab leaders face the Islamists offence in their steps for reforms. Practically all armies in the Middle East try to prevent infiltration of radical Islamists in the officer corps. The army rests the only instrument of the Arab states shacked by the revolution waves that can act in case the regional war will begin due to escalation of tension in Arab-Israeli conflict. That’s why the analysis and examination of the role of military in current Arab politics presents now more practice than academic interest.
To be continued.
Military Involvement in Arab Politics.
(Part II)
Recent developments suggest that the Middle East region is on the verge of an era of profound political change. Arab revolutions changed the balance of power in Arab countries as well as in the whole region. That very fact creates the variety of perspectives for further developments as well as a danger of political vacuum that may be filled up by undesirable content.
The important point about events in the region today is that local leaders are feeling and responding to two simultaneous pressures for change: external pressures from the Anglo-American forces, powerful regional players like Turkey and Iran and internal pressures from revolutionary people and the remains of old ruling elites. Each of them tries to impose to Arabs their own views and press on them to accept their model of development and reforms. There is no doubt that American threats and Anglo-American military presence will indeed achieve some immediate desired changes (as it was in Libya, may be will happen in Syria) in both native regimes and behavior in the Middle East. In the end, however, local conditions in the Middle East will be determined not by the dictates of imperial foreign armies, but by the strength of the sense of collective dignity and well-being among the local folks. Indigenous Arabs pressures for change reflect a complicated combination of political discontent, economic stress, environmental vulnerability and the indignities of ordinary people who feel abused by their own security-minded national power structures, Israel, the US, global economic forces, multinational institutions and other forces and powers. This combination of complaints is usually deadly to the reformers process. Some leaders in the region who feel the pressures of change respond by making some of the political moves we witness today. Yet the causes and consequences of all this remain unclear. The best scenario would be for indigenous forces to engage in public policymaking and steer change towards genuine democracy anchored in native identities and values. Change and reform will be neither credible nor lasting if they are driven by foreign military threats, and are defined by lone Middle Eastern leaders or ruling groups who are motivated mainly by preserving their autocracies and oligarchies. Successful democracies have generally been built in societies where there is already a healthy civil society: local institutions, often elected from below long before national governments are; professional unions or syndicates; other non-governmental organizations functioning in a manner, which permits individual input and participation in the governance of at least some part of one’s life.
From the other hand, lack of democratic developments and weakness of legal institutions in Arab countries determine the growing role of political Islam and the military in ensuring control under key political processes including the reforms. The revolutionary Egypt gives good example for this. One of the first decree of the Supreme Military Counsel concerning the political parties permitted previously oppressed Islamists to organize their own political parties. Nevertheless army plays the leading role in political process. The military has played the crucial role in achieving the victory of the revolution in Tunis and Egypt. During Libyan upraising the army has split but the role of military from both sides was undoubtedly decisive in achieving the proper goals. In Syria the army (at least its bigger part) for the present under the pressure of security apparatus opposes their own population. In Bahrain the untied GCC armies (mainly Saudis) suppressed the revolutionary movement.
One of the main features of the Arab armies as important political institution their secular nature. This is very important today when the Arab leaders face the Islamists offence in their steps for reforms. Practically all armies in the Middle East try to prevent infiltration of radical Islamists in the officer corps. The army rests the only instrument of the Arab states shacked by the revolution waves that can act in case the regional war will begin due to escalation of tension in Arab-Israeli conflict. That’s why the analysis and examination of the role of military in current Arab politics presents now more practice than academic interest.
To be continued.