Middle East on fire - should we worry

[Spudulika]

I'm sure lots of posters on here have been on holidays at one time or another to the Middle East. I'm sure some have even been to Egypt and are looking on at the events there in surprise and worry. I've been watching events grow from the Tunisia mayhem to what is happening now in Egypt, what is building in Jordan and what is also happening, though less noticed, in Yemen.

Now, maybe it's just me, though I doubt it, but I'm getting worried by what is happening. When I hear the US spokespeople embracing "change" and "increasing international pressure" being put on Mubarak to get out, it just shatters my belief that these people who advocate placating the mob, actually know what's going on. These countries don't do democracy well, they do autocracy badly, and the one thing do manage is to keep tabs on the fundies who would love to grab control.

If Mubarak goes, and "democracy" comes in, Israel is in serious trouble. The people who are going to take over are the type who don't believe in religious harmony, remember this is a country where Christians are slaughtered and liberal muslims end up swinging from lamp posts.

Worse still, if Jordan goes, then we're going to have even more trouble. Jordan is a police state, though it's the only one in the Middle East that granted Palestinians citizenship and let them take an active part in civic life - the marriages of the royals bolstered this. It's almost 50-50 between native Jordanians and Palestinians, Jordan are a trading nation and balance the wild east (Iraq) with a relatively calm west (Israel and Lebanon).

I am no fan of Israeli policy. That they allow so many criminal types in and are in existence thanks to American firepower, says bad things for them. However I appreciate the fact that they are a progressive nation, with many elements we appreciate in European society - plus it's not their fault they've been dumped with the legacy of American and European distaste. They at least provide a buffer against the hypocritical rulers of Saudi and the military regimes of Egypt, Jordan and Syria.

From what I can see in the Irish, British, US and general European media - getting rid of Mubarak and his kleptocrats - to give the country democracy, is a frightening prospect. Mubarak has been a thug and ruled with an iron fist, and even he can't keep the fundies at bay. What happens when they take over - see Iran.

[culloty82]

It doesn't follow that once the dictators fall, fundamentalists will take over - El Baradei seems to have a greater popular support in Egypt than the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Tunisian uprising looks to have most in common with the Ukraine's Orange Revolution in terms of resentment against corruption. Most of these countries have never had elections that were truly democratic by Western standards, so much like with Sinn Féin here, the ordinary people won't be fooled by simplistic Islamist solutions.

[Spudulika]

Culloty82, we're not talking about citizenry that would think twice about having another go at Israel, or turning to the fundies. El Baradei is a decent sort, but it was the same in Iraq, and Afghanistan - how have they turned out? Tunisia, true enough, was alot to do with corruption, though the Ukraine was not quite that. One of the leaders of the Orange Revolution, Timoshenko, was one of the elite and highly corrupt, using her various positions to grab more and more wealth, in the same manner as Luzkhkov's wife in Moscow. She got the bums rush and those who risked all by taking to the streets to push the Orange agenda (which was financially and materially supported by American agencies) now are calling for her head. I just fear that meddling nations, UK, USA are going to unleash hell in the region.

[Rasputin]

I am no fan of Israeli policy.

Reminiscint of the classic, "Im not a racist but...."

That they allow so many criminal types in and are in existence thanks to American firepower, says bad things for them. However I appreciate the fact that they are a progressive nation, with many elements we appreciate in European society - plus it's not their fault they've been dumped with the legacy of American and European distaste. They at least provide a buffer against the hypocritical rulers of Saudi and the military regimes of Egypt, Jordan and Syria.

You find ethnic cleansing progressive?
Israel ahs sytematically ethnically cleansed the Palestinians from their lands and is one of the worlds most criminal states.
It has broken more UN conventions than any other country in the world, including all the Arab states you have listed.
To state Israel is in any way progressive is just hilarious.
It is a criminal state based on Relgious Fundamentalism and is the biggest threat to Middle East stability.
The amount of stereotypes, misconceptions and casual racism throughout your post is really quite staggering.
You do realise who has supported the tyranny of Mubarek, and ill give you a clue its not the "fundies".
Also who is the primary allys of the "hypocritical rulers" of the Saudis?

From what I can see in the Irish, British, US and general European media - getting rid of Mubarak and his kleptocrats - to give the country democracy, is a frightening prospect. Mubarak has been a thug and ruled with an iron fist, and even he can't keep the fundies at bay.

So Mubarek was their to cure fundamentalism?
He hasnt been a cause of it, no?
Is it really beyond your chauvanistic perspective to comprehend that Mubarek and his ilke of yankee imperial puppets are in a large part responsible for Islamic Fundamentalism by fanning discontent and giving the people legitimate grievence's that the Imams funnel into fundamentalism?
Look at the House of Saud or the Shah or Israel or any of the countless forays into the Middle East by western imperial interests that have created a seething pot of discontent harnessed by Islamic Fundametalists.
Mubarek wasnt placed in Egypt to placate the masses he was placed there to control the masses and now American Imperialism has helped create more enraged Arabs through their foreign policy.

What happens when they take over - see Iran.

haha, sweet mother of god.
Have you just copied and pasted Glenn Becks latest tweet?

[Spudulika]

Reminiscint of the classic, "Im not a racist but...." No, I do not agree with Israeli policy. No buts, nothing. Too many things they have done are wrong. However I appreciate many of the things they have done right. Their situation was created out of European and US collaboration to solve the Jewish question in Europe once and for all, yet it ignored the rights of the Palestinians.

To each their own I guess and I will refrain from any generalisation or lack of respect.

[Billsthoughts]

Reminiscint of the classic, "Im not a racist but...."
You find ethnic cleansing progressive?
Israel ahs sytematically ethnically cleansed the Palestinians from their lands and is one of the worlds most criminal states.
It has broken more UN conventions than any other country in the world, including all the Arab states you have listed.
To state Israel is in any way progressive is just hilarious.
It is a criminal state based on Relgious Fundamentalism and is the biggest threat to Middle East stability.
The amount of stereotypes, misconceptions and casual racism throughout your post is really quite staggering.

what solution would you propose for the Israeli situation given that its neighbours dont want it to exist at all?

[Rasputin]

what solution would you propose for the Israeli situation given that its neighbours dont want it to exist at all?

Of course they dont want it to exist, it is a state founded in the 40's and 50's by exporting White Europeans with the assistance Western powers into Palestinian lands and ethnically cleansing the natives from it.
You would swear that them not "wanting it to exist" was some sort of zany fundamentalism.
Maybe its because people in the Middle East have a wider comprehension of the context that spans more than just the last 3 or 4 decades.
I suggest you read "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe and also the author is Jewish so that should rubbish the inevitable anti-semite claims.

[Billsthoughts]

Again what would be your solution as the only logical progression of what you are saying would be to ethnically cleanse the Isaraelis? Or repatriate them all back to Europe?

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the Israelis being there they are there now. Any resolution of the conflict will have to take that into account.

[peadar1987]

Stopping the continued illegal settlement of the West Bank would be a nice start.

[backstothewall]

On the face of it this has gone way off topic, but in another way its got to the core of the topic. The middle east has been on fire since the partition of the British mandate, and until a resolution to the Israel-Palestine issue is found the situation will continue to deteriorate. Given the influence of the pro-Israel faction in Washington, things will have to get much worse before the political will is found to impose a realistic 2-state solution.

[Rasputin]

Again what would be your solution as the only logical progression of what you are saying would be to ethnically cleanse the Isaraelis? Or repatriate them all back to Europe?

Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the Israelis being there they are there now. Any resolution of the conflict will have to take that into account.

Israel doesnt want peace, my suggestions for the solution to the situation are irrelevant.
Israel will continue to do what it has done for the past decades and continually ethnically cleanse the Palestinians in any way possible.
In the not so distant future Palestinians wont exist in the Palestinian territorys and Israeli settlers will occupy their lands.
This was all set out in the Koenig Memorandum.

[BohsPartisan]

A shocking OP and the idea that "These countries don't do democracy well" is nothing short of racist - implying that the people of the middle east are less capable of making rational decisions than white europeans and Americans. Yet the real reason why fundamentalists win support is that the western superpowers (and previously the Soviet Union) have been meddling in their affairs for what seems like an eternity. The interest in these countries varies from the economic to supporting the Israeli zionist state and is never concerned with the welfare of the inhabitants of the region.

[Spudulika]

A shocking OP and the idea that "These countries don't do democracy well" is nothing short of racist - implying that the people of the middle east are less capable of making rational decisions than white europeans and Americans. Yet the real reason why fundamentalists win support is that the western superpowers (and previously the Soviet Union) have been meddling in their affairs for what seems like an eternity. The interest in these countries varies from the economic to supporting the Israeli zionist state and is never concerned with the welfare of the inhabitants of the region.

BohsP, read your history books and visit the region, immerse yourself in the culture and you'll find they're not too distant from our own, or any others, and outside influence has little to do with it. Religion is a major factor in any assessment, it is still causing Ireland headaches and hasn't been thrown off, however it's not polite to discuss such matters in "polite" society. Any questioning of ME affairs always has to be tempered, why? Why is it okay to slam Israel and zionism, yet far more muted attacks take place on, for example, wahabism? Peadar is 100% right, new settlements need to be stopped and existing illegal ones removed and the inhabitants rehoused in ACTUAL zones under law. This is a major start. Another start would be for reform of Islamic rule in countries such as Saudi Arabia (who are the chief fundraisers and trouble makers in Palestine), Iran etc. Until there is give and take on both sides there will be no progress.

By adding "racism" as a slur you're demeaning the discussion and also lumping all the peoples in the region together. It's unfair on many areas and uninformed.

[Billsthoughts]

Israel doesnt want peace, my suggestions for the solution to the situation are irrelevant.
Israel will continue to do what it has done for the past decades and continually ethnically cleanse the Palestinians in any way possible.
In the not so distant future Palestinians wont exist in the Palestinian territorys and Israeli settlers will occupy their lands.
This was all set out in the Koenig Memorandum.

why do you think israel are doing that?

[BohsPartisan]

BohsP, read your history books and visit the region, immerse yourself in the culture and you'll find they're not too distant from our own, or any others, and outside influence has little to do with it. Religion is a major factor in any assessment, it is still causing Ireland headaches and hasn't been thrown off, however it's not polite to discuss such matters in "polite" society. Any questioning of ME affairs always has to be tempered, why? Why is it okay to slam Israel and zionism, yet far more muted attacks take place on, for example, wahabism? Peadar is 100% right, new settlements need to be stopped and existing illegal ones removed and the inhabitants rehoused in ACTUAL zones under law. This is a major start. Another start would be for reform of Islamic rule in countries such as Saudi Arabia (who are the chief fundraisers and trouble makers in Palestine), Iran etc. Until there is give and take on both sides there will be no progress.

By adding "racism" as a slur you're demeaning the discussion and also lumping all the peoples in the region together. It's unfair on many areas and uninformed.

If you make a blanket statement that "These countries don't do democracy well" you are implying that the ethnic groups there are less capable of making their own decisions than those in Europe. That is a racist statement so it's not a slur on my part. If you mean something else you should clarify it. I'm well aware of the history of the region. For example the coming to power of the Islamic regime in Iran was in part a backlash against the corrupt US sponsored regime of the Shah and the powerfull workers movement which played a big role in the early days of the revolution being heavily influenced by Stalinism and as a result following Soviet foreign policy in standing aside and allowing the Islamists to take over (this was in line with the Stalinist "two-stage" theory of revolution, that first the "progressive bourgeoisie" had to take power in colonial and semi-colonial countries and develope capitalism before the working class could take power - yes they did bizarrely consider the Islamists to be "progressive bourgeoisie").

[osarusan]

Pretty concise video analysis of the whole Egyptian situation here.

[Spudulika]

If you make a blanket statement that "These countries don't do democracy well" you are implying that the ethnic groups there are less capable of making their own decisions than those in Europe. That is a racist statement so it's not a slur on my part. If you mean something else you should clarify it. I'm well aware of the history of the region. For example the coming to power of the Islamic regime in Iran was in part a backlash against the corrupt US sponsored regime of the Shah and the powerfull workers movement which played a big role in the early days of the revolution being heavily influenced by Stalinism and as a result following Soviet foreign policy in standing aside and allowing the Islamists to take over (this was in line with the Stalinist "two-stage" theory of revolution, that first the "progressive bourgeoisie" had to take power in colonial and semi-colonial countries and develope capitalism before the working class could take power - yes they did bizarrely consider the Islamists to be "progressive bourgeoisie").

Using the racist slur is something that is too readily thrown about when discussions on the ME occur, and in this case it is very wrong, especially as you now draw a line between nations and race. Countries have nothing to do with race, yet in your mind you appear to see the ME as one homogeneous block - Arabs/Muslims, when in fact it varies greatly even within national borders (Lebanon a perfect example). Your insertion of Iran is the accepted version, though leading the revolution at that time were academics, progressive reformers and communists, yet they ended up fleeing the country or swinging from lamp posts once the religious bloc took over. This religious grouping then, ironically with Saudi assistance, began pushing up into Soviet territory which has gone on to become the destabilising factor the world sees today. If you're inferring that the revolution was Soviet backed you're partially right, it had more to do with French interests in the region and their tacit support of enlightened islamic rule. However what is continually misunderstood is the nature of radical islam, this is what the tenet of the thread itself. Like our own country with it's long history of tribalism and clientelism, countries in the ME are no different. Interference from the outside continues - unless you missed it Obama is saying "yes they can" to those wanting Mubarak out. In the manner of FF's suggestions of how Ireland should be run and what is best for the electorate, are the USA so enlightened now that they should be listened to?

[peadar1987]

BohsP, read your history books and visit the region, immerse yourself in the culture and you'll find they're not too distant from our own, or any others, and outside influence has little to do with it. Religion is a major factor in any assessment, it is still causing Ireland headaches and hasn't been thrown off, however it's not polite to discuss such matters in "polite" society. Any questioning of ME affairs always has to be tempered, why? Why is it okay to slam Israel and zionism, yet far more muted attacks take place on, for example, wahabism? Peadar is 100% right, new settlements need to be stopped and existing illegal ones removed and the inhabitants rehoused in ACTUAL zones under law. This is a major start. Another start would be for reform of Islamic rule in countries such as Saudi Arabia (who are the chief fundraisers and trouble makers in Palestine), Iran etc. Until there is give and take on both sides there will be no progress.

I think this does have a lot to do with the fact that it is almost universally agreed, in Western Europe at least, that radical Islam is a bad thing. Nobody really feels the need to convince anyone otherwise. There's a lot more support in various areas for Israel, and their supposed Divine Right to rule over the middle east, so arguments are a lot more common between the supporters, and those who think otherwise.

And you are dead right about compromise. If both sides continue refusing to give an inch, the situation will never be resolved. Of course, an impartial broker, whose government aren't in thrall to conservative christians, would be very welcome. I wonder could China ever fulfil that role.

[Spudulika]

Peadar you're speaking complete sense! I don't know if you mean Israel's right to rule over the Middle East or the Islamic radicals, if it's the former I think you mean the holy land which is where they're at right now, if it's the latter you couldn't be more wrong - they want to rule the world, though they'll take the ME for now. Of course I say you couldn't be more wrong as a joke, I've traveled throughout the region, lived there and just saw the great differences from country to country. This summer I was in Libya for the first time and while I'm not a fan of Ghaddafi, I could see how the islam practiced there was far more open and progressive than in (for example) Egypt or Algeria. At least religion was well monitored in the state. Again, I think Ghaddafi is not a nice person and the country is a nervous wreck, though the outrages of radicals are kept well out of the way.

You've hit a good note with an honest broker role, though China, it's food for thought. I had a very weird experience in Sudan back in 2002, standing in a dusty desert town trying to figure how I was going to catch a lorry bus when three impeccably turned out Chinese (in shiny suits) appeared with brief cases and looked at me as if I were out of place. It was +35 and I was melting, these guys in their shiny acrylic suits must have been liquid. Up pulls a large Nissan Patrol, they jumped in and disappeared. Apparently they were in doing deals and had that air of neutrality and honesty, according to some I spoke with. The Japanese would also be decent with no religious ties whatsoever (there is a substantial muslim population in China so this might be a hold up). I can't remember where I read it, could have been a novel, but the Swiss Guards have been suggested as peacekeepers as the head of the Catholic church carries relatively good weight and has good relations with Jewish and Islamic leaders. Though hand on heart, I just can't see anything being enough for the hard core on either side.

[shantykelly]

I can't remember where I read it, could have been a novel, but the Swiss Guards have been suggested as peacekeepers as the head of the Catholic church carries relatively good weight and has good relations with Jewish and Islamic leaders. Though hand on heart, I just can't see anything being enough for the hard core on either side.

Tom Clancy, Jack Ryan novel, Sum of All Fears. The one where an ex-Stasi and Islamic fundamentalist alliance nuked Denver with an Israeli bomb. From the '73 war. Wasn't exactly War and Peace.