View Single Post
  #187  
Old Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Predator's Avatar
Predator Predator is offline
Senior Member
Medal of Appreciation: Awarded to appreciate member's contribution on forum. (Academic and professional achievements do not make you eligible for this medal) - Issue reason:
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Karachi
Posts: 2,572
Thanks: 813
Thanked 1,975 Times in 838 Posts
Predator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to beholdPredator is a splendid one to behold
Default

Tunisia’s ripple effects


In spite of all the palpable anger felt by the citizenry in Pakistan, it is unlikely that a Tunisian-type upheaval could take place here. There are more differences than parallels between the two nations.


By Shahid Javed Burki
Tuesday, 25 January, 2011



WILL the ripples from Tunisia reach the shores of Pakistan? The not-so-quiet revolution in that country toppled the 23 year-old regime of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and has caused other long-ruling elites of the Arab world to quake in their well-worn seats.

Roula Khalaf of the Financial Times nicely summed up the situation in Tunisia before the fall of the Ben Ali government. “We’ve become accus tomed to an Arab order where the young people, the vast majority of the population, are unhappy with their rul ers but too apathetic to rise up for change. They grumble about the dearth of jobs, the difficulty of marrying and starting a family but they sit back and wait for better days. They rarely bother to vote since they know that the elec tions are always rigged.” But this time around they did not wait. They came out on the street and challenged the established order. Ultimately the street won.

There is broad consensus among commentators who write for the western press that other parts of the Arab world cannot remain untouched by the events in Tunisia. There are many Arab countries where ossified, autocratic and immensely corrupt governments have long been in place. Protected by the security establishment that also benefits from regime longevity, the governments were able to ignore the wishes of the masses.

That may not be that easy anymore. The Tunisian youth — by daring the government and the security establishment — succeeded in bringing about change that few thought was possible. The young have shown that they can force those who rule to take note of their problems. Since, thanks to the internet, the flow of information cannot be constrained (Arab youth, particularly in Egypt and Saudi Arabia are among the most enthusiastic internet users) events in North Africa will be noticed and parallels will be drawn.

In spite of all the palpable anger and frustration felt by the citizenry in Pakistan because of their economic plight, it is unlikely that a Tunisian-type of upheaval could take place in the country. There are more differences than parallels between the two nations.

The Tunisians had suffered politically but not that much economically. The regime was supported by a small coterie that had security forces not linked with the military to protect the regime and the established order. If the Tunisian revolution does have an effect it will be because of the way it has influenced thinking in Washington about political and social reform in the Muslim world.

Pakistan has to be especially responsive to what Washington would like to see in Arab and Muslim countries in terms of political and social development. What the Obama administration tells Pakistani leaders will be of greater consequence than what happens on the streets of Tunis. A troubled relationship with the IMF means that Islamabad would like to see the United States loosen its purse strings and allow a larger flow of resources already committed under the Kerry-Lugar Act of 2009.

There is much more money locked in that initiative than is due from the IMF. Pakistan would wish some of that money to become available in the form of budgetary support. The Americans are more interested in providing it to finance projects. Washington is in a position to lay down conditions for its support. They are more likely to be of political rather than economic nature.

Even the senior leadership of the United States — a country that has played its part in preserving autocratic regimes in the Arab world since they were easier to work with — has taken note of the change in sentiment in that part of the world. US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton barnstormed through five Gulf capitals in four days in early January, holding town hall style meetings, conferences and media interviews in which she pressed the establishment to take note of what was happening around them and accommodate change.

In a meeting in Doha, the Qatari capital, she bluntly criticised the region’s leaders for tolerating “corrupt institutions and stagnant political order.” According to one newspaper report, “her message was enthusiastically received by thousands of Arabs — from Yemen’s crowded, rubble-strewn capital of Sana to the dazzlingly modern metropolises of Dubai and Doha.” Yet the week also brought fresh reminders of how democratisation of Middle Eastern societies has worked against US interests in the region. “Those who cling to the status quo may be able to hold back the impact of their countries’ problems for a little while but not for ever,” Secretary Clinton told her audience.

Her speech was given before the Tunisian president went into exile. “If leaders don’t offer a positive vision and young people meaningful ways to contribute, others will fill the vacuum,” she continued. Her reference was obviously to the rise of extremist Islamic parties in some of the Arab countries that were persuaded to hold free elections.

The week brought the fall of the government of Prime Minister Saad Hariri in Lebanon when Hezbollah, the Islamic party supported by Iran and Syria, pulled out of the coalition. In the Gaza strip Hamas, another Islamic group, increased its operations against Israel. Both Hezbollah and Hamas had gained power as a result of the elections promoted by the George W. Bush administration as a way of delivering greater democratic freedoms.

In her swing through the Arab world Ms Clinton pushed in particular the promotion of civil society. She advocated the use of these organisations to counter corruption which she labelled a “cancer.” If this is the direction of the American thrust in Pakistan, it may lead towards better governance and a real democratic order.

The writer is chairman of the Lahorebased Institute of Public Policy, a former finance minister of Pakistan and former vice president of the World Bank.
__________________
No signature...
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Predator For This Useful Post:
Tassawur (Friday, January 28, 2011)