The ‘Arab Spring' belongs to another era
To avoid renewed unrest, many of the regimes of North Africa and the Middle East have, in varying degrees, learned to adjust their mores.
For all the latest headlines follow, our Google News channel online or via the app.
As protests erupted in south-central Tunisia earlier this month, some wondered if we were witnessing a remake of the December 2010 events which sparked the Arab Spring.
Hundreds of inhabitants took to the streets of Mazzouna, a small city in the same province of Sidi Bouzid where a street vendor named Mohammed Bouazizi set himself on fire unleashing a wave of unrest which led to the fall of the Zine El Abidine Ben Ali regime, more than 14 years ago.
The catalyst for the protests, this time, was the death of teenagers who were crushed under the weight of the debris of a decaying school wall, which local authorities neglected to repair.
Another similarity were the protests by angry crowds which for a few days set tires on fire and blocked city roads to voice their anger.
But similarities stopped there; as Tunisia of 2025 was not the Tunisia of 2010. In fact, all the Arab countries, which had witnessed the watershed upheaval of 2011 and even those which did not, have in many ways changed great deal.
All across the region, there was a rude awakening the day after the Arab Spring. Ensuing experiences of civil war, chaos or just stalled transitions offered unappealing models.
In Libya, the institutional vacuum created by four decades of Gadhafi rule, combined with outside interventions and domestic strife, hurled the country into a chaotic situation from which it is yet to recover.
Revolts in Yemen and Syria evolved into full-fledged civil wars brought about by short-sighted and sectarian rulers and unbridled interference of foreign powers, wrecked the two countries.
Tunisia, the poster child of the 'Arab spring,' did for a while offer the semblance of an exception. But, as its inept governments engaged in political feuding at the expense of economic reform, the country quickly joined the ranks of failed experiences providing cautionary tales about the consequences of regime change under street pressure.
In most non-oil producing Arab countries, the lack of meaningful reform continued to fuel poverty and unemployment, breeding new contingents of despair.
Populations learned not to believe in the politicians' promises nor to expect their salvation through elusive democratic change. They ended up pinning more hope on individual solutions, mainly emigration, than on street protests.
To avoid renewed unrest, many of the regimes of North Africa and the Middle East have, in varying degrees, learned to adjust their mores.
In dealing with occasional eruptions of protest, more cohesive and disciplined security forces have mostly abandoned recourse to lethal means while the protesters themselves learned to eschew violence in expressing their grievances.
Drawing the lessons of the slippery path of extreme violence which ended up sealing the fate of 'Arab spring' regimes, such policies went a long way towards preventing protests from spinning out of control in more recent years, even if keeping a lid on vicious cycles of violence remained an uphill task in places awash with weapons, such as Libya or Iraq.
The North African countries, which were not engulfed by the 2011 turmoil, were in fact those which had the wisdom to avoid using excessive force in dealing with demonstrators.
Morocco escaped the maelstrom by managing to keep protests peaceful while pointing to the reforms and political overtures it had introduced in the nineties as well as by capitalising on the king's legitimacy.
Despite mass protests, from December 2010 to January 2012, Algeria, too, avoided bloodshed. It had been immunized by the memory of its bloody decade and was helped by oil revenues it used to cushion social woes.
On the political level, the post-2011 governments of Tunisia, Libya and Egypt learned the hard way that the fallen regimes' practices of dynastic rule, combined with corruption, were key to eruptions of anger, and hence should be a red-line for all not to cross.
A more cautious form of authoritarianism was born; as rulers realized they should not take their tenure for granted. They were now convinced they had to appease social discontent by introducing reforms or at least taking token measures in the face of looming unrest; even if such palliatives could take their toll on the budgets.
Not all regimes seemed to realize that the freedom of expression genie could not be put back in the bottle but no ruler could ignore the fact that social media have widened their reach and were proving, every day, that they were a step ahead of the authorities and of traditional media.
The aftermath of the Arab Spring also led the West to modify its approach to countries of the region. Desire for stability trumped all cards. Regional governments were now meeting the West half-way: while Europe and the US showed a willingness to refrain from democratic proselytism and the advocacy of regime change, the countries south of the Mediterranean accommodated Western calls to fight illegal emigration and curtail cross-border security threats.
In the battle for the hearts and minds, authorities in the Maghreb, in particular, stayed vigilant about the early signs of re-emergence of the 'Hogra' mindset among the disenfranchised. Such a mindset, long associated with the feeling by the poor and the marginalized of being disrespected by authorities, had always proven to be a mobilizing battle cry and a harbinger of incoming turbulence.
The Arab Spring truly belongs to another era. But a more cautious approach alone is not enough, by itself, to keep ghosts of trouble forever at bay. There remains the need for meaningful reform in order to revive hope in the future and make sure constituencies of despair start shrinking. Till that happens, too many cadres and underprivileged youth will continue to set their sights on Europe instead of seeking better lives at home.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Arab News
a day ago
- Arab News
Sectarianism is in the eye of the beholder
I know it is never easy, but if we are about to have a reset then we should do the same with our perceptions of the region. Analysis of the Middle East has been dominated by two widely held beliefs: one is that conflicts are our fault because we are sectarian, and the other is that our problems are the West's fault because we have been divided into artificial states by colonialism. Both these myths belong to an era dominated by secular nationalist ideas that academia largely favored. For positive change to happen, we have to believe in ourselves and remind ourselves that, in our region, it is coexistence between sects that has been the norm and sectarian conflict the exception. We must also note that the Arab state system has been rather stable, especially if compared to that of Europe. Let me explain. First of all, sectarianism is often in the eye of the beholder. Some see it everywhere because they believe it is there. They look for it in situations that we consider mostly as normal politics. Of course, there are politicians who use sectarian speech and sometimes it works in their favor: they create the problems that they then offer to resolve. Some academics even study 'de-sectarianization' (my spellcheck insists that the word does not exist). It is as if there is a disease called sectarianism that can be treated by de-sectarianization. This blurred vision happens to people who expect complete homogeneity and do not understand coexistence. The Arab proverb that says 'me and my brother against my cousin and me and my cousin against the stranger' may be a source of confusion. This is often used to explain family and tribal solidarity, but in reality it is prescriptive rather than descriptive: it means you should stand by your brother against your cousin and stand by your cousin against a stranger, because it is often not the case. We all know that the most intense conflicts, since Cain and Abel, are between brothers. Family feuds or internal fights are driven by what Freud described as the narcissism of small differences. You do not really have to stand by your kin — in fact, this is how alliances and coalitions can develop across religious, tribal or ethnic boundaries. The debate over that proverb is also that, morally, you should stand by what is right, even if it is against your own kin. Moral sentiments, or what is culturally acceptable as a norm, are the product of numerous interactions between people. A feel for what is considered right in a society develops over time and through millions of daily exchanges. That is why societies differ — what is considered normal in one is an anomaly in the other. There are also traditional ways of resolving conflicts; sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. In a society where they do work, you will find a diverse population living together despite their sectarian, ethnic or tribal differences. They also share norms developed through long-term coexistence. In Europe, after centuries of conflict, it was resolved that people should adopt the religion of their prince, resulting in largely homogeneous divisions. In former Ottoman lands, it is diversity rather than homogeneity that is the norm — we are children of an empire that ruled over many nations. Someone coming from a society where homogeneity is the norm will find diversity abnormal and confusing; for them, everything becomes sectarian. We have to believe that diverse populations can coexist in states that cooperate, while respecting each other's sovereignty. Another misconception about the region is that the state system is artificial and therefore not viable — that we are not real nation states. This is based on the absurd notion that real states do exist and that there is a natural nation state. The whole idea of nationalism is in fact barely 150 years old and has been the cause of conflicts, rather than their solution. It is true that our borders were artificially drawn, mainly by Europeans, in the aftermath of the First World War. This was a messy affair and they did a bad job following a disastrous war and the collapse of three empires: Ottoman, Russian and Austro-Hungarian. The idea that the European state system is stable is even more of a myth than the one we are questioning about the Middle East. Nadim Shehadi The idea that three politicians, David Lloyd George of Britain, Georges Clemenceau of France and Woodrow Wilson of the US, could get it right was absurd to start with. But they did a worse job in Europe and the result was another devastating war where the boundaries of Europe were again redrawn. They came to their senses after that and worked on creating what later became the EU, which now has 27 members. The idea that the European state system is a stable one is even more of a myth than the one we are questioning about the states of the Middle East being unstable. Since the rise of nation states in the 1870s, Europe has destroyed itself twice, while borders kept changing well into the end of the 20th century. By contrast, the borders of the Arab states have been far more stable. The League of Arab States was also created post-Second World War and it has now expanded to 22 members from the original seven signatories. The Alexandria Protocol of 1944 promised cooperation in economic and cultural matters, as well as respect for each other's sovereignty. The fall of the Assad regime promises that we can go back to that. A new beginning is possible thanks to the end of an era where Arab nationalist parties sought to suppress local identities, exploit tensions between them and claim an agenda of regional domination, while deriving legitimacy from their claim of leading the Arabs in the conflict with Israel.


Leaders
a day ago
- Leaders
Syria Wants Russia ‘By our Side', FM Said in Official Visit to Moscow
In his first official visit to Russia, Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Shaibani has led a high-level delegation to strengthen relations with Moscow amid Syria's political transition, according to Arab News. First Official Engagement Al-Shaibani's visit to Moscow serves as the first official engagement between the two nations since the fall of former President Bashar Al-Assad – a move that ended almost five decades of Assad family rule. During the visit, Al-Shaibani held a significant meeting with his Russian Counterpart Sergey Lavrov at the Russian Foreign Ministry's Guest House. He unveiled Syria's keenness to build a 'correct and sound relationship' with Moscow based on 'cooperation and mutual respect.' Moreover, he underscored that the new government represents a vision of unity and reconstruction for Syria, which has suffered long years of conflict and instability. 'We are here today to represent the new Syria, and we have worked since December 8th to fill the political, civil, and service vacuum. We have preserved civil institutions and are working to reunite Syrians at home and abroad,' Al-Shaibani said. Russia's Interest in Backing Syria Meanwhile, Lavrov emphasized Russia's interest in supporting Syria during its transitional phase. 'We are closely following the ongoing events in Syria. We sincerely hope the friendly Syrian people, with whom we have historically cooperative relations, will overcome current challenges,' he said. Lavrov also expressed hope that Syria's President Ahmad Al-Sharaa would attend the first Russian-Arab summit on October 15th. Current Challenges Crucially, uncertainty still lingers over the future of Russia's military presence in Syria. The naval base in Tartus and the air base at Hmeimim—Moscow's only official military outposts beyond the former Soviet Union—are now in question. It is still unclear whether the new Syrian government will permit their continued operation. Al-Shaibani acknowledged these challenges. However, he called the moment an opportunity to 'build a united and strong Syria,' expressing hope that Moscow would support Damascus in this endeavor. 'The current period is full of various challenges and threats, but it is also an opportunity to build a united and strong Syria. And, of course, we are interested in having Russia by our side on this path,' Al-Shaibani said. Related Topics: Saudi Arabia, Syria Boost Energy Cooperation High-level Saudi Delegation Eyes Investment Opportunities in Syria Syria, US and France Hold Frank, Productive Talks in Paris Short link : Post Views: 11


Arab News
2 days ago
- Arab News
Jordanian king says Gaza catastrophe ‘unlike anything witnessed' in recent history
LONDON: King Abdullah II of Jordan said on Wednesday that the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip is among the worst in modern history, as the Israeli military campaign in the Palestinian coastal enclave reaches its 22nd month. He affirmed that 'Jordan has been, and will remain, the greatest support for Gaza's people, who are suffering from a humanitarian catastrophe unlike anything witnessed in recent history.' During a meeting with media representatives at Al Husseiniya Palace, King Abdullah emphasized Jordan's ongoing diplomatic efforts to end the Gaza conflict. He highlighted discussions with Germany and Canada, as well as coordination with Arab leaders and international partners, aimed at enhancing the humanitarian response in Gaza. 'The suffering of our brethren in Gaza strikes at the very sense of our humanity, not just because it is happening at our doorstep, but also because this country was built on compassion, on standing with those who suffer,' he said. 'No matter how much we do, it can never measure up to the scale of the horror Palestinians in Gaza endure every single day, not when entire families are being erased and children are being starved. 'But that doesn't mean that we are not doing everything in our power. We are. And we will continue to do so, relentlessly and without hesitation,' he said, Petra news agency reported. The Jordanian leadership has been steadfast in its support of Palestinian rights, including the establishment of statehood and an end to Israeli occupation policies. Jordan was one of the first countries to conduct airlift missions in the early days of the Israeli war, delivering relief to Gaza, and dispatching hundreds of aid convoy trucks to the territory since late 2023.