Simplified view on situation in Arab countries

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I noticed that many people are looking at the recent developments in the Arab world in a very simple, and thus misguided, way.

Tunisia and Egypt were areas of an successfull popular uprising against a dictator (successfull, because key establishment elements decided to, more on less openly, back the protesters, like army in Egypt). Bahrain was an example of a popular uprising, that was put down by security forces and foreign help.

Meanwhile, Syria and Libya doesn't really fall into this category. As of Syria, true, we can say that a majority of population (Sunni) are opposing the regime, but the same regime have strong support among other groups, like (naturally) Alwaites or Christians. Syria is a diverse country, unlike Tunisia or Egypt.

In Libya we simply have two sides in a civil war, going on in a very divided country. And despite my lack of sympathy toward Gaddafi, I wouldn't call Libyan rebels a pure "freedom figthers".

Perceiving the situation in Libya or Syria the same way, like situation in Egypt or Tunisia, is, in my opinion, a pure ignorance.

[Middle-aged Europe]

There are probably two significant differences between Tunisia/Egypt and Libya/Syria:

- In Tunisia and Egypt, the respective rulers were ultimately ousted because they had lost the support of the military. This isn't the case in Libya and Syria, at least not to the extent of Tunisia/Egypt.

- Tunisia and Egypt have much closer ties to the West (politically, economically, and militarily) and depend on good relations with America and Europe. Massacring your own people wouldn't look so good on your resume here. On the other hand, Assad can probably do what the heck he wants in that regard, because his government relies more on Iran than he does on America/Europe.

However, I'm not sure whether the support the government managed to retain among the civilian population is so different in these four countries. I'm inclined to say that the NDP still had significant support among the certain portions of the Egyptian population all the way to the end. If 50% are against you and you're not willing/able to let it come down to a bloodbath, it is certainly enough to oust you though.

[TheGlobalizer]

I agree, in part.  I think you overstate the evenness of regime vs. opposition in both cases.

In Syria particularly, there is a disconnect between notions of modernity and the medieval crackdown by Assad that isn't just a religious affiliation issue.  Major protests have occurred throughout the country, even in traditional areas of support for the regime.

In Libya, it's not a clean split between west and east (Tripoli and Cyrenaica/Beghazi) as some of the tribal allegiances have shifted.

I agree that they're more complicated than Egypt and especially Tunisia, and largely due to the fact that Libya and Syria both have strong mukhabarat that are deeply connected to a personality-driven regime.  Mubarak was always second/third/fourth fiddle to Nasser et al., and Ben Ali was simply weak.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I agree, in part.  I think you overstate the evenness of regime vs. opposition in both cases.

In Syria particularly, there is a disconnect between notions of modernity and the medieval crackdown by Assad that isn't just a religious affiliation issue.  Major protests have occurred throughout the country, even in traditional areas of support for the regime.

Yes, you're right. I underestimated this factor.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Naturally, but there always been a division between Tripolitania and Cyrenaica. Gaddafi never been as strong in Cyrenaica, which was a main base for Sannusi monarchy before 1969.

Well, after all, Libya was created, like many post-colonial countries in Africa, with little regard to an actual historical and social ties.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Gaddafi basically had over 40 years to build a country where everything was resolving around him. In 1969, all he need to take power was a group of junior officers to take over army HQ and radio station. Assad, meanwhile, inherited a very strong powerbase created by his father. It didn't save them from current troubles, but difference is clear.

So yes, in comparison, powers of Ben Ali and Mubarak were weak. It took hours before Ben Ali lost all control. Mubarak held longer, but only because army was reluctant to just kick his ass openly.