Saturday, February 19, 2011

World Research News/Arabia



Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya: The Struggle

 for Self-Determination in the Arab World




Global Research E-Newsletter

 to teddybear







The Struggle for Self-Determination in the Arab World:
The Alliance between Arab Dictators and Global Capital
PART II: Is 1848 Repeating Itself in the Arab World?

By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
URL of this article: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?
Global Research, February 14, 2011


Is history repeating itself? Have the events of 1848
 in Europe repeated themselves in the Arab World?
 Will 2011 see the same outcomes as 1848? Only
 the Arab people can decide. Their fate is in their
 hands, but they should learn from the mistakes
 of 1848 and seriously address the role of the capitalist
 class.


PART II

The Struggle for Self-Determination in the
 Arab World
The Arabs are seeing their second wave of revolt
 against colonialism. The first wave of revolt started
 between the First World War and at the end of
 the Second World War. It involved the Great 
Arab Revolt, with British and French support, against 
Ottoman Turkey during the First World War and 
then Arab revolt against Britain, France, and Italy 
during and after the Second World War. [3]

During the formal period of colonialism, the authority
 of the colonial powers (Britain, France, and Italy)
 were politically visible. Today, the Arab World is
under the "invisible authority" of the neo-colonial
 powers.  These include the U.S., Britain, and France.

The modern-day neo-colonial powers maintain 
control over Arab countries through the 
supervision of their economies and the control
 of their political leaders, who serve neo-colonial
 interests as vassals. Thus, 2011 is not only
 the start of the second wave of Arab revolt 
against foreign rule via imposed dictators and
 corrupt regimes, but it is also part of a broader
 struggle against neo-colonialism.

Starting with Tunisia, revolts and protests have
 broken out across the Arab World. Algeria, 
Yemen, Jordan, the Israeli-occupied Palestinian 
Territories, Mauritania, Sudan, and Egypt have 
all been electrified with activism. Added to this
 is the political tension in Lebanon, continued 
instability in Iraq under American-led foreign
 military
 occupation, building tensions in Bahrain, and 
the 
balkanization of Sudan.

At first glance the Arab World seems to be in 
turmoil, 
but there is much more than meets the eye.

The people of the Arab World have not awoken, 
they were already awake. They have watched 
the resources and wealth of their countries being 
handed out to foreign corporations and 
squandered by their corrupt leaders. The Arab 
people have watched as these same leaders 
supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq
 in 2003. They have watched as Israel has
 oppressed the Palestinians with the help of
 their governments, they have watched as
 Lebanon was attacked in 2006 with the 
tacit blessing of their regimes, they have 
watched as the Gaza Strip was re-invaded 
in 2008 by the Israeli military, and they have 
watched as the Egyptian regime has helped 
Israel starve Gaza.

The Arabs have not awoken, they have watched
 in anger and frustration. The Arab people are
 now mobilizing. The Arab masses, like the immune 
system of a body, are now combating the 
diseases that have been infecting the Arab 
World. The Arabs are in action.

Arab Leaders as Comprador Elites serving
 Foreign Interests
Class polarization has grown as the gap
 between the rich and the poor widens.
 Intergenerational mobility, a change in
 social class that takes place in one person's 
lifetime, and intragenerational mobility, a change 
that takes place from one generation to the next
 generation within a family, have been stunted.
The Arab people grasp the fact that their ruling 
class and governments are not only corrupt
regimes, but also comprador elites, namely 
the local representatives of foreign corporations,
 governments, and interests. The capitalist
 class that these local Arab comprador elites
 are subservient to are properly called parasite
 or parasitic elites, because they siphon off local 
wealth and resources on behalf of their neo-
colonial masters.
This structure of comprador elites prevails in Egypt, 
Tunisia, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Authority.

In Egypt, Gamal Mubarak (who was being groomed
 by his father, Mohammed Husni Mubarak, for the
 presidency) worked for Bank of America.

In Tunisia, Zine Al-Abidine Ben Ali was a military
 officer trained in French and American military 
schools who, once in power, served U.S. and 
French economic interests.

In Lebanon, Fouad Siniora was a former Citibank 
official before he became prime minister and 
Rafik Al-Hariri worked for both the French
 construction company Ogre (before he established
 Saudi Orgre) and Saudi interests (which in 
turn serve U.S. interests) before he became 
Lebanese prime minister.

Within the corrupt Palestinian Authority, Salam
 Fayyad worked for one of the banks forming the
 U.S. Federal Reserve and the World Bank before
 he became the Palestinian finance minister and 
then the kangaroo Palestinian Authority prime 
minister in the West Bank appointed under the 
semi-dictator Mahmoud Abbas.
Moreover, almost all Arab finance ministers are 
affiliated to the major global banking institutions. 
All of them also strictly adhere to the Washington
 Consensus of the International Monetary Fund (I.M.F.)
 and the World Bank.

 


Are the Tides Turning in the Arab World Or is
 America Hedging its Bets?
America, Israel, Britain, France, and their allies
look to be facing major losses in the Middle East 
and the Arab World. It has already started in 
Lebanon where the corrupt March 14 Alliance has
been in decline. Since 2008, when Walid Jumblat
 and his Democratic Gathering left, the March 14 
Alliance no longer formed the parliamentary 
majority in Lebanon that it so heavily touted. [4] 
The election of a new prime minister has highlighted
 this reality. Hezbollah, the Amal Movement, the
 Free Patriotic Movement, the Marada Movement,
 and their political allies in Lebanon through
parliamentary manoeuvring have removed Saad
 Al-Hariri, the son of Rafik Hariri, from the 
Lebanese premiership











The U.S. is trying to play a two-sided game.
 The New York Times, which is highly 
supportive of U.S. foreign policy, suggests that
 the U.S. government seeks a form of stage
-managed democratization in Egypt. Ross
 Douthat states: "[L]ook closer, and it's clear
 that the [Obama] administration's real goal 
has been to dispense with Mubarak while 
keeping the dictator's military subordinates
 very much in charge. If the Obama 
White House has its way, any opening to 
democracy will be carefully stage-managed 
by an insider like Omar Suleiman [the current
 vice-president of Egypt], the former general
 and Egyptian intelligence chief who's best
 known in Washington for his cooperation 
with the C.I.A.'s rendition program. This 
isn't softheaded peacenik dithering. It's cold
 blooded realpolitik." [5]










As long as the current structure of the 
Egyptian regime remains unchanged in the 
wake of Mubarak's departure, neo-colonial 
interests will continue to be served. As long as 
their interests are secured, they would have 
sacrifice Mubarak. The face of a regime does 
not matter; it is the interests that it serves.


Whether correct or incorrect, the Mubarak
regime has claimed that the U.S. and Israel 
have been behind the mass protests throughout 
Egypt. Iran, Hezbollah, Qatar, and Hamas 
have also been accused of helping orchestrate
 the protests alongside the U.S. and Israel by 
Cairo. These accusations by Mubarak's regime
 are meant to demonize and delegitimize the 
protest movement as foreign ploys and to divide
 the Egyptian protesters.

The U.S. government seeks to maintain the 
same kleptocratic status quo in place in Egypt 
and Tunisia, either under continued dictatorship 
or under an outwardly appearing democratic
 political system. In other words, the aim is 
to keep the same substance, but to change 
the form. Kleptocracy can work under dictatorship
or "managed" democracy.

As the protests across the Arab World gain
 momentum, the U.S. and its allies are working 
to "try" to mix their own "opposition" figures
amongst the protest movements and to bring 
their "agents" into power. In other words, the 
U.S. is politically hedging its bets. If the Arab 
protest movements are not attentive to this 
process of infiltration, the emerging wave of so-
called democratization in the Arab World could 
end up being a manipulated process which retains
 the control of foreign powers.

The Mediterranean Union and Democratization
 in the Arab World

America and the European Union are not the 
models for democracy or liberty. The Arab 
people should not sell themselves short by 
restraining themselves to such narrow definitions 
of democracy. Nor do they need culturally-biased
 or latently racist and ethnocentric lectures 
about democracy. They are a very capable plurality 
of people.

The Barcelona Declaration of 1995 has called for
 massive economic restructuring, market 
liberalization, 
and the creation of a free-trade zone between 
the European Union and the Arab World. The
U.S. Middle East Free Trade Area (MEFTA) also 
is a economic project that parallel's the steps 
that the E.U. is taking. In this regard there has 
been a U.S. and E.U. sponsored roadmap for 
eventually integrating the European Union, Israel, 
Turkey, and the Arab World.

This geo-political and socio-economic project is
 known under the framework of the "Mediterranean 
Union" or the "Union of the Mediterranean." The 
process envisions "gradual" reform through a so-
called democratization process within the Arab 
World.

Something old has to be restructured or taken 
apart to make something new. The "New Middle
 East" project is intended to do this. The aim is
to weaken and change the old states of the Middle
 East and North Africa to make way for integration.

Democratization is needed to advance this project
in order to allow stable integration whereas 
chaos is used to prime these states for eventual 
integration. In this regard, Turkey is now the 
model state. Since the establishment of the
Turkish Republic, Ankara has been run by 
authoritarian governments and the Turkish military.
 Turkey, however, has been transformed 
into what outwardly appears to be a relatively
 liberal democracy. Despite this outward change
or transformation, Turkey is still a kleptocracy 
that serves the interests of organized capital.
Ankara is also at the forefront of establishing
a regional market and bloc in the Middle East 
through a broad set of agreements jointly signed 
between Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.

Ankara is also deepening its ties with Iran, 
which Zbigniew Brzezinski has explained that 
the U.S. government should support. According
to Brzezinski, deepening Turkish-Iranian relation


would benefit America in the long-term. Thus,
 Ankara is working to integrate itself economically 
with Iran and Syria, as well as other Middle 
Eastern states.

The Turkish government has deliberately made
 public shows of opposition to Israel to boost 
its credentials amongst Middle Eastern 
populations as a possible leader. In this context, 
Turkey has been moving closer to the entire 
Arab World and Iran. In 2010, it launched a 
state-run Arabic channel. Turkey has also 
become so close to Tehran and Damascus that
t Ankara is being called an ally or strategic
 partner and a member of the "Resistance 
Bloc" by Syrian and Iranian officials. These all 
seem to be steps intended towards creating
a regional bloc in the Middle East and North 
Africa.

What is missing in the process of economic
 integration between the E.U. and the 
Arab World is "institutional democracy." Many
important institutions will be undemocratic in 
nature. The financial and banking sector 
will operate outside the realm of public control
and accountability. Under such conditions, the 
banking sector will eventually control the 
state's political structure. While on the 
surface a set of democratic-looking states
 may emerge, they will be controlled by
undemocratic forces.

The Alliance between Global Capitalism
and Arab Dictators
 
It is paramount to understand that the Arab
 dictators and tyrants serve the interests
 of organized capital. This is their primary 
function. They are elements of the global 
system formed by organized capital.

Looking back, protests and riots started in
 1977 against the regime of Mohammed Anwar 
Al-Sadat, Mubarak's predecessor. The causes 
of these protests were the neo-liberal
policies that the I.M.F. had handed down
to Sadat. The I.M.F. policies ended 
government subsidies on basic daily 
commodities of life. Food prices jumped 
and Egyptians became hard-hit. Sadat
 ended the protests through the use of force 
by the Egyptian military and making promises 
to bring back the state subsidies. The


protests of 1977 ended as failures. Today 
the situation in Egypt is far dire and the
U.S., the E.U., are looking for other options 
than just military force.

The U.S. and the E.U. on one hand have given
 low-key vocal support for the changes that
 the Arab peoples want, but on the other
 hand work to maintain the oppressive 
regimes in power. The U.S. and E.U. support 
these regimes overtly and covertly, because
 they serve organized capital. It should also
be noted that it is the capitalist class in
the U.S. and the E.U. that are against liberty
 in the Arab World. When the U.S. and E.U.
 are mentioned it is in context of this
capitalist ruling class. The government and
state in America and the nations of the
European Union merely serve as agents of 
this capitalist class.

In Tunisia, the protests have calmed down.
 The structures of the old regime still exist. 
Many of the same ministers and officials are
 still in power. In a clear show of American 
involvement, the U.S. Assistant Secretary
 of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffery
D. Feltman, went to Tunis to hold 
consultations with officials on the formation 
of a new Tunisian government. [6] Feltman 
is especially known for his tenure as U.S. 
ambassador in Beirut where he worked against 
the interests of Lebanon.

More importantly, the interests of organized 
foreign
 capital that propped up the dictatorship of
 Ben Ali in Tunisia are still in place. The 
Tunisian protests have electrified people 
worldwide, but they have not turned into
 a revolution with socio-economic change. 
Hereto, Tunis has only seen a slight cosmetic 
face-lift, but all the same mechanisms
and the same establishment structures remain
 in place underneath the face-lift.

Global capital still has a strong hold over Tunisia. 
Such agreements as those between Tunis and
the International Monetary Fund (I.M.F.), the
Euro-Mediterranean Partnership with the E.U.
 to form a Mediterranean Union, and various
economic agreements with the U.S. and the 
European Union still place a yoke over Tunis.
 Tunisians must reject the economic
 agreements and neo-liberal policies that have
 degraded their society.


 








Learning from 1848: Will the Aftermath of 1848 

Repeat in 2011?
Like in 2003, on the eve of the Anglo-American 
invasion of Iraq, the "Second Super Power" is
 rearing its head once again. The Second 
Super Power is the power of the people. 
Under a different phrase and much more 
developed manner, Zbigniew Brzezinski would 
also talk about this process in 1993. [7] "
The Global Political Awakening" is what 
Brzezinski calls it. He would pickup on this 
concept once again in 2008 and argue that 
another round of it could be starting. [8]

Yet, this global political awakening is not 
new. 1848 saw the same events unfold in 
Europe under the use of the printing press 
and new means of communication. 2011 
has seen it occur via the internet and
social media. In the context of a zero-
sum game or conflict, political awakenings
by mainstream societies are a historic 
process tied to the ruling classes movements 
towards greater control. The members of 
mainstream society become more aware of 
their conditions, the closer they get towards 
a point of zero-gains. This is while the closer
to absolute the control of the ruling classes
 becomes over mainstream societies.
It has to be asked again: what lessons can 
be learned from 1848? The conditions in 1848 
Europe were the same as in the Arab World.
 Poverty, unemployment, exploitation, and 
lack of freedom were rampant. Mainstream 
society was in a state of social anomie. The 
same fate as that of the Paris Commune 
should not reoccur in Egypt or any part 
of the Arab World. The revolutions should be 
real and bring about radical socio-economic
change.

Additionally, Mohammed Al-Baradei (El-Baradei/
ElBaradei) is now being presented as an alternative 
to Mubarak. He is the former director-general of 
the International Atomic Energy Agency 
(I.A.E.A.) and prior to that was a former 
Egyptian diplomat under Gamal Abdel Nasser 
and later the regime
of Al-Sadat. The Mubarak regime is a 
continuation of the Sadat regime. Al-Baradei 
is no real alternative; he has a track-record of 
yielding to the interests of the U.S., the E.U.,
 and Israel. Nor does he oppose the neo-
liberal policies that are crippling Egypt and 
the Arab World. Rather, Al-Baradei is intended 
to serve the interests of global capital and
 preserve both Egypt's kleptocratic status quo
 and foreign policy direction. He has been 
groomed and kept in reserve as an "opposition"
 figure by the E.U. and America. Reports of 
him wanting the presidency started circulating 
at the start of 2010. [9]

The Arab Peoples Must Address the Role of 
Global Capitalism
The U.S. and the E.U. are not advocates 
of democracy and liberty. They support 
kleptocracy. The kleptocracy can take on 
different forms. It could be democratic or 
authoritarian in nature. Its main prerequisite
 is that it must serve the global capitalist class
 and not merely the local capitalist elites, as in
 Russia or Iran, where the national elites are 
challenging Western European and American 
capitalism.

Are these popular protests the birth pangs of 
a new Middle East?

Are the Arab people regaining their political 
agency?

It is time for the long-awaited re-entry of 
the Arabs into the pages of history. The 
Arab people must be on their high guards to 
continue their revolution without it being 
manipulated by organized capital. So-called 
stabilization funds from the E.U. and other 
assistance
 is not meant to help, but to manage the course 
of Arab societies.

Mainstream Arab societies must recognize this 
process of financial manipulation and cut the 
economic strings that shore up the Arab regimes.
 The U.S. and E.U. imposed economic 
agreements, which amount to exploitation 
and theft, must be nullified. Political power 
should not be subordinated to economic 

power. In this context, institutional 
democracy should also be kept in mind. 
Otherwise, the same aftermath as 1848 will 
repeat itself as the aftermath of the 2011
 Arab Spring.

The other "alternative" which might emerge 
as a result of the protest movement is that
Arab governments will outwardly look like
democracies. Instead, they will work to maintain 
the kleptocractic status quo for a social minority.

The status quo will prevail. Economic exploitation
 will continue under the guise of democracy and 
democratic governance instead of open dictatorship.

Democracy is not a matter of holding elections,
 where voting at the ballot box becomes a ritual.

Democracy must centre on freedom of the mind
and livelihood through economic democracy.

In order for this to emerge, people
throughout the Arab World must address the 
impacts of global capitalism on the very 
structures of the domestic political system, 
namely how successive authoritarian regimes 
have served foreign interests.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Research Associate 

of the Centre for Research on Association (CRG).

NOTES
[3] In the context of Arab societies, it is 
debatable
 if the Ottoman Empire was a colonial power.
 If the Ottoman Empire is to be considered a 
colonial power, it was a different form of 
colonialism than that of Western Europe. There
 is a far stronger case for colonialism in regard
s to Eastern European societies within the 
Ottoman Empire. Also, the Ottoman Empire was
 a political state, like the U.S., and not an ethnic
-based stated. Moreover, the role of ethnic
nationalism only became strong towards the last
 days of the Ottoman Empire.
[4] When the March 14 Alliance did form a 
parliamentary majority, it was barely a majority.
 It always exaggerated this standing to make
itself sound like it had popular support amongst 
the Lebanese. The March 14 Alliance was not 
a popular majority ever, but a majority formed
from consensus sectarian-based politics. In other 
ords, the March 14 Alliance did not represent 
he demographic majority of the Lebanese
population.
[5] Ross Douthat, "Obama the Realits," 
The New York Times, February 7, 2011, p.A23.
[6] "Senior US envoy presses for democracy in 
Tunisia," Agence France-Presse (AFP), January 
24, 2011.
[7] Zbigniew Brzezinski, Out of Control: Global
Turmoil on the Eve of the Twenty-First Century
 (New York City: Charles Scribner's Sons Macmillian
 Publishing Company, 1993), pp.47-55.
[8] Zbigniew Brzezinski, "The global political 
awakening," The New York Times, December 16, 
2008.
[9] Abigail Hauslonner, "Will ElBaradei Run for
President of Egypt?" Time Magazine, February 
20, 2010.


Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers.


Your endorsement is greatly appreciated
Subscribe to the Global Research e-newsletter

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization. The contents of
 this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The
Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible 
or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained 
in this article.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global
 Research articles on community internet sites as long as 
the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's
 copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global 
Research articles in print or other forms including
commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com 

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the
 use of which has not always been specifically authorized by 
the copyright owner. We are making such material available 
to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort 
to advance a better understanding of political, economic
 and social issues. The material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
 in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If 
you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other 
than "fair use" you must request permission from the
 copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

© Copyright Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research,
 2011

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.


© Copyright 2005-2007 GlobalResearch.ca
Web site engine by Polygraphx Multimedia © 
Copyright 2005-2007

0 comments: