Commentary on Events in North Africa
TRANSCEND MEMBERS, 21 Feb 2011
Ramon Lopez-Reyes – TRANSCEND Media Service
The revolutionary events in North Africa that occurred in February 2011 echo, in part, the “people-power” that was exhibited in East Europe in 1989 particularly the tearing down of the Berlin Wall. There will be many books written on these events which already are being heralded as “world changing.” The human, it seems, will tolerate injustice to a point and then rebel against repression even when backed with massive arms. That rebellion took place indicates that prior developments had occurred and set in motion the mobilization of people-power. Political, social and economic analyses will be presented to shed light on these events. While such analyses undoubtedly will be informative they will not address all the dynamics that are at play.
In a paper written in 2007 on “War in the Middle East” I brought attention to the dynamic of convergence (globalization) that is hurling Homo Sapiens toward a common identity. Clearly a concept of ‘convergence’ projects a metaphysical nuance that falls outside the normal span of dialectics, something akin to the Gaia Hypothesis that holds planet Earth to be a self-regulating organism. Although depth psychology contains aspects of metaphysics, I would list the theory of convergence more under evolution than metaphysics. I am of the opinion that nothing can impede convergence other than the demise of the human species itself. The slow evolving enlargement of identity from clan to tribe to nation is accelerating as communications, transportation, trade, environment and weapons of mass destruction increasingly bring attention to the universality of human interface.
Besides the concept of convergence I spelled out in that paper the geopolitical dynamic taking place in what I call the Eurasian Quadrants: Christian (Northwest Quadrant), Muslim (Southwest), Hindic/Buddhist (Southeast) and Tao-Buddhist (Northeast Quadrant). I brought attention to how the recent two hundred years of European conflict (1789, the fall of the Bastille, to 1989, the fall of the Berlin Wall) survived horrendous killing wars which finally ushered in a pattern of cooperation rather than confrontation. France and England reconciled animosities as did France and Germany and let’s hope, also between Germany and Russia. The exact period of confrontation was 1789 to 1975, the year when the Helsinki Accords were agreed upon by NATO nations and those in the Warsaw Pact. Those accords created what is today the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. The major components of the accords were reduction of forces and arms in Europe, and the pursuit of human rights in each nation. Ridicule was cast upon the accords for few believed that the Soviet Union would allow human rights to take root in its territory and satellite states. But human rights did penetrate the body politics of East Europe which led to the nonviolent fall of the Soviet Empire. In my opinion, the Helsinki Accords had as much if not more impact on the coming of people-power in East Europe as NATO is alleged to have had, particularly in keeping the “peoples’ revolutions” nonviolent. In short, the Northwestern Eurasian Quadrant provides two models for the other three quadrants: that of confrontation (1789-1975) or that of cooperation (1975-1989).
The notion of convergence holds that intra-quadrant integration needs to occur as part of the process leading to globalization. Over time such integration will weaken the power wielded by nation-states. Convergence further holds that after intra-quadrant integration, inter-quadrant integration needs to occur to finally hone a global pattern of identity.
In a remarkable short period of time, the major state in the Northeast Quadrant (China) and Southeast Quadrant (India) have made tremendous development following for the most part the model of cooperation. Although both eastern quadrants experienced major confrontations in the past, both nations are threading their way with little recourse to confrontation. Of course that may change given the realities of Chinese-Japanese, Indian-Pakistani, Chinese-Indian tensions and looming Russian-Chinese tensions in Central Eurasia where Afghanistan is the proverbial loose cannon.
The situation is much more complex in the Muslim or Southwest Quadrant where a status quo hangs over a poorly evolved post-Turk/European colonial culture. But beneath this status quo atmosphere, which caters to strong-men regimes or dictatorships, lies unresolved intra-quadrant tensions, something similar to the Balkans where unresolved tensions were not addressed until after the breakup of Yugoslavia. Regretfully, the Balkan unresolved issues were addressed with arms. Such may be the case with the Muslim Quadrant. In addition, the Sunni-Shiite tension (which approximate the Catholic-Protestant conflicts that caused the religious wars of the Seventeen Century) fester quadrant stability.
In a manner of speaking, the other three quadrants are moving on while the Muslim Quadrant (once the owner of a prolific, enterprising and advanced culture) remains in a sort of medieval milieu. The first attempt to put aside this medieval setting perhaps began with Gamal Nasser’s overthrow of King Farouk in 1952. Later came the overthrow of monarchial rulers in Iraq and Iran. Nasser’s Arab nationalism lost momentum probably because of failure to defeat Israel in battle but more likely because the efforts to fashion democracy waned and gave way to strong-man rule. Lacking other institutions or rallying principles, Islamic fundamentalism emerged as a banner to advance political activism and uplift Muslim worth. Shortly after the overthrow of the Iranian Shah, Iraq, a secular Sunni nation, invaded the newly created Iranian Shiite Islamic Republic. This war augured future intra-quadrant conflicts; that they have not occurred, other than the First Gulf War (1990-91) is largely due to quadrant-wide hostility toward the Israeli State, and the displacement of intra-quadrant rivalry tensions on Israel. Before the rise of political Islamic fundamentalism, Israel served as rallying cry that brought some sort of Islamic cohesion. But defeat in several wars with Israel and peace accords with Israel by Egypt and Jordan weaken the gravity Israel exerted on Muslim integration. Israel, however, has good reason to fear that people-power in North Africa may rekindle the anti-Israel umbrage and perhaps launch another round of confrontation with arms.
Islamic fundamentalism is a doubled edge sword. It may be used against non-quadrant “crusaders” and colonialists but also against Muslim rulers who are either secular or do not govern according to ‘proper’ Islamic precepts. Al Qaeda being an example of this “sword;” it would bring the sword down on the Saudi Arabian monarchy as well as on Western “crusaders” and supporters of Zionist occupation of Palestine.
From this short sketch of the Islamic Quadrant one might be prone to conclude that the Muslim Quadrant is bent on following the violent confrontation route to quadrant integration, the route followed by Europe during 1789 and 1975 particularly were the “crusaders” evicted from Iraq and Afghanistan, and Israel obliterated from the quadrant (similar to the Twelfth Century Christian kingdom in Palestine that lasted less than 200 years). But the people-power that erupted in North Africa has provided the Muslim Quadrant with an alternative to violent confrontation. The demand is for democracy which at it best includes assorted institutions and rights and not just an electoral system that selects the nominal head-of-state. Clearly there are political, economic and social reasons for what has occurred in Tunisia and Egypt. But I submit that dynamic of convergence may also be at play.
In the earlier paper, I wrote, “What can be expected as the fallout from the latest Western intervention in the Islamic Quadrant? From a psycho-political view, U.S. policy has played the role of ‘inciter.’ U.S. policy swept away the dust that hid the intra-quadrant fault lines and stroked intra-quadrant animosity. By opening the gate to Persian, Turk and Arab dormant interests to clash, U.S. policy set quadrant States upon a conflict course which, however, may lead to quadrant integration…..Is there any hope that the Muslim Quadrant can escape from prolonged war?…..The Islamic Quadrant also seems a ways off from creating ‘open’ societies that encourage reason. It is left to be seen whether an Islamic peace faction can gain momentum and argue the case for cooperation over conflict. It is hoped that peace jihadists will emerge and engage their “enemy” nonviolently.”
While I strongly opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, I can accept, in a metaphysical sense, that President Bush played the role of “inciter,” to set the Muslim Quadrant ablaze. In a perverse manner, the spread of war to three fronts (Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine/Lebanon) is forcing the quadrant to address and remedy underlying tensions. Not surprising the call for democracy, justice and economic betterment surfaced in states not yet beleaguered by arms. The voices being raised in North Africa call for nonviolent reforms and peaceful change of governance. These voices provide an alternative to the violence and killings that are rampant in the states caught up in war. If the voices are not heard or heeded it is likely that violence in the quadrant will increase. Such increased violence may eventually lead to exhaustion. Perhaps only then will a readiness emerge to cooperate and catapult or drag the quadrant into the Twenty-First Century, and participate cooperatively in the process of convergence.
Yes, credit can be given to neoconservative rhetoric that the war in Iraq was to establish democracy first, in Iraq and later, throughout the Middle East. But the democracy being etched out in Iraq came through violent means (suggesting that the ends will also be encrusted with violence), and its final form is anything but clear. What is happening in North Africa is mostly nonviolent except for the efforts to incite protesters to resort to some sort of violence. People-power in North Africa, in my opinion, does not flow from the Iraqi interlude even though it resulted in the overthrow of a dictatorial regime. Rather, the nonviolent people-power of East Europe that opposed the Soviet dictatorship seems a more likely model for what is happening in North Africa. I also do not give much weight to those Iranian religious leaders who frame the nonviolent revolution as part of a greater Islamic awakening. Rather the voices are a call for just governance and economic opportunity.
Historically, the convergence dynamic has operated amorally; it followed violent and nonviolent paths. Either way forged a trail toward the global community. But the development of weapons of mass destruction renders the confrontation approach ambiguous if not highly dubious. As long as conflict did not cause widespread destruction, convergence appeared not to favor cooperation over confrontation. But given that employment of nuclear weapons borders on sheer madness, the convergence process may now favor cooperation over confrontation.
People-power in North Africa did not just appear out of nothing. Basically it flowed from widespread frustration with the Muslim Quadrant’s backwardness; from the agony of blood being shed throughout the quadrant; perhaps from the human longing to live in peace. This people-power is being voiced by Muslim youth who, I believe, have a glimmer of understanding that we all live on the same planet and thus must share it, but they want to participate in the sharing. Given the destructiveness of modern wars, there is little desire for an added call to arms. As much as some may oppose the United States’ invasion of Iraq, Muslim youth also recognize that the prior Iraqi dictatorship and other dictatorships in the quadrant represent the main obstacle to the quadrant’s advancement. A call to arms would result in more shedding of Muslim blood which, regretfully, may be the case if conflict becomes the path to quadrant integration.
In summary, the force of convergence may be rooted in the destiny of Homo sapiens. We mutated out of the primate chain of evolution. We have consistently enhanced our level of consciousness. The question is whether the current level is sufficiently evolved to avert employment of armed conflict to achieve convergence. If not, the next round of integration, namely, inter-quadrant integration may evoke a war that is apocalyptic for the human species. In this sense, the convergence dynamic may opt to steer humans toward cooperation over confrontation. Just as though out-of- nowhere appeared people-power in East Europe, so too out-of-nowhere, so it seems, appeared people-power in North Africa. This out-of-nowhere nuance, I believe, suggests the convergence dynamic at work, that is, presenting an alternative to armed confrontation and thus avoid a war that might produce too many ashes that will preclude the proverbial Phoenix from ever rising again.
_____________________
Ramon Lopez-Reyes – Hawaii Institute of Depth Psychology
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 21 Feb 2011.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: Commentary on Events in North Africa, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Robert P Reibold, Helsinki Vip. Helsinki Vip said: TRANSCEND MEDIA SERVICE » Commentary on Events in North Africa http://bit.ly/ekDNWV […]