Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

After 18 days of protest Egypt has its freedom. Military is now in control and is promising to meet the wants of the Egyptians.

So with Egypt being successful other countries are already jumping on the idea of freedom. Algeria and Yemen both had protests. My question to Dakka is how viable do you think it is for another successful overthrow/reform?

Unfortunately in my opinion it's not going to happen, not without getting very bloody at least. Egypt only worked IMHO due to two things.

1. Egypt's military had always been a serve to people military, not in the back pocket of the government (at least not Egypt's government). Which leads to...

2. The United States being a major factor in the Military's paychecks.

So Dakka How likely do you think more Middle East reform is?

So unlikely that its impossible.

It will always be a bad region politically and stability wise.

Mr Hyena wrote:So unlikely that its impossible.

It will always be a bad region politically and stability wise.

My view as well, only way i could see it happening would be a massed and armed revolt of the citizenry, and as stated earlier that'd get bloody very fasy

Mr Hyena wrote:So unlikely that its impossible.

Egypt has basically followed the same path as Turkey, the main difference being that, until recently, the Muslim Brotherhood was the alternative to authoritarianism; which garnered lots of US money for the funding of oppression.

Mr Hyena wrote:
It will always be a bad region politically and stability wise.

Neither Jordan nor Syria have been tumultuous states in terms of regime change. Jordan because everyone loves the Hashemites (basically the text-book case for being good autocrats). Syria because the Assads will shell your village if you screw with them. Then there's Saudi Arabia, which, as a rentier state, is naturally among the most stable places in the world (why revolt when the government gives you everything?); the same goes for Oman, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar.

When we talk about "the unstable Middle East" we're really only talking about Lebanon and Israel; plus maybe Iraq (a recent addition), Iran (not really unstable), and Yemen (again, a recent addition).

DA's Forever wrote:
My view as well, only way i could see it happening would be a massed and armed revolt of the citizenry, and as stated earlier that'd get bloody very fasy

That almost never leads to democracy. Like, seriously, I can't think of one time its actually worked. Even the United States had its own sort of elite hierarchy that worked to enforce a sort of democracy that already existed in England, for the most part.

Edit: Because I just realized that the first person I responded to was not directly referencing Egypt.

True, i wasn't thinking of Democracy with that last post, good point sir.

DA's Forever wrote: Algeria and Yemen both had protests. My question to Dakka is how viable do you think it is for another successful overthrow/reform?

Algeria already had a sort of quasi-democracy, and Yemen is a full democracy with only a single dominant party. And before anyone says it, simply electing the same guy repeatedly does not make a state undemocratic.

DA's Forever wrote:
So Dakka How likely do you think more Middle East reform is?

In states that don't produce large amounts of oil, as likely as anywhere else. In states that do produce a large amount of oil, very unlikely.

DA's Forever wrote:After 18 days of protest Egypt has its freedom. Military is now in control and is promising to meet the wants of the Egyptians.

So with Egypt being successful....

Woah there, little buddy! Let's not be hasty. There's still plenty of time for the situation over there to go tits-up, and just because they might (if they're lucky) get real democracy doesn't mean that everything be rosy. Egypt could conceivably end up being 'Iran 2: Electric Boogaloo'*.

I'm willing to bet that many people were optimistic when the Shah (another despot backed by the west - noticing a pattern?) was overthrown. I wonder how many people are optimistic about Iran now?

* Stolen from Khornholio!

I don't think that there will be other country's that will change into a Democracy. But i believe that their
leaders, now that they seen what has happened in Egypt. Will change their politics here and there. So that
people will gain some more freedom, and feel less inclined to revolt.

Albatross wrote:
I'm willing to bet that many people were optimistic when the Shah (another despot backed by the west - noticing a pattern?) was overthrown. I wonder how many people are optimistic about Iran now?

Iran is a democracy, its just not a liberal democracy.

Like it or not, lots of people like stoning women.

The Kuwaitis are happy to give away money in order to buy their citizens happiness.

I can't imagine the Sauds having too much trouble now. Their authoritarian regime seems pretty stable and with 20,000 or so royals or family members in positions of power they have a lock in securing their future.

dogma wrote:

Albatross wrote:
I'm willing to bet that many people were optimistic when the Shah (another despot backed by the west - noticing a pattern?) was overthrown. I wonder how many people are optimistic about Iran now?

Iran is a democracy, its just not a liberal democracy.

Like it or not, lots of people like stoning women.

Yeah, that's what I'm driving at - democracy isn't always pretty. Sometimes people don't chose the things you want them to.

Democracy also adds elements into a society that may be disturbing to Americans.

Imagine a pro-Western autocrat gets toppled in a non-Western country with a non-Judeo-Christian religion undertone that was never repressed, but also never became prominent on the national political scene.

We get a rise in free-speech (relative to previous times), and all of a sudden we see that religion rise in the power structure. Depending on their interpretation of religious values, these could conflict with what Western nations see as "proper" values thay a democracy holds (read: their own) and may get perturbed at the new policies that arise with the rise of said religion.

WarOne wrote:Democracy also adds elements into a society that may be disturbing to Americans.

Imagine a pro-Western autocrat gets toppled in a non-Western country with a non-Judeo-Christian religion undertone that was never repressed, but also never became prominent on the national political scene.

We get a rise in free-speech (relative to previous times), and all of a sudden we see that religion rise in the power structure. Depending on their interpretation of religious values, these could conflict with what Western nations see as "proper" values thay a democracy holds (read: their own) and may get perturbed at the new policies that arise with the rise of said religion.

You're awfully correct and understandable in your posts today.

For a long time west democracy wasn't pretty, The UK had it's troubles and so did Italy and France. We can't leave out the US,s own dirty past.

Nobody predicted Tunisia. Nobody predeicted Egypt.

I think this is because revolution is an inherently unpredictable thing, and as a result I'm skeptical of anyone who says they know how something is going to go.

As for Egypt, well so far it's turned out about as well as anyone could reasonably hope for. But that doesn't mean it'll all be good from here on, there's still plenty of scope for other factions to take control. Trying to build a democracy is a really difficult thing.

DA's Forever wrote:So Dakka How likely do you think more Middle East reform is?

I think it's the natural course to tend toward Democracy and progress.

They'll all come around eventually.

sebster wrote:Nobody predicted Tunisia. Nobody predeicted Egypt.

I did. In 1987.

sebster wrote:Nobody predicted Tunisia. Nobody predeicted Egypt.

People have been talking about Egypt as a powder keg for about 10 years, its just that no one in the media has paid attention, for a variety of reasons.

Tunisia was more unexpected, though the additional protections of women's rights made the government much more unpopular.

When I first saw the title of this thread I thought it Guns'n'Roses announced their next album to be released in 2020.

Ahtman wrote:When I first saw the title of this thread I thought it Guns'n'Roses announced their next album to be released in 2020.

dogma wrote:People have been talking about Egypt as a powder keg for about 10 years, its just that no one in the media has paid attention, for a variety of reasons.

Tunisia was more unexpected, though the additional protections of women's rights made the government much more unpopular.

There's a big difference between 'that place is a powderkeg' and 'the situation in Egypt is likely to lead to a popular non-violent call for Mubarak to step down'. The latter is a reasonable view of the situation at the time, the latter would have required an incredible level of predictive skill or utterly stupid lucky guess.

Point being, I think it's fair for people to start talking about how the situation is still very unstable, and start listing the factors in play. But when I see folk making really clear declarations about how this faction is going to take control or whatever, I can't but think those people are probably trying to sell us something.

Well, yeah.

If you can't be right, then its best to convince everyone else that you are.

dogma wrote:Well, yeah.

If you can't be right, then its best to convince everyone else that you are.

But if you want to keep guessing or speculating while keeping reputation for making solid predictions, you can't make any predictions that can be provably false. Which is why 'it's a powerkeg is great' - how do you prove something isn't a powderkeg?

sebster wrote:

dogma wrote:Well, yeah.

If you can't be right, then its best to convince everyone else that you are.

But if you want to keep guessing or speculating while keeping reputation for making solid predictions, you can't make any predictions that can be provably false. Which is why 'it's a powerkeg is great' - how do you prove something isn't a powderkeg?

Is there powder? Is there a keg? If the answer to either is no you have no powderkeg.

Its a lot like the debate over realism and liberalism.

Realist: "Nations don't make pacts very often!"

Liberalist: "Nations make pacts more often than that!"

Ken Waltz: "My theory can't be falsified, and is therefore scientifically accurate!"

Everyone: "Ken, you're incompetent!"

Everyone hates Waltz.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:
Is there powder? Is there a keg? If the answer to either is no you have no powderkeg.

According to Downey's Theorem, if there exist both powder and Keg, then there must also exist party.

dogma wrote:Its a lot like the debate over realism and liberalism.

Realist: "Nations don't make pacts very often!"

Liberalist: "Nations make pacts more often than that!"

Ken Waltz: "My theory can't be falsified, and is therefore scientifically accurate!"

Everyone: "Ken, you're incompetent!"

Everyone hates Waltz.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:
Is there powder? Is there a keg? If the answer to either is no you have no powderkeg.

According to Downey's Theorem, if there exist both powder and Keg, then there must also exist party.

I do believe dogma is drunk

Ahtman wrote:Is there powder? Is there a keg? If the answer to either is no you have no powderkeg.

Is that what they told you when you stood waiting in the dorm hallway? Nah dude, no powder in here, no keg in here, you must have the wrong room.

You tried to believe them, but you knew you heard whispers and giggling.

Ahtman wrote:

sebster wrote:

dogma wrote:Well, yeah.

If you can't be right, then its best to convince everyone else that you are.

But if you want to keep guessing or speculating while keeping reputation for making solid predictions, you can't make any predictions that can be provably false. Which is why 'it's a powerkeg is great' - how do you prove something isn't a powderkeg?

Is there powder? Is there a keg? If the answer to either is no you have no powderkeg.

Three weeks ago there was no sign of a powder keg in Egypt.

Two weeks ago it exploded, and the US was all like, "Way to wreck our regional stability, democracy fanbois".

KK wins the thread.