Two years in the life of the Arab Awakening already feelslike an exhausted century, with the pendulum swinging from exuberance toextreme fear. Reckonings with tyranny considered unimaginable a mere five yearsago have taken place across North Africa, alongside a descent into savage civilwar in Syria, chaos in Yemen, violence in Lebanon and the tremors of quakes stillto come in virtually every corner of the region.
Everything has changed when it comes to the exercise ofpower in the Middle East. And yet, in too many capitals contending with its newcondition, nothing has changed. With the rush to rename the two-year ArabSpring into an “Arab Autumn” or even, among those with strikingly shortmemories, an “Arab Winter,” it’s worth recalling what this revolutionarymovement really was about.
Leave aside the simplistic Western narrative about the Arabuprisings representing the final unspooling of a universal urge for“democracy.” Far more threatening to this moment’s legacy is the way in whichArab leaders across the region are seeking to redirect the passion of anengaged public toward canards and chimeras, new and old.
The roots of the Arab Awakening are as explosive as they arestraightforward: a demand for government that is legitimate in its relationshipwith the governed and one that is accountable for its actions. Has mygovernment earned a right to exercise power, and can I remove it if I believeit has failed to deliver on its promises for greater security, opportunity andprosperity? These are the existential questions posed today by Arab men andwomen “ united in their quest, finally, to live as citizens, and not merely assubjects. Instead of seeking to meet their peoples’ demands, however, too manyArab leaders are betting on a mix of fear, inertia and confusion to change thesubject. Masters of distraction, they are seeking to replace the alibis of old“ “resistance” to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and resentment of thepower of the United States “ by stoking new, and far more dangerous, fears.Principal among these is Iran, and its challenge to the 30-year regional statusquo in the Gulf dominated by Saudi Arabia and its allies, backed by the UnitedStates. Second, and related to this, is the so-called “Shia crescent” emergingfrom the ruins of the invasion of Iraq and spreading west through Syria andJordan into Lebanon. Third, the emergence of political Islam as a conqueringtransnational movement.
Make no mistake: Iran is playing a dangerous and destructiverole through every proxy at its disposal; a rising Sunni and Shiitesectarianism is threatening to unleash another wave of conflict across theMiddle East; and the experience of political Islam in power (see: Iran) doesnot inspire confidence in its ability to respect the rules of legitimategovernment.
Legitimacy is the spectre that is now haunting the halls ofpower throughout the Middle East. Much as many of the region’s embattledleaders wish to deceive their allies in the West, themselves and their peoplethat this is about perfidious Persia, Shiite sectarianism or political Islam(as threat or savior), the reality is much simpler: The Arab young wantcompetent, responsive and responsible rule. Properly understood, this is anopportunity for Arab leaders “ including the kings and sheiks. Difficult as itis for them to adjust to public demands for accountability and efficiency, theyare far less equipped to manage the inevitable blowback from stoking sectarianwar within their own countries or a greater confrontation with Iran. They andtheir backers in the West would be wise to consider whether they would not bein a much stronger position to manage the new threats if they ruled with thesupport of their citizens.
A decade ago, as an aide to United Nations Secretary GeneralKofi Annan, I took part in a meeting in Cairo with then-president HosniMubarak. The meeting was proceeding as usual until, in response to anexpression of concern about human rights abuses in Egypt, Mubarak abruptlychanged demeanor and delivered his standard ultimatum: It’s him or the MuslimBrotherhood. Was Mubarak right? Well, yes, but only up to a point, and onlybecause he made it so by ensuring that the only effective opposition to hisrule was channeled through the mosque. Last month, leaving a meeting in Cairowith Egyptian policy makers and diplomats struggling to make sense of lifeunder a Muslim Brotherhood government, I entered a crowded Tahrir Square thatwas preparing for yet another mass protest. Only now the chants were againstPresident Mohamed Morsi.
Power’s purpose has never been so contested, or socontingent, as it is today in the Middle East. Genuine legitimacy must now beearned, and re-earned, through the accountable exercise of power. This is, inone respect, a major threat to the region’s leaders “ as much to the newIslamist governments as it is to the unreformed monarchies and republics. Moreimportantly, however, it is an opportunity for forward-looking leaders in theregion to create a sustainable basis for their rule “ one that isn’t based on ashell game of threats and excuses.
Nader Mousavizadeh is chief executive of Oxford Analyticaand the co-author with Kofi Annan of ``Interventions: A Life in War andPeace"
