If there is one hotspot in the world that can be described as ‘the region of the year’, it has to be the Middle East for 2011.

azlan The tumultuous year began with Zine El Abidine ben Ali fleeing Tunisia, followed by the forced resignation of Hosni Mubarak, who became president of Egypt when I was still a primary school kid back in 1981. Who would have thought the iron man would end up behind bars a year ago today?

Then the queerish Colonel Gaddafi vowed to fight until the last drop of his blood in April, and fulfilled his wish six months later, which may have prompted Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen to sign a deal - hammered by his Arab counterparts and backed by the United States - to step down by February 2012.

As the Chinese saying goes: Wise is the man who submits to circumstances, although Bashar al-Assad remains defiant and hopes to prove his enemies both within and outside Syria wrong.

The fast-changing realities on the ground have no doubt aroused the time-honoured concern as to whether the so-called Arab Spring is an outcome of foreign intervention masqueraded as global humanitarianism.

azlan After all, it was not too long ago that Mubarak was hailed as a reliable partner to Washington, while Gaddafi had naively believed the renunciation of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons would enhance his strategic values, but the honeymoon between him and western leaders only lasted for a few years before it turned into a deadly spell.

One may also question - and legitimately so - why Washington, Paris, London and Brussels were all conspicuously silent when King Hamad of Bahrain ordered indiscriminate shooting at peaceful protesters against him even during the holy month of Ramadan?

Granted, Manama’s gross abuses against its populace with rubber bullets and CS gas may appear benign in comparison to the outright killings by other despots in the region, the mass protests are however increasingly quenched by live fire and troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Needless to say, these are perceived as ‘good Arabs’ on account of their well-tested cooperation in the past.

The ruling monarchy is anxious to get back into the good graces of the world community, and one wonders if the otherwise balanced international media is doing its bidding also. To date, at least 50 Bahrainis have died as a result of the brutal crackdown . The number may pale into insignificance in light of the shocking scale of violence in Libya and Syria, the loss of human life is never merely a statistical question.

But one must avoid reducing the complex issue of foreign intervention into two understandings: military action and securing western interests, although either of these is valid to some extent.

New model of intervention emerges

In fact, the example of Libya clearly indicates a new model of intervention has emerged through heightened profile of Muslim countries such as Turkey, and other powers - including Russia and China - were initially receptive to the argument that something must be done about Gaddafi.

More importantly, these interventions could not have taken place without the conditions on the ground, ie. the massive discontent towards the ailing regimes and archaic systems.

The cracks in Mubarak’s hold on power, for instance, had begun to show as early as the early 2000s, but the military adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq somehow diverted the attention of the Egyptian populace from their own challenges at home. The lack of a viable alternative also played into the hands of the regime.

The same can be said of Malaysia. The popular uprising against Barisan Nasional and Umno in particular cannot be simply attributed to foreign interference, which explains why even Najib Abdul Razak himself has warned that his party must reform itself or wait to be wiped out, although his ostensibly liberal messages almost always amount to mere rhetoric or tasteful propaganda.

In a sense, those who are afraid of critical voices and hence argue for the status quo to be maintained are most probably wary that their vested interests would be forfeited following a regime change. In the case of a typical Umno loyalist, it would be the fear of his/her ‘bumiputra’ position being eroded and replaced with a ‘Chinese chauvinist’ agenda.

Having said that, there is no dispute that foreign intervention will likely breed bloody retaliation, especially when it is seen as orchestrated by the West. The increased attacks by extremists against Christian communities in Pakistan and Nigeria are a case in point.

Thankfully, Muslims in Malaysia remain predominantly cool-headed, despite attempts by Perkasa and other racists in Umno and PAS to drive a wedge between the various communities.

But it also reveals seeking help from outsiders calls for delicate balancing, especially foreign funding that can be easily twisted by the powers-to-be to portray any civil rights or opposition movement as made up of ‘traitors’. Then again, such tactics may not necessarily work if the regime is too out of touch with the public.

In sum, while the developments across the Middle East have inspired much of the world, the ultimate gains remain unclear given the severe challenges ahead (would it be another sectarian conflict in Syria, for instance?). It is certainly the region of the year, but will also likely stay as a place to watch closely in the coming year.

 

JOSH HONG studied politics at London Metropolitan University and the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. A keen watcher of domestic and international politics, he longs for a day when Malaysians will learn and master the art of self-mockery, and enjoy life to the full in spite of politicians.