The Arab Spring and the triumf of Non-Violent Action

The Arab spring of 2011 has changed the Middle East and the world. Ordinary people have lost their fear and shattered the perception that their rulers are invincible and that it is impossible to overthrow dictators without arms. Whatever happens next, the changes across the region in the first few months of 2011 have proven themselves historic as they show that revolution is possible.

It all started in Tunisia with mass protests in December last year. These were triggered by the self-immolation of a 26-year-old vegetable seller, Mohammed Bouazizi, after he was abused by police and had his only form of income, a box of vegetables and a pair of scales, confiscated. The protests continued for four weeks and concluded in a way nobody predicted - Zine el Abidine Ben Ali, Tunisia’s president for the past 23 years, fled the country.

Tahrir Square occupied

Even though this amazing feat had occurred nobody predicted that it would spread as far as it did with protests and strikes kicking up all over the Middle East. In Egypt the 30-year-old dictatorship of Hosni Mubarek was seen by most as being far too ruthless for protests to succeed in any way- certainly in toppling the dictator. Millions of people took to the streets after posters on university campuses called for a non-violent protest and Tahrir square was occupied. The initial demands to topple Mubarek quickly turned into demands for womans rights; fair pay; the right to food ect. After 18 days of protests, Hosni Mubarek was gone.

The fight for liberation in the Middle-East is continuing today. The toppling of Ben Ali and Mubarak is only the start as protests spread and demands for equality and good living conditions continue. Organisation through socialist groups and trade unions is vital in order for everyone to work coherently, nationally and internationally, so they can force the remaining working class out of power and include everyone in society, making links between the causes of all the different struggles across the world. Struggles that are all fighting against a common oppressor - Capitalism and the class system.

Victories like in Egypt and Tunisia that used non-violent action are not new. Throughout history both recent and distant, ordinary people have found innovative and inspiring ways to challenge violent regimes and confront abuses of power: bringing down dictators, changing unjust laws, or simply giving individuals a renewed sense of their own humanity in the face of those who deny it. It goes to show how non-violent tactics can achieve huge advancements even when facing a repressive and brutish state. Violent protests in the Middle East have failed. States use brutal force in such a way and with such power that even if guns are available to the masses, it is impossible to confront. This is true now more than ever with the advanced technology available to states such as Israel and the USA.

Lone protestor stands up to police in Egypt

The main use of violence by the oppressed in the Arab revolutions so far is in Libya where guns were picked up by rebels to fight. They were initially bombed out by the Libyan air-force, of which their guns had no chance of defeating. This then paved the way for NATO forces to walk in on apparently “humanitarian” grounds. The result of this has been huge numbers of civilian deaths, NATO securing key ports that export oil to Europe, and even huge casualties for the rebels. This was a much less constructive method as compared to Egypt, where due to the tactics used by the protesters, through strikes and the occupation of Tahrir square, the protesters had much more control over the country, had must bigger numbers due largely to the lack of violent ideas. Obama, who’s government was an active supporter of Mubarak, was forced to say that it was good that the Egyptians were fighting for democratic rights and was unable to intervene. This differs greatly from the response he and NATO gave in Libya, where people were also fighting for true democracy as in Egypt. The USA’s interests were secured and the Libyan peoples ignored.

Non-violent tactics in Egypt also lead to key members of the army and police joining the protests. It was clear to see that the people in the army, who mostly entered it as members of the working class as a means to survive, could connect to the protesters cause as it was also theirs and their families cause. It is common sense that if these members of the army were being shot at they would be unlikely to react in the same way. This was shown as mention previously with the military in Libya. Does it not seem like common sense that is impossible to win a revolution without the army on side and this will be hard to achieve when you are shooting at them?

The Arab revolutions have shown that when the masses take to the streets and take control of means of production they can revolutionise society, even in the face of hugely repressive forces. They have also helped demonstrate the effectiveness of non-violent action and how it is ultimately more successful than violence. The Arab revolutions came as the result of decades if not centuries of oppression from the ruling classes that ensure members of the poor, working class do not have access to the basic necessities of life. They arose from the spark created by Mohammed Bouazizi but lacked political organizations to unite all of the struggles into one that could unite the masses against their common oppressor with the aim of creating true democracy. This could still happen at any moment and the struggles in the Middle East continue. Removing the dictators was only the first step. The real change that the Arab people are struggling for is yet to come…The fantastic thing is that it has started to.


J.Llewellyn