By Dhiren Ponnusamy
Mass street protests in Tunisia and Egypt have swept away two leaders who had been firmly in the saddle of power. With modern communications, the whole planet has watched the events unfolding minute by minute until Zine El Abidine Ben Ali fled from Tunisia to seek asylum in Saudi Arabia, and Hosni Mubarak abandoned his presidential palace in Cairo for his summer residence in Sharm el Sheik.
I said to myself, when I learned of the resignation of Mubarak, that it was like the scenario of the film, “A Perfect Storm,” starring George Clooney. After the fall of Ben Ali who is now seriously ill in Saudi Arabia, political commentators around the world started drawing up the list of North African and Arab countries likely to be affected by the strong winds of change and spoke of the domino effect.
Today it comes as no surprise to see television pictures of regular street movements and growing social and political unrest in Libya, Bahrain, Algeria, Yemen and Iran. The stunning TV coverage of the bloody upheaval in Libya ruled by Moammar Gadhafi for 40 years without any regard for the opposition conveys an image of surrealism.
What is the common thread in these mass demonstrations? Is it the call for regime change? We know from history that autocratic leaders do not like to share power. They tend to crush all forms of opposition and do whatever it takes to remain in power until their last breath. Ben Ali stayed in power for over 23 years and Mubarak 30 years, ruling their countries with the motto “L’etat c’est moi.”
The families and friends associated with the leaders of ruling parties amassed fortunes over the years, creating a society where the haves have more and the have-nots have nothing. Such a situation gives rise to several social monsters such as corruption, poverty, unemployment, inflation and poor governance. It is precisely these monsters which the population wanted to display and kill with vehemence during their mass street demonstrations in Tunisia and Egypt. Have they been successful?
Yes, to a certain extent by getting rid of the leaders and allowing the people to express themselves. But getting rid of the evils will take a longer time. Tunisia and Egypt are right now working on new constitutions which will pave the way hopefully to democratic elections. It is only after the elections that we shall know what kind of government will emerge and what its policies will be.
It is interesting to note that when the agitation started in Tunisia, France, a former colonial power, through its minister of foreign affairs initially stood by Ben Ali, but changed its stance when it was clear that he would fall due to the increasing popular outburst. By contrast, when the street protests became louder in Tahrir Square in Cairo, U.S. President Barack Obama said that when he last met Mubarak, he advised him to undertake urgent reforms in various sectors.
Unfortunately, Mubarak who has been in power for too long could not bring in the reforms expected by his own people. After the downfall of Mubarak, I was surprised that U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton also termed the event “A Perfect Storm.” For her part, German Chancellor Angela Merkel sympathetically qualified the resignation of Mubarak as “the last service he rendered to his country.”
No one would like to see a chaotic situation developing from street revolutions. It is the duty of the interim governments to protect the fabric of society and more importantly prepare the ground for reforms. Otherwise, the present euphoria may be followed by long-term suffering.
My father once told me that when he was at the State Department in Washington way back in 1977, a representative of Afghanistan, praising the ousting of King Mohamed Zahir Shah a few years back, told a Moroccan delegate in his presence, “See, the people of Afghanistan have got rid of the king, a despot. We are no more a kingdom. Why don’t you do the same with your king in Morocco?”
Revolution and abrupt changes can bring in their trail unfold miseries. Afghanistan has not known any form of institutional stability and has been a continuous battle ground for 38 years. It has been a dreadful laboratory for the Soviets, the Taliban, the Americans and now NATO.
The country is still in great mess today under President Hamid Karsai. By contrast, Morocco has remained a kingdom and its people have enjoyed a relatively peaceful life and some economic prosperity, although major reforms are lacking. Which scenario would people prefer? One where reforms are continuously applied to meet the needs and aspirations of the people, or one where there is little bother about reforms and which can create a situation of no-return.
The question which many are asking themselves is, “Who next after Tunisia and Egypt?” As money and wealth continues to flow from the West to the East, these social monsters are growing in size. The East also happens to be where most of the “fringe” countries are ― i.e. those countries with autocratic governments. As wealth flows into these countries, many of whom are rich in core resources, the disparity between rich and poor is increasing at an alarming rate.
In a recent study, The Economist highlighted that China currently has 800,000 millionaires but 400 million people who live on less than $2 a day. This is a recurring theme throughout the East and as reforms fail to keep pace with economic growth, the very ingredients which eventually lead people to take to the streets is quietly brewing.
Reform is an ongoing process. It should be dynamic and should address the fundamentals of our society in terms of political and social stability to ensure economic prosperity for the entire population. But who decides on the pace of reforms? Should the streets dictate the pace or should it not be the sacred duty of the government?
Before his downfall, President Didier Ratsiraka of Madagascar was in Mauritius (Mauritius is my home country), and during a press conference he was asked about the long awaited economic changes in Madagascar. He replied “Je suis un home presse.” Why? Because he did not embark on meaningful reforms for years, thinking he was a president for life. Poor fellow, it was too late when he realized that time and the population were no more on his side.
One can only hope that the governments of various nations across the globe can draw appropriate lessons from all these events. They should show the courage and the wisdom to take bold decisions in a timely and efficient manner or else, the existing monsters will continue to grow and the “domino effect” of the northern African belt will take new meaning.
Dhiren Ponnusamy is a financial expert residing in Seoul. He can be reached at dhiren14@gmail.com.