The Middle East (general catch all)

[Bill Moore]

Has anyone shown a correlation between OIF and recent uprisings against non-democratic governments in the Arab World? Was the former administration right that removing Saddam would be a catalyst for the spread of democracy in the Middle East? I suspect this has been addressed, but I haven't seen any studies, articles or commentaries on this line of thought. Please share if you have seen it.

[Marc]

Has anyone shown a correlation between OIF and recent uprisings against non-democratic governments in the Arab World? Was the former administration right that removing Saddam would be a catalyst for the spread of democracy in the Middle East? I suspect this has been addressed, but I haven't seen any studies, articles or commentaries on this line of thought. Please share if you have seen it.

I think few, if any, analysts saw this recent wave of uprising coming. I have not seen any article showing a relation between the removal of Saddam and current events. There are some studies that show that as long as a muslim autocratic regime maintains a defiant stance towards the West, it has less to fear from its own population than when it is seen as a lackey of the West (e.g. because it fails to denounce western military operations in the Middle East).

However, I think that - with the benefit of hindsight - studies will be written that show a correlation between OIF and the recent uprisings against non-democratic governments in the Arab World.

[Surferbeetle]

Has anyone shown a correlation between OIF and recent uprisings against non-democratic governments in the Arab World?

Brother Bill,

It would seem to stand to reason that after dropping a trillion dollar rock into an oxbow lake waves from that event would travel to every point in the lake; I would argue that it’s still too early to say conclusively that that event has fully reconnected things (when using the Assyrian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, etc. as reference points) to the mighty multi-generational river that is globalization. IMHO Iraq, Egypt, Israel, and Saudi Arabia are just a few of the interesting places to look to for hints.

Let’s consider three ‘substantive’ viewpoints from Iraq

Iraq’s last patriot, by Anthony Shadid, NYT, 4 February 2011

“We came in naïve about what the problems were in Iraq,” Gen.Raymond Odierno, the American military commander in Iraq, told me last August, a few days before he was to end his third tour. He had spent four years in Iraq. “I don’t think we understood what I call the societal devastation that occurred, we didn’t realize how damaged Iraq had been from 1980, in the Iran-Iraq war.” The list went on: Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, the 1991 gulf war, international sanctions that crippled Iraq’s middle class. “And then,” Odierno added, “we attacked to overthrow the government.” The same naïveté affected American efforts to mold Iraqi politics, with its ethnic and sectarian divisions. “We just didn’t understand it,” Odierno said.

Maliki’s victory ended eight months of utter political dysfunction, and what have become Iraq’s key players were all represented in some fashion. “A big step for Iraq” is how an American briefing paper described the result. “A government that is made in Iraq.” Former American diplomats were less encouraged. Before it had all finished, Crocker offered a typically insightful prediction. “There will be a little for everybody, probably,” he said. “It’s going to be fairly inclusive among the elite. But the promises that are made, the deals that are dealt, are really not going to involve any promises or commitments to make life better for people in Iraq. That’s just not what the transaction is in Iraqi politics.”

In my first interview with Allawi, back in May, he offered a suggestion, with a laugh. “This is my advice to you — go and ask President Bush how Iraq is going to get out of this mess. Bush, Bush, your Bush, Bush Jr., you ask him. He’ll probably have the right answer. I think so. He introduced the de-Baathification, he introduced the dismantling of the army, he introduced the sectarian quotas in the Governing Council. He should know what he did — the process, how this process is going to move forward.”

I asked which was better — the Iraq of Saddam Hussein or the Iraq of today. He shook his head with the disdain of an expatriate. “The only difference is that we have this democracy.” He uttered the word with contempt.

I would argue that the OIF experience, good and bad, has raised the expectations of the hoi polloi, and as a result many of the changes resulting in some level of transparency & accountability (Al Jazeera style) at the Nahiya, Qada, Province, and National levels in Iraq are unstoppable, and will indeed continue.

Al-Maliki gives Iraqi officials 100 days to improve — or else, By Rebecca Santana, in the Washington Times on 9:53 a.m., Sunday, February 27, 2011

BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraq‘s prime minister, following a string of deadly anti-government protests, gave his ministers on Sunday 100 days to improve their performance or risk being fired.

The warning from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki came two days after thousands of protesters took to the streets across the country to demand better public services. It demonstrates the worries Iraqi officials have that protests here inspired by the popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt could spiral out of control.

If we accept that Egypt is indeed the cultural vanguard of the Arab World, it’s interesting to think about the demographics of the country and who might be representative of the different viewpoints associated with a market segmentation analysis. Yusuf al Qaradawi (25 to 30 percent of the Egyptian populace is said to favor a Muslim Brotherhood derived vision), General Ismail Etmaan(Egyptian Army, Higher Military Council), Al Jazeera (New Media), and ‘Arab Youth’ (60 percent of the Arab region is said to be under 25 years of age) are part of the topology.

After Long Exile, Sunni Cleric Takes Role in Egypt By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK, Published: February 18, 2011 in the New York Times

Sheik Qaradawi, a popular television cleric whose program reaches an audience of tens of millions worldwide, addressed a rapt audience of more than a million Egyptians gathered in Tahrir Square to celebrate the uprising and honor those who died.

“Don’t fight history,” he urged his listeners in Egypt and across the Arab world, where his remarks were televised. “You can’t delay the day when it starts. The Arab world has changed.”

Person in the News: the Arab youth, By Rould Khalaf, Published: February 25 2011 22:33, Financial Times

He is the young Egyptian who occupied Tahrir Square, and awakened a sleepy population. She is the young Libyan defying the madness and brutality of Muammer Gaddafi. He is the empowered Bahraini and Yemeni youth raising his voice in a resolute call on governments to listen to their people instead of oppressing them. Each revolt has drawn in swaths of its own society, but it is the young Arab who is the driving force; the unassuming leader. Whether in Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen or Libya, the more established forces in society, including political parties, tribes and the military, have been followers, forced to jump on the bandwagon lest they too are left behind.

Middle East: Uncertain horizons, By Tobias Buck in Jerusalem, Published: February 23 2011 21:51, Financial Times

The real problem for the IDF, however, lies not so much in the human fallibility of senior officers but in their inability to formulate a coherent response to a changing security environment. That, at least, is the thesis advanced by Ron Tira, an Israeli military analyst and a former air force pilot. “We are now facing a new warfare paradigm by the enemy. The old approaches are not very useful, we need to come up with something new – and we are not there yet,” he says.

The threat today is not invasion or battlefield defeat. Instead, argues Mr Tira, Israel’s enemies in Iran, Syria, southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip have launched a war of attrition aimed at the “long-term erosion of the Israeli will and the long-term erosion of Israeli legitimacy”. The approach cleverly combines political and military elements, conventional and non-conventional warfare, and draws on the international community’s increasing frustration with Israel.

Citizens not serfs can save Saudi Arabia, By David Gardner, Published: February 27 2011 19:06, Financial Times

On his return from months of hospitalisation and recuperation in the US and Morocco, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was characteristically unstinting in his generosity. He lavished $36bn on his subjects, in pay rises and debt forgiveness, and to help them buy houses and start businesses. As munificence goes, this was princely. Whether it was politic is another question.

It might buy off whatever unrest is brewing underneath the kingdom’s thick layers of political, military and religious control. Or it may be perceived as the panicky response of an absolute monarchy to the wave of revolution unfolding across the Arab world; the rulers of neighbouring Bahrain offered their people a similar bribe but they took to the streets anyway. Yet King Abdullah’s decision to hose Saudis with money to pre-empt any revolt is certainly old politics in a new era – and unless it is followed by political reforms the king himself has timidly championed, the future of the kingdom must be in question.

[Bill Moore]

Marc and Steve,

I agree it is too early to tell. While we successfully removed Saddam's regime, our attempt to transform Iraq is still largely a failed experiment in forcing Western values and political processes upon a people who didn't embrace them. I don't think any of the popular uprisings desire to follow the model we established there, BUT on the other hand, our occupation of Iraq probably motivated some interesting political discussions among the youth in several Arab nations and they decided they wanted change so much, that it broke the bonds of fear that the government had over the people.

Unfortunately in my view, we see people throughout the Middle East demonstrating against their corrupt and inefficient governments and seeking a greater say in governance, yet because these corrupt governments are our allies in the war on terror we don't have a policy for responding to these events. We seem to be paralyzed and letting a potential opportunity to let the Arab people reform the Middle East (something we can't do) slip through our fingers. It seems by our actions, or lack of action, that we would have preferred the status quo to remain, because the bastard you know may be better than the bastard you don't, but on the other hand we claim our policies are at least partially based on human rights, freedom and democracy. Once again we're losing credibility in the Middle East.

From my very bias seat, I see this as the a great opportunity for Special Forces to support the oppressed rise up against their corrupt governments, but, and maybe with good reason, we're too nervous about the morning after to engage.

Marc, I agree that the anti-western rhetoric in the Middle East had legs, but that seems to be waning a little. If we don't always support Israel, if we get past our desire to re-make the Middle East in our image, and we support legimate change that is desired by the Arab people, etc., then there will be less reason for the anti-western rhetoric to resonate. Saddam didn't have any answers, and I don't recall any other leaders in the Middle East who played the anti-western theme to their advantage that were effective in providing for their people. Iran isn't in the Arab world, but their anti-western rhetoric isn't winning them the support of their people. Saddam's anti-western rhetoric didn't win support from his people, but it did generate support from various anti-Israeli extremists, much like Qadaffi's anti-western rhetoric (before he allegedly became our friend) won more support from radicals outside Libya than his own people.

I think we'll be learning and relearning lessons for a long time based on these current upraisings. I only fear we'll discover the truth too late to act in ways that would benefit our interests and the Arab people.

[Dayuhan]

From my very bias seat, I see this as the a great opportunity for Special Forces to support the oppressed rise up against their corrupt governments,

Counterproductive, I suspect. When the operation ceased to be secret (wouldn't take long) those rising up would be de-legitimized, branded pawns of a meddling foreign government. Foreign intervention, especially if it involved arms, would also make it much easier to justify an armed crackdown, and once we are revealed as a participant we'd lose any credible status as mediator.

These uprisings are good things and should be helped along, but it has to be very subtle and if we go out trying to provoke them we are likely to make a mess.

All countries where the US has focused CT efforts and capacity building efforts to help these regimes more effectively deal with the "terrorists" within their borders. One man's freedom marcher is another man's terrorist; and our GWOT focus has been decidedly in support of the perspective of these despotic leaders in that regard. Even Libya became an ally in our war on terror, and leveraged that to gain greater license in the suppression of her own people.

Calling Libya a "US ally" is well exaggerated. They came off the "untouchable pariah" list but that's about all.

The Libyan regime never asked for or needed any license to oppress. Not many people do, really. They do it because its what they do; they don't ask permission and they don't care what we think.

[Bob's World]

Calling Libya a "US ally" is well exaggerated. They came off the "untouchable pariah" list but that's about all.

The Libyan regime never asked for or needed any license to oppress. Not many people do, really. They do it because its what they do; they don't ask permission and they don't care what we think.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/...6?pageNumber=1

We started down that path in 2007. I suspect there is little coincidence that this coincided with the Surge in Iraq, what with Libya being one of the major sources of foreign fighters to that conflict.

[Marc]

Marc, I agree that the anti-western rhetoric in the Middle East had legs, but that seems to be waning a little. If we don't always support Israel, if we get past our desire to re-make the Middle East in our image, and we support legimate change that is desired by the Arab people, etc., then there will be less reason for the anti-western rhetoric to resonate. Saddam didn't have any answers, and I don't recall any other leaders in the Middle East who played the anti-western theme to their advantage that were effective in providing for their people.

Bill, you are right. The effect of anti-western rhetoric is waning. However, the anti-western theme is still important. One analyst that did see the Egyptian uprising coming is David B. Ottaway, who published an occasional paper entitled "Egypt at a tipping point" in the summer of 2010. This is what he wrote about Mohamed ElBaradei:

A Ph.D. graduate in international law from New York University
School of Law, the balding, owlishlooking diplomat has spent his entire professional career working abroad either for the Egyptian foreign ministry or
at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Geneva. For 12 years he was the IAEA’s director general, emerging from bureaucratic obscurity with his outspoken criticism of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003

In other words Ottaway says that ElBaradei's OPPOSITION increases his credibility on the Egyptian political scene.

Another thing. There are leaders in the Middle East who played the anti-western theme to their advantage AND were effective in providing for their people. This approach is at the core of many Islamist movements' strategies. Hizbollah, Hamas and Sadr's movement all combine effective humanitarian and social services programs with anti-western rhetoric.

I agree with you that anti-western rhetoric is no substitute for a lack of attention for the people's need, but I think that an emerging leader that combines anti-western rhetoric with effective policies concerning education, health care, and social assistance will quickly gain massive popular support.

[Marc]

Marc, I agree that the anti-western rhetoric in the Middle East had legs, but that seems to be waning a little. If we don't always support Israel, if we get past our desire to re-make the Middle East in our image, and we support legimate change that is desired by the Arab people, etc., then there will be less reason for the anti-western rhetoric to resonate. Saddam didn't have any answers, and I don't recall any other leaders in the Middle East who played the anti-western theme to their advantage that were effective in providing for their people.

Bill, you are right. The effect of anti-western rhetoric is waning. However, the anti-western theme is still important. One analyst that did see the Egyptian uprising coming is David B. Ottaway, who published an occasional paper entitled "Egypt at a tipping point" in the summer of 2010. This is what he wrote about Mohamed ElBaradei:

A Ph.D. graduate in international law from New York University
School of Law, the balding, owlishlooking diplomat has spent his entire professional career working abroad either for the Egyptian foreign ministry or
at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Geneva. For 12 years he was the IAEA’s director general, emerging from bureaucratic obscurity with his outspoken criticism of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003

In other words Ottaway says that ElBaradei's OPPOSITION to OIF increases his credibility on the Egyptian political scene.

Another thing. There are leaders in the Middle East who played the anti-western theme to their advantage AND were effective in providing for their people. This approach is at the core of many Islamist movements' strategies. Hizbollah, Hamas and Sadr's movement all combine effective humanitarian and social services programs with anti-western rhetoric.

I agree with you that anti-western rhetoric is no substitute for a lack of attention for the people's need, but I think that an emerging leader that combines anti-western rhetoric with effective policies concerning education, health care, and social assistance will quickly gain massive popular support.

[tequila]

For those interested, the Ottaway paper is here. I would disagree with the characterization that Ottaway saw the revolution coming - he rated such an event as highly unlikely.

Might Egypt have its own version of Eastern Europe’s “color revolutions” or Iran’s mass street protests? No Egyptian I talked to felt either was very likely. They cited the apolitical and easy-going nature of most Egyptians, the limited number of activists and the government’s skill in keeping economic and social discontent from turning into a political opposition—at least so far. “The Dream of the Green Revolution,” the title of a new book timed to ElBaradei’s return, was pretty much just that.

On the other hand, Western diplomats reported that the Mubarak government appeared to live in constant fear of a major social explosion at any moment. They worried how long Egypt could remain peaceful while faced with such a yawning gap between rich and poor, a bulging population, mounting worker unrest, worsening living conditions in Cairo and high unemployment among the of thousands of graduating university students.

I would posit that "anti-Western rhetoric" is not going to be central to the next Egyptian government, which will likely be focused overwhelmingly on economic and institutional reform issues.

Note that the organizations you listed all originated as clandestine resistance movements in countries under Western military occupation, which might have something to do with their penchant for such rhetoric.

[Marc]

Note that the organizations you listed all originated as clandestine resistance movements in countries under Western military occupation, which might have something to do with their penchant for such rhetoric

Tequila,

Hamas is an offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (Gaza was Egyptian until 1967). Please note that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood's ideologue at the time (Said Qutb) never needed a Western military occupation to have a penchant for anti-western rhetoric. In case you still have a doubt, please consult Qutb's writings.

[Fuchs]

I think few, if any, analysts saw this recent wave of uprising coming. I have not seen any article showing a relation between the removal of Saddam and current events

The least indirect link is probably the rise of Al Jazeera (pushed by the Iraq War) and AJ's influence (it's rather more liberal than state media outlets were).

[Surferbeetle]

Unfortunately in my view, we see people throughout the Middle East demonstrating against their corrupt and inefficient governments and seeking a greater say in governance, yet because these corrupt governments are our allies in the war on terror we don't have a policy for responding to these events. We seem to be paralyzed and letting a potential opportunity to let the Arab people reform the Middle East (something we can't do) slip through our fingers. It seems by our actions, or lack of action, that we would have preferred the status quo to remain, because the bastard you know may be better than the bastard you don't, but on the other hand we claim our policies are at least partially based on human rights, freedom and democracy. Once again we're losing credibility in the Middle East.

Bill,

If you can be both soft and tough enough you can simultaneously be friends with Venus and fight alongside of Mars. Our friend Sun Zu knew how, unlike much of our old guard who are slaves to CvC in all things. In short we lack balance in our approach.

So much for the past; what is a possible solution to help us move forward?

Pragmatism = DIIME+PPP = whole of government approach + public private partnerships = inputs< outputs

What if we were to have a five person strong government working group regularly sitting at our President’s table providing him with sound whole of government advice regarding DIIME issues outside our nation’s borders? We, fortunately, see synergies with the Team Clinton-Gates (DoS and DoD – the D and M of DIIME) just as we did with Team Crocker-Odierno in Iraq. As for I (Intelligence ) once upon a time the Central Intelligence Agency was just that, however it now falls under some administrative fiefdom or another, while our 16 member strong intelligence community appears to happily drift along while burning through 50 billion USD or so a year. Horrible things have happened to the USIA and it appears that we have no one at the table who can represent or speak to our nations governmental Information needs. Similarly who would represent governmental Economics issues for our nation; USAID (external), Department of Commerce (Internal), the Export-Import Bank, etc?

What if we had a five person strong private partnership working group regularly sitting down with our President providing him with sound private partnership advice regarding DIIME issues outside our nation’s borders? What if membership was limited to a single representative from the top US Company in each of the DIIME arenas and membership was transparently reviewed and competed for every two years?

What if these two working groups had to develop quarterly combined work break down structures, schedules, cost estimates, and workplans for their proposals that would be subjected to our Executive, Legislative, and Judicial systems? What if working group members were held accountable for their successes and failures and concepts such as Return on Investment were used as benchmarks? What if the process was transparent and accountable to the population of the US?

Either it’s the beer or I must have bumped my head….

Steve

[Pete]

Elliot Abrams had an opinion piece to that effect in the Washington Post about a month ago.

[Bob's World]

I would argue that in many regards the current rise of democratically minded protest is in spite of, rather than because of OIF and our GWOT efforts. I do believe that in the long run Iraq has the potential to provide a powerful example of how to evolve toward a form of effective democracy appropriate to this region, but that is a future benefit.

Consider that the countries where the populaces are rising up now, emboldened by the success of Tunisia and the US response, are also the countries that were:

1. The greatest source of foreign fighters to travel to Iraq and fight against the US under the AQ banner;

2. All (Libya new to that first list) U.S. Allies and all topping the charts of the "least free" nations on earth;

3. All countries where the US has focused CT efforts and capacity building efforts to help these regimes more effectively deal with the "terrorists" within their borders. One man's freedom marcher is another man's terrorist; and our GWOT focus has been decidedly in support of the perspective of these despotic leaders in that regard. Even Libya became an ally in our war on terror, and leveraged that to gain greater license in the suppression of her own people.

Sadly, the many populaces standing up to oppression are in large part doing it is spite of the US support to their governments, rather than because of the US support to concepts of liberty and democracy. Our words have been of the latter, but our actions have been firmly toward the former.

The key is how we move forward from here. How does the U.S. recover and refocus to lend stability to what could easily become a violent and chaotic process that is not in our best interest, or the best interest of the people involved. Dark forces will absolutely step up and seek to exploit these tumultuous conditions for their own purposes and we will need to be alert. Hopefully the CT guys are dialed up, because there is a good chance some of the real terrorists may break cover or get careless as they seek to grab this advantage. We need to scrub those target lists hard though, because I suspect there are many on the list that are nationalist patriots rather than international terrorists, and we do not want to fall back into the business of being manipulated by our allies to take care of their problems for them.

We live in dynamic times.

[Presley Cannady]

Sadly, the many populaces standing up to oppression are in large part doing it is spite of the US support to their governments, rather than because of the US support to concepts of liberty and democracy. Our words have been of the latter, but our actions have been firmly toward the former.

Couldn't be helped. Americans were damned lucky to tear those governments away of the Soviet sphere in the first place.

[Bob's World]

Couldn't be helped. Americans were damned lucky to tear those governments away of the Soviet sphere in the first place.

Presley,

Agree, the US waged the Cold War hard in the Middle East. And well from our perspective. The problem is that we locked those Cold War control measures in place and rode them from the fall of the Berlin Wall to the fall of the Twin Towers. Then, we modified them by adding an aggressive CT layer of engagement and HN security force capacity building directed at capabilities to go after "terrorists." AQ guys are really very few. AQ AP, HOA and Maghreb are made up primarily of nationalist insurgents with a handful of AQ hardcores running the UW program to organize, train, finance, supply, etc.

We let our intel guys throw a big net over the whole mess and call it "terrorism" and granted hunting licenses, provided support and encouraged aggressive pursuit of all.

If we are going to do Security Force Capacity Building with some Ally we need to focus it on dealing with external threats 99% of the time. Help the Saudis deter or defeat an attack by Iran? No problem. Help the Saudis round up the dissenting members of their own populace? I have a problem with that. If the Saudis want to do that, that is there business, but it flies in the face of US principle and law and it weakens us globally when we support suppression abroad of actions that are legal, encouraged, and honored at home.

Bottom line is that we got off track. Our handling of the current rash of popular uprisings, both in how we deal with those governments and how we deal with those populaces, is critical to getting back onto azimuth with our national ethos and principles. We will still do hard things when hard times such as the Cold War dictate. But now is not such times, and there must be healing when conditions change.

[Dayuhan]

Help the Saudis round up the dissenting members of their own populace? I have a problem with that.

The Saudis, like the Libyans, have never needed our help or asked our permission to round up dissenting members of their own populace, nor would they stop doing it if we told them we didn't like it.

[Bob's World]

The Saudis, like the Libyans, have never needed our help or asked our permission to round up dissenting members of their own populace, nor would they stop doing it if we told them we didn't like it.

Agreed. Yet we used our power and influence to encourge this behavior all the same. And I suspect you underestimate our ability to either push things in the direction we desire, or steer them elsewhere. Here we pushed where we should not have, and we will never know what might have happened if we had tried to steer in stead.