http://www.newrepublic.com/article/1...-obama-notice#

Welcome to Phase Three of the Arab Spring

It appears to be the case that, in one zone after another, the vast regional revolution that used to be known as the Arab Spring (except that springtime has lasted two years now, and not everyone is Arab, and Mali testifies to the fact that revolutions do spread) has entered its Phase Three. The liberal origins back in 2011—the beautiful cries, “Peaceful! Peaceful!”, the days of Facebook glory—amounted to Phase One, the utopian heyday. Then came the Islamist triumphs, which marked Phase Two. Phase Two had a look of permanence, or so we were told, if only because, in the estimation of a certain school of Western thinking, Islamism, which may not be to our taste, is nonetheless authentic, which signifies: inevitable.
The Arab Spring’s Phase Three has nonetheless arrived. Phase Three adds up to a series of mass protests and revolts and even wars against Islamists of every stripe—against the mainstream Islamists in Egypt, against the moderates in Tunisia, and against the radicals in Mali. The people want to topple the Islamists!—a significant number of people, anyway. Events have by-passed the experts. Islamism, even in its mainstream and moderate versions, turns out to be less democratic than advertised; and the demos, less Islamist.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/comme...ticle9234600/?

The Harlem Shake and a simmering Arab sexual revolution

There was something enthralling in the sight, on Thursday night, of young Egyptians, some clad in underwear, making rhythmic pelvic thrusts in front of the Cairo headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Harlem Shake is an unlikely medium of revolution, but the dance craze this week became the latest front in the showdown between Islamic politics and the drive toward individualism and independence.
Beneath the surface, something more complex appears to be taking place – perhaps not a whole country embracing the libertine abandon of those dancers, but an Arab world that is making the break, however slowly and awkwardly, from the restrictions of traditional family life.
I found the last paragraph particularly interested, because it may indicate a major philosophical shift in their society, which is the real revolution. I believe most historians now treat the American Revolution as the underlying philosophical change (the guiding principles that shaped the society and government) that took place before the armed conflict, and the conflict was just a phase in the overall the revolution. I'm about half way through "The Radicalism of the American Revolution" by Gordon Wood. In the run up to actual war he focuses on how American's philosophical views on government, family, social norms, etc. broke from England's, and one of the key changes that facilitated the revolution was the change in the traditional family.

We tend to focus our studies on the fighting, and come up with doctrines to defeat revolutionaries militarily and by enabling good governance, but we often fail because we don't understand the shifts in society, family, and political values. If we understood this we may find that stepping to the side and letting evolution take its place is the best answer. Our interventions in Central America, Vietnam, and elsewhere only made the evolution more deadly, but ultimately the far left assumed office in many locations. Let them assume office sooner naturally, and allow their methods to fail, and then gradually shift to the middle. It seems many of our interventions, even if successful in the short term, then to fail over the long term, and perhaps this what we're missing. I don't think our current approach to so called human domain will capture this.

http://www.playboy.com/playground/vi...ld-arab-spring

The Cold Arab Spring

Observers of the first turbulent days of the Arab awakening could have been forgiven for predicting the triumph of Western values of liberty. Scenes of girls fearlessly marching on the palaces of the anciens régimes evoked the French Revolution. Women led rallies heralding Tripoli’s liberation from 42 years of Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi’s dictatorship and earned their place at the tables of Cairo’s coffeehouses, long a bastion of Egyptian males. The angry reaction to soldiers in Cairo who chased female protesters and subjected them to virginity tests showed just how much the public mood had changed.

But two years on, the promise of individual as well as national liberation still hangs in the balance. The secular youths who braved the batons and bullets seem mere stalking horses for the Islamist cavalry bent on regulating according to God’s word not only the public life of Arabs but their private predilections as well. Among the first victims were Alexandria’s statues of bare-breasted mermaids, which for more than a century had borne a hunky Zeus on a marble platter. During the French Revolution, women bared their breasts; during Egypt’s, iconoclasts covered them up.
I don't think the interview with Bruce Hoffman that David posted elsewhere is wrong, actually I think he is correct. Al-Qaedaism is replacing Al-Qaeda, and there are always those who fear and oppose change and change does seem to be taking place in the Arab world. We had the KKK form after our Civil War because they opposed the changes taking place. I'm sure there are numerous other examples.

http://www.middleeast-armscontrol.co...rorism-threat/

It is dynamic. What we have seen is the decline of Core al Qaeda, but the rise of al Qaeda-ism. In other words, even while Core al Qaeda has suffered since bin Laden’s killing, its ideology and brand have clearly prospered. Today, al Qaeda’s affiliates and associates are present in more places than al Qaeda was ten years ago.
Yes, we are witnessing a resurgence of the al Qaeda ideology and brand across the Middle East and North Africa. It is of course limited to a small number of fanatics but that in essence is the appeal of terrorism: you don’t need divisions or brigades to have an impact or arguably even to change the course of history. Rather, a handful of persons can fundamentally do so if they are sufficiently disciplined and able to perpetrate even only one or two dramatic, significant, jarring acts of violence. That is the age-old conceit of terrorists and their driving motivation.
Perhaps we have an overall positive trend, but this trend threatens the reactionaries and in turn they become more dangerous. We all know if it bleeds it leads in the media, so the extremists will unfortunately in many ways control the narrative and create the perception that the Arab world is becoming more fundamental.