Arab regimes have deliberately fought off the other possibility, namely that of a liberal-civil order. Arab despots have never worried that much Islamists, knowing that in case of any doubt, the West would opt for them as the "lesser evil".

Reform standstill following the Arabellion

The authoritarian reinstatement of prior conditions that has taken place in many flux-nations since 2013 does not provide any kind of answer to the huge challenges of the present and the future in Arab nations.

Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi (photo: AFP)
Combining authoritarian rule and military might: following the failure of the Arab Spring, almost all "republics of fear" have not only become economically weaker, but also more repressive

This development is worrying inasmuch as the socioeconomic conditions that ultimately led to the Arab revolutions have dramatically worsened: today one in every three Arabs is under 23 and in the next 20 years the Arab world is going to need 50 million jobs – and no one knows where these are going to come from. In the context of this, it can be assumed that without far-reaching political and economic reforms, nations such as Egypt will soon be ungovernable.

This is precisely where western efforts should be focussed: Germany and its partners need to attach conditions to their offers of aid. These should include progress (however small) in stamping out widespread corruption, in the implementation of economic reforms for the middle classes and in the bolstering of civil society and the rule of law.

In the western capitals of the world, we should be distancing ourselves from the illusion of stability in apparently robust repressive states. After all, in reality, tyranny is never stable.

Loay Mudhoon

© 2018

Translated from the German by Nina Coon

More on this topic
In submitting this comment, the reader accepts the following terms and conditions: reserves the right to edit or delete comments or not to publish them. This applies in particular to defamatory, racist, personal, or irrelevant comments or comments written in dialects or languages other than English. Comments submitted by readers using fantasy names or intentionally false names will not be published. will not provide information on the telephone. Readers' comments can be found by Google and other search engines.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.

Comments for this article: Whatʹs left of the Arab Spring

Mr Mudhoon, I think you don't find any problems with your own analysis. On one side you are with a "West" that must "nuture and support" so-called democracy and on the other side you are blaming the failure on a "ruling military elite to promote a modern statehood." Don't you see your contradiction? Is it not the very same major "West" powers, in addition to the IMF, that have been supporting the Egyptian regime since 2013? What did the major Western power did for Syrian uprising and the Syrian regime? Saudi Arabia in Bahrain and Yemen? I guess you supported the "democratic" NATO intervention in Libya. Honestly, I don't see in your very short piece that you distinguish between the "revolutionary forces" and the "counter-revolutionary ones" since 10 December 2010. Could you please mention when since formal independence major Western powers supported "democracy". Was it in Egypt's under Mubarak, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia or Algeria?
Regarding confessionalism, what do you think of the support of rich Sunnis ("Sunni bourgeoisie, capitalists") in Syrian of the Assad regime? What was the weight of the Sunni soliders fighting with the Syrian regime before the active support of Hizbolah and others?
I think I agree with you only in one thing: the slogan of the beginning of the uprisings, especially in Tunisia. A slogan that was hijacked and changed to "Jasmin revolution", and then by Foreign Policy as "Arab Spring.".
I hope my comment will make you question some fundamentals and dig deeper in the wealth of research and analyses carried out the uprisings since its inception.

Nadeem17.11.2018 | 13:04 Uhr