Beyond the Bubble

The protests that have occurred in Tunisia and Egypt have been successful in fostering significant political change. In Tunisia popular protests resulted in the ousting of former President Zine El Abidine Ben. In Egypt, former President Hosni Mubarak has been forced to resign, and his National Democratic Party has been fractured.

Mirroring the protests that have culminated in these political changes, citizens have engaged in popular anti-government movements in states throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa. Iran, Bahrain, Yemen, Libya and Algeria have all experienced demonstrations in the past week, and regional governments have struggled to maintain their grip on power.

The scale of these protests has differed greatly, from several hundred people to several hundred thousand citizens. On Monday, Feb. 14, the BBC reported that thousands of citizens marched in Yemen for a fourth consecutive day, demanding the removal of President Ali Abdullah Saleh.

In a larger uprising, the New York Times reported that on Monday, Feb. 14 in Iran there were an estimated 20 to 30 thousand demonstrators involved in protests across the country.

While the scale of the protests has varied, protestors seem to share many similar goals for their political regimes. They call for an increase in civil liberties, demand a more just democracy and hope for a political regime that will more justly adhere to the constitution and the rules of law.

While the tones of these revolutionary chants have struck similar cords throughout this region, one must be wary of grouping all of these protests together in a unilateral analysis of regional instability.

Most basically, the protests are occurring in countries with many stark political, historical and cultural differences. While sharing similar features, the governments of these states have all developed in unique ways, and have been in power for differing lengths of time.

Regime differences will also significantly affect the way that the government deals with the protests, and the level of violence that they might use against their citizens. In Iran for example, the military has been much more willing to use violence against protestors than have been soldiers in Egypt.

The goals of protestors also vary from state to state. While all seek an increase in political liberties, it seems evident that different groups of citizens will independently decide what degree of reform they are willing to accept, and when they will decide to cease their public demonstrations.

In Egypt, the military has assumed control of the state, and has suggested that they will serve as the interim government, “for a period of six months or until [parliamentary] and presidential elections are held,” reported the Canadian newspaper the Globe and Mail.

While progressive, it remains to be seen whether or not Egyptian protestors will accept the terms of this interim regime, and if peace will follow such a transition.

Citizens in each of the aforementioned states will have to make similar concessionary decisions. They will be forced to weigh the potential benefits of continued protest against the constraints of daily life, the violence of the military and the potential for greater regional instability.