Reactions to Political Change

Image courtesy of Boise Weekly & Getty Images

I was initially uncertain about writing more on the continuing crisis in Egypt.  Largely my purpose in blog writing tends toward discussing issues outside the spotlight of mainstream political news media, but the relevance of the current crisis to democracy promotion is such that it would be folly not to discuss the subject further.  The political change currently rolling through the Middle East has the potential to shape the region for the foreseeable future, and so I thought it would be worth taking a moment to discuss the reactions of other world powers to the current political change.  More specifically, the political reactions in the United States, European Union, China and Israel are vastly different and illuminating in regard to the nation’s issues with the Middle East and the ideological promotion of democracy.

In Israel, as in most nations, standards and opinions vary among the populace, the government and most obviously the media.  That being said the most regular sentiments expressed by Israel’s media have been of resistance to potential change and concern over “extremism”.  Of particular note has been the series of harsh critiques of President Obama’s approach to the crisis as naïve, ill informed and unaware of the region’s history.

Fortunately, and contrary to its news media, the Israeli government been rather cool headed about the situation, particularly in light of recent commentary from Egypt’s new VP regarding the continuation of peace with Israel.  However, as in America, the specter of the potential leadership by the Muslim Brotherhood has been one of many concerns among Israel’s conservative government.  Further given the division of the state and the issues with Palestine, there is obviously the added concern over protests in Israel. Israel’s stance on the situation might seem harsh to Americans, but the threats posed by political change in Egypt are much more tangible and immediate than they are to us across the sea.  Through all of this, the government of Israel has still voiced firm support for potential democracy within the state.

Though it is not exactly a subject of focus at the moment, China’s reaction to the current political crises in the Middle East has been telling.  Predictable in many ways, China’s activities have focused on controlling access to information on the crisis for fear of domestic uprisings.  While the differences between the governments of China and Egypt are- to put it bluntly- massive, China’s government has long been proactive on capping potential troubles before they have the opportunity to overflow.  We’ve discussed in the past the need for constant awareness among authoritarian regimes, and the ways they’ve risen to the challenge. In the current Middle East political crisis, China has provided a sterling example.

In Europe, despite all the tangible dangers and potential for problems presented by a transition from Mubarak’s authoritarian regime, the standard has been support for change and hopefully democratic growth.  As in the Unites States, European support has largely been limited for fear of meddling in the affairs of another state, particularly in a time of governmental transition.  This stance may have been expected to a degree, the EU as a body without a populace to be held accountable by has often been quite progressive in its assertions over human rights and the development of representative governance.  It is important to note however, that the EU is hardly the most representative of bodies, and that opinions throughout the governments and populace of member states vary greatly.

In the US, as mentioned in another of my posts, the government found itself in something of a difficult position.  Regionally our projects in democracy building have long been threatened by our support of Egypt’s authoritarian regime, and there was the small issue of Obama’s speech in Egypt in staunch support of democratic growth in the state.  On the other hand Mubarak was easily one of the United State’s most useful allies in the Middle East, thus I was quite pleasantly surprised at our government’s decision to voice support of regime change in the area.  At the same time, contrary to many I find that our reserved approach to the situation was precisely the right decision, rather than the perception that we were only hedging our bets. Few things are more important in the growth of potential democracy than the principle of self-determination.

In all, these last weeks have been quite a time for any student of governance or individual with an interest in international relations.  I consider myself rather fortunate to be alive during a period of such potential change, even if as always I have my pessimistic doubts.  Though certainly I can understand the desire to relate to the struggles for representation throughout the Middle East, I’d note that solidarity and self absorption are not one in the same, and that now certainly isn’t a time for self-centered news reporting.  The current protests aren’t a parallel for US Tea Partiers any more than they are for any other social movement or the 1979 revolution in Iran, and flawed analogies are seldom helpful to anyone.