By Alessandro Boncio.
More than two years already passed since the beginning of the so called “Arab Spring” phenomenon, but the events that developed into an unsteady regional situation are yet not so clear and defined. As Kierkegaard said, “history is lived forward but it is understood backwards”, and so the evolutionary process that, civil or armed unrest, of liberal or reformist shape, continue to produce in MENA countries, still prevent us a clearer view of what is happening thus affecting an adequate socio-political analysis.
One thing that is clear and evident is how few articles or comments are today related to the future happenings of this region, while history already teached us of the backlashes of short term strategies. The occurrences that unfolded in the same region after the 1978/79 events (the Camp David peace treaty, the Iranian revolution, the Afghan conflict…) were the result of decision that were made or influenced by western powers directly involved in MENA.
The Western political scholars reaction through the ongoing events in the Middle East and North Africa, is still mainly based on the central misinterpretation that this phenomenon should represent the people will to engage and establish a Western-style democracy. The Arab Spring uprising instead is not related to such concept and it was not motivated neither by religious nor political demands, being the result of social and economic instability. This phenomenon has been composed of decentralized riots and rebellions, without a defined leadership and a clear political ideology, not motivated by a desire to adopt social structures that historically, culturally and religiously do not belong to them.
The concept of civil society then should not be engaged in accordance with the prevailing Western doctrine, which consider the implementation of parameters expected in a democratic political system. In the MENA countries instead, the notion of civil society is more related to a system that provides firsthand those social services (education, health, etc.) that central governments, for various reasons, are not able to provide.
To develop a better understanding of such realities, in order to assist the whole region in social advancement, it is then required to learn about traditions, cultures and history of the MENA countries, being flexible and adapting our view in foreign policies and interactions. The region has a longstanding tradition of male leadership, structuring the family, tribal hierarchy and the leadership of today’s nation which unity has always been guaranteed by such a patriarchal model of governance. As a consequence of this cultural tradition, after ousting the previous regimes, some people felt the necessity to replace them with strong powers via religious or military backed political parties.
In the complex unfolding of events that cross at several levels the involved societies, only two steady elements can be found in each of the otherwise unique national histories; one is the religious factor, bearer of fundamentalist and reformist instances, while the other is the military one, a tool often used by the ruling regimes to maintain the status quo situation through the use of coercion and armed force. These two elements are differently influencing each MENA country affected by change and asking for a different kind of governance. In fact, along the course of recent history, these two factors have often been opposed during the creation of modern Middle East and North Africa nations; generally the Islamic world followed two main trends in the creation and development of the modern nation concept: on the one hand there was global Islam implementation, where religion is fully integrated within civil society and politics, and on the other the creation of a (secular) nation-state concept relegated the religious factor to the mere intimate and personal appearance. Comparing as an example the notion of wilayat-e faqih – the Iranian theocratic leadership of a country (also in the political and social fields) – with the clear separation between secular and religious power in Turkey that led to the creation of a strong secular state, provide the wide range of possibilities through which modern Muslim societies are shaping themselves accepting their belief in the political, and by consequence, social structure.
The armed forces have been quite often a social elite that came into contact with some kind of “contaminated” education offered by western actors; as a result, they were among the first in their community to grow the awareness that civil society primarily needed a sociological thought modernization. The military leadership was often shaped and educated according to the interest of the colonial powers and Western nations, evolving into the opening key to Western political and social principles leading to a point of no return with the “other part” of each country, still entrenched in religious and cultural tradition, who condemn any kind of diversity as apostasy from Islam.
The uprising and changes that begun in Tunisia in 2011 and then spread out in several MENA countries, still leave many sociologists and scholars with a fundamental doubt on what direction those societies should take, being now at a crossroads between an Islamic revival and the end of religion as a state fundamental element. With many conflict still ongoing, and the serious possibility of Western direct involvement in Syria or indirect participation in Egypt evolving landscape, it is therefore necessary to find a cooperative approach between the two most prevalent factors in the social structure of these countries to reach a peaceful coexistence and an evolution in state building bringing stability and collective rebirth in countries that have suffered already too much in the last century.
It is the author opinion that for us this should be considered as a moral obligation due to the past intervention in the region (XIXth and XXth century) that altered the area not only geographically (imposing borders that divided families and relatives forever) but also in a political and religious way, to the point to help the awakening of a radical version of a politicized Islam that lead to the fragmented current situation beefed by extremists and jihadists all over the Arab world.
As concerned partners (and above national interests) we should help to find an approach between the most important actors in such countries; maybe we should begin provocatively just from their military structure; by the element that (recent revolts already demonstrated it) although used as government armed expression, found itself politically engaged, torn between the loyalty to civil institutions (in which they swore oath), and an equally strong communal solidarity feeling, motivated mainly by sharing the same religious beliefs.
In several MENA nations’ history in fact, the armed forces have been the engine of reformation ideas brought by the religious establishment. It is hardly the case to remember that the Islamic religion is not directed just to the intimate and personal man’s sphere, encompassing instead all aspects of life, including public and social output. It appears then inconclusive to rule out the religious aspect from the military sector of society, being fruitful to take possession of this asset and using it to support the social development. This can be obtained promoting a communication channel between public institutions and military establishment, facilitated by their shared beliefs.
This hypothesis request a forward looking strategy aimed not only at pacifying the ongoing conflict like the Iraqi and Libyan conflicts are teaching us today; a new wave of sectarian killings is more or less throwing again those countries into the hands of warlords and tribal leaders. What is needed instead, is a proactive approach that takes into account the oxymora that each political class is confronting trying to respond to democratic instances while at the same time protecting the political institution and the religious and cultural heritage of the nation. This can be helped establishing working groups, composed by representatives of the main ideological actors, as well as by Islam scholars who are capable to communicate with secular representatives of Arab societies and beyond, in order to find the basic principles of agreement on which promote the training and education of military morale and ethic.
Disclaimer: the expressed opinions as well as any error or inaccuracy in the text should be referred solely to the author.
