Unrest in the Middle East: Innocent or Coerced?

Across the EU and much of America, countless individuals are cheering the protesters for their success in toppling governments in Tunisia and Egypt--and  all the while some other people are also pleased. Though unlike the happily blissful western denizens, these figures are all smiles because they understand the exact consequences which will come from the change of regimes in the region better than the average American or European will likely ever be enlightened enough to discover. And while the masses are celebrating, they are scheming, for the revolutions follow their train of thoughts and planning with more preciseness than they had previously believed. These joyful notables are Bashir al-Assad of Syria, Mohammed ElBaradei of Egypt, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, and Hassan Nasrallah of Lebanon.

(Photo courtesy of Long Live Jacob! blog)

What do these men have in common other than geographic proximity? They all command anti-Western views and are influential in their countries, making them the perfect alliance to surround and crush the State of Israel with their coordinated assaults on moderate regimes throughout the Middle East.

In the loud results of the revolutions few have been ready to point out the key pattern of successful--and failed revolutions across the area while some still rage on. We hear chants of democracy and triumphant glee, yet the final reports seem to ignore the singular truth of it all: extremist leaders in the region are holding strong with an almost prepared resistance, while the dormant governments of Egypt and Tunisia easily fell to the shouting rebels. In the latter nation's unrest, President Ben Ali's dominance collapsed within a matter of days, yet his North African brother Qadafi has held strong in Libya through a determined radical Islamic policy and a brutal crackdown on protesters not seen in more moderate governments.

When Hosni Mubarak stepped down in February to quell protests, many felt this would lead to the peaceful collapse of other governments, yet neighboring Iran seems to defy this view. Before opposing activists could muster a force and demonstrate, the Iranian authorities launched a systematic suppressant strategy that curbed the growing flames of opposition to their power. So despite the common mindset of freedom in the Middle East, the radicals are coming out on top while the moderates fall.


With Syria in the anti-Western camp and Lebanon now controlled by Hezbollah, the State of Israel is progressively being surrounded by a powerful alliance in the molding of Gamal Nasser's Pan-Arabianism during the 20th Century. Only this time Egypt will have a military trained by the United States and Iran will not play the role of the moderate empire as it did under the Shah's leadership in the past.

It is understandable that people desire to embrace changes in age-old systems of power, yet each movement must be complemented by either a new centrist force or the toppling of a dictatorial regime. The truth of the current protests is that they threaten to realign the Middle East into a supremely anti-Western bloc, spelling considerable trouble for American and European interests in the near future. Understanding this threat means responding to it, and America must do so by helping to preserve the present moderates who hold power and seeking to topple those with views verging into the extremities.



Andrew Rimmer

National Alliance Vice President for Communications