AlQaeda in Yemen

LONDON ARAB REVOLUTION NETWORK @ YEMENI EMBASSY LONDON

Are the Mideast uprisings strengthening al Qaeda?

It isn't Osama bin Laden who's out there toppling autocratic Arab regimes — but will he and his terrorist network benefit anyway?

Best Opinion: Wash. Post, Yemen Observer, Al Arabiya

As Libya slips deeper into a bloody civil war, unyielding leader Moammar Gadhafi insists that al Qaeda is behind the revoltagainst him. Meanwhile, many, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), argue that the uprisings in Libya and across the Arab world are a "repudiation" of Osama bin Laden's network of terrorists. Others aren't so sure. Will the uprisings unleash pent-up support for Islamist extremism?

The revolts will strengthen al Qaeda: The uprisings represent "an enormous strategic step forward for al Qaeda," says Michael Scheuer at The Washington Post. Each dictatorship that falls creates "a more religion-friendly" political environment where bottled-up support for Muslim extremists will now gush forth. And with Egypt's Hosni Mubarak gone, Israel has lost its last "anti-Islamist shield." For bin Laden, who has declared war against both Israel and "the Arab tyrannies," this is a double victory. "Why the Mideast revolts will help al Qaeda"

Actually, the uprisings make al Qaeda irrelevant: Al Qaeda has never been "more marginal than it is now," says Shahid Alam at the Yemen Observer. It recruits frustrated young people by calling for "terrorist attacks against local tyrannies or their foreign backers." But these uprisings, which have largely succeeded without violence from the protesters, are robbing the organization of its lifeblood, and undercutting its rationale. "Washington, al Qaeda, and the Arab revolt"

Al Qaeda is down, but not yet out: Al Qaeda was "caught by surprise,"says Musa Keilani at Al Arabiya, and it's trying to "muscle its way into the unrest" after the fact. But if new Arab leaders can guarantee stability and jobs, the region's "hopeful youth" will "shun al Qaeda." The real question is whether the governments replacing toppled regimes can satisfy protesters' demands. If the new regimes fail, don't count al Qaeda out. "Priorities for post-revolt leaders"

source: http://bit.ly/guBsmA

Middle East round-up: ‘The gates to our freedom have been opened’

Observed by: Mr. Alaa Isam

by Siân Ruddick

Since Tunisia’s revolution began in December, people across North Africa and the Middle East have risen up against their regimes. They are inspired by Tunisia and Egypt, where two dictators were toppled in the last few weeks.

Algeria

Thousands took to the streets over the weekend, defying a police crackdown. They chanted, “Yesterday Egypt, today Algeria” as they faced police lines.

Since December young people have taken to the streets over rising unemployment and food prices.

The protests have forced concessions from the regime, including food subsidies.

And President Bouteflika has promised to lift the 19 year state of emergency—but has failed to do so yet.

Bahrain

Demonstrations have seen protesters fighting battles on street corners with police. Police have used rubber bullets and tear gas against protesters.

The government has promised a relaxing of the laws that restrict movement and the media. It has also given every family the equivalent of about £2,000 in an attempt to stop the protests.

Protesters are vowing to bring down the regime.

Yemen

Pro-government thugs have attacked democracy protesters. Both sides threw rocks while the security forces stood back.

On Sunday, Human Rights Watch said police used stun guns and batons against demonstrators and small mobs of government supporters attacked protesters.

Palestine

The entire cabinet of the Palestinian Authority, headed by prime minister Salam Fayyad, handed in its resignation to president Mahmoud Abbas on Monday in the face of rising protests.

Abbas promptly appointed Fayyad as premier and asked him to appoint a new cabinet.

The old cabinet were all members of Fatah.

There is talk that Abbas wants to try and draw opposition groups into the cabinet, but up until now Hamas—which won the last election in Palestine in 2006—has refused to take part.

The political crisis in Palestine has grown in recent weeks after the leak of the Palestinian Papers which exposed how much Fatah was prepared to concede to Israeli demands in negotiations.

But both Fatah and Hamas have discouraged demonstrations in solidarity with the Egyptian revolution.

Yousef Asfour from Jaffa told Socialist Worker, “The official Arab media are trying to say this revolution is only for Egyptians.

“But we know it is a blow against imperialism in the Middle East. We Palestinians are rejoicing—the gates to our freedom have been opened.”

Source: http://bit.ly/ikprlr

Political unrest across the Arab world

Revolution of the Arab peoples - comic

How should the U.S. respond to the protests in the Middle East?

Observed by: Mr. Alaa Isam

The Post asked experts what America should do about unrest in the Middle East. Below are responses from Steven Heydemann, Stephen J. Hadley, Aaron David Miller, Danielle Pletka, Hussein Agha, Robert Malley, Marina Ottaway, Andrew Albertson and Ed Husain.

STEVEN HEYDEMANN

Vice president at the U.S. Institute of Peace and special adviser to the Muslim World Initiative

Arab regimes are reeling from the aftershocks of events in Tunisia. Governments in Egypt and Yemen are the focus of mass protests expressing the anger that many Arab citizens feel toward their leaders. Surprises are possible, but it is most likely that the Egyptian and Yemeni regimes will survive these "days of rage."

After the truncheons have done their work, what are U.S. options? The administration has an extraordinary opportunity to reinvigorate support for democratic reform in the Arab world. For decades, supporters of reform have struggled to make a convincing case that Arab democracy is in America's interest. Fear of Islam and a strong preference for stability have long trumped arguments about the damage to U.S. interests of supporting authoritarian regimes. The recent uprisings demonstrate just how misguided these calculations have been. U.S. interests are poorly served by regimes that have lost the confidence of their people. Illegitimacy and instability are now linked; the connection provides compelling justification for a more assertive U.S. approach to political reform in the Arab world.

The United States can help the region's transition to democracy by acknowledging the depth of anger among Arab publics, making explicit the link between U.S. interests and the legitimacy of regimes, and communicating forcefully to our Arab allies that current governments will not overcome the crisis of legitimacy that is driving their citizens into the streets without fundamental political transformation - through processes that are themselves democratic, peaceful and inclusive. Such an approach does not require the isolation or abandonment of current regimes, but it would signal clearly that American interests and Arab democracy are now, finally, aligned.

STEPHEN J. HADLEY

National security adviser in the George W. Bush administration

Once the situation in Egypt got to a crisis point, America's options were limited. It did not have to be this way. Our government - and particularly then-President George W. Bush - urged the Egyptian government to encourage the growth of civil society and of non-Islamist political parties. Sadly, instead of fostering them, it oppressed them. The underground Islamist Muslim Brotherhood thus became the only alternative to the government party.

If Egypt descends into chaos, either a takeover by the army or a putsch by the Muslim Brotherhood is the most likely option. Neither will be a triumph of democracy nor give the Egyptian people the freedom they seek and deserve.

If the Egyptian government survives the current violence, even Mubarak may conclude that neither he nor his son can win the presidential elections scheduled to be held later this year. He will face a choice. Will he seek to transfer power to another authoritarian strongman or midwife a transition to democracy? Will he encourage the civil society and non-Islamist political parties that could give the Egyptian people real choices for a democratic future? Let us hope and urge President Mubarak to make this latter choice.

AARON DAVID MILLER

Public policy fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; former Arab-Israeli peace negotiator for the State Department

Mr. President,

You smartly steered clear of the ideological freedom agenda of your predecessor. And now, in one of history's crueler ironies, you're confronted with a home-grown freedom agenda in Tunisia and Egypt and maybe elsewhere, with impact over time that may be far greater than the politics of Iraq and Afghanistan.

If you're smart and lucky, you won't make an already complicated situation worse, and you might even do some good. Remember:

You can't control history. The Middle East is littered with the remains of great powers that thought they could impose their will on small tribes. The changes loosed in the Arab world are primarily driven by local factors, and they'll have to play themselves out.

Don't abandon your friends. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak may be an authoritarian, but since 1981 your predecessors and you have deemed him vital to American interests. Be careful what kind of signals you send until you have a much better sense of who or what will come after him. The worst outcome of Egyptian unrest would be a Mubarak who crushes the opposition and resents the United States because he believes that you wanted him on the next flight to Paris.

This will be a long movie. It's driven by deep-seated divisions in the Arab and Muslim world, first between the haves and have-nots over economic resources and second between those who can participate in governing their societies and those who cannot. You will need a strategy, but don't rush to come up with one; it will probably be wrong. For now, loudly proclaim the importance of American values such as respect for human rights, peaceful demonstrations, rule of law, good governance. But keep your distance until you have a much greater sense of where these changes are headed.

DANIELLE PLETKA

Vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute

There are three choices on foreign policy at any given time: to lead, to react or to be indifferent. When it comes to the question of human freedom, the Obama administration (and, before it, the Bush administration in its latter years) chose indifference. That is how we now find ourselves on the wrong side of history, watching the people of the Middle East as they stand against American-financed and -supported dictators. We have always had the chance to right our ways and to use our great moral, diplomatic and economic suasion to push for increased openness in the region, but other priorities - and the establishment's love affair with "stability" - have taken precedence.

Proponents of indifference (the proto-statesmen of the Foreign Service and their allies) like to posit a binary sort of choice between armed intervention in favor of democracy and the status quo, but that has never been the choice. Rather, we should be educating people about their rights, teaching consistently about the creation of political parties, working to free political prisoners and building the foundations of freedom. That, and not budgetary support and cash-transfer programs, is the proper role for American aid.

Some say that a freedom agenda only opens the door to Islamists; the truth is that our support for secular dictators does more for Islamists than democracy promotion ever did. We have an opportunity to right our ways and stand with the people of the Middle East - not forgetting Iran - in their quest for basic freedom. But it's going to take more than bland statements and White House hand-wringing. The president himself needs to stand up and unequivocally make clear America's position: in favor of the people over their oppressors. Suspend aid to the Egyptian government. Initiate an immediate review of all programs in the Middle East. Get the word out to our diplomats. Now.

HUSSEIN AGHA and ROBERT MALLEY

Agha is senior associate member of St. Antony's College, Oxford University; Malley is Middle East program director at the International Crisis Group and was special assistant to the president for Arab-Israeli affairs from 1998 to 2001

Decades of U.S. policy in the Middle East are coming back to haunt Washington. The United States backed Arab regimes that supported U.S. objectives irrespective of whether they legitimately represented popular aspirations. It propped up "moderate" rulers whose moderation consisted almost exclusively of cooperating with American policies. The more they aligned themselves with Washington, the more generous America's support and the greater the erosion of their domestic credibility. As a result, the United States now faces a battle it cannot win.

To continue supporting unpopular rulers would further alienate those who are most likely to assume power in the future. Openly siding with the street would strain ties with regimes that might survive the unrest and whose help the United States still needs; signal to America's remaining friends that its support is fickle; precipitate the rise of forces hostile to U.S. interests; and do little to persuade demonstrators who will see in America's midnight conversion hypocrisy and opportunism.

Washington can cut its losses and begin turning the page in its relations with the Arab world. That will have to wait. For now, it means assuming a low profile and resisting the temptation to become part of the story. That hardly is an exciting agenda, but the United States could do far worse than do very little.

MARINA OTTAWAY

Director of the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Washington's reaction to the growing unrest will have almost no impact on what actually happens in the Arab world, which will be determined by domestic factors - the protesters' determination, the governments' response, the willingness of police and army units to use force against demonstrators. Protesters, who view the United States as the historical prop for Arab authoritarian regimes, will not heed Washington's calls to avoid violence. And regimes that have been authoritarian for decades will not suddenly see the wisdom of liberalization because of statements from Washington.

But what the United States says affects its standing in the region. The Obama administration's attempt to strike a balance between not offending incumbent regimes and refurbishing its image by sending a message that Washington wants reforms is failing - messages are circulating on the Internet to the effect that the United States is once again supporting authoritarianism. Washington must get off the fence and choose whether it wants to support democracy, and thus be on the side of Arab publics enraged by decades of repression, or whether it wants to continue supporting regimes that have been repressive for decades in the name of ill-defined strategic interests. It cannot do both. The United States' long-term interests would be best served by supporting unequivocally the messy process of democratic change.

ANDREW ALBERTSON

Executive director of the Project on Middle East Democracy from 2007 to 2010

The Obama administration has begun taking many of the right steps already. Aware of the dangers for U.S. interests posed by governments that resist democratic participation even as their people become more educated, affluent and connected to the outside world, they have repeatedly raised with Arab leaders the need for comprehensive reforms. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presciently warned regional foreign ministers two weeks ago, "Those who cling to the status quo may be able to hold back the full impact of their countries' problems for a little while, but not forever."

For far too long, the United States has relied on leaders in the Middle East who maintain their rule through coercion. Against the backdrop of appalling violence in Tunisia and Egypt, and the stark moral legitimacy of protests sweeping the region, the bankruptcy of that approach has never been clearer.

In the wake of Friday's events in Egypt, the administration needs to double down on its call for political reforms across the region. In Tunisia and Egypt, the administration should seize the opportunity to support full-scale transitions to democracy. New subsidies or cabinet shuffles aren't enough. What happened on the streets of Cairo was not a bread riot but a legitimacy riot. And forceful crackdowns represent a big roll of the dice - for regimes and for Washington, to the extent that the United States is perceived to be complicit in such violence.

People in the region want to be citizens - protagonists in their national political life, rather than subjects who passively take what the government gives. They want an end to ministries, parties and police forces that operate above the law and foster endemic corruption. The United States should quickly press allies such as Yemen, Jordan and Morocco to drop constraints on political participation, convene broad political dialogues, and place the highest premium on transparent and effective governance. The best guarantee of stability is participation, pluralism and progress.

ED HUSAIN

Senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations

Arabs regularly accuse America of flagrant hypocrisy: The United States claims that it stands up for freedom and democracy and yet supports the world's most tyrannical governments in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. The current popular uprising is a chance to set the record straight. Former secretary of state Condoleeza Rice once quipped that America had traded freedom for stability in the region and got neither.

I've lived and traveled across the Arab world and witnessed the vast popularity of American clothes, Hollywood, McDonald's, baseball caps, cars and books. Visa applications overload U.S. embassies. Yet double standards in U.S. foreign policy anger young Arabs and fuel radicalization and terrorism. By proudly supporting the freedom chanters today, America has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to help undermine terrorists and tyrants and support the people. So far, Vice President Biden has blundered by supporting Egypt's dictator. This needs to change.

The Arab world is no longer across the oceans. It is also on our streets here. Millions of American citizens are of Arab descent. Millions more are here as workers and students. What happens over there matters here. Can America make these people proud and empower them against Muslim extremists by changing the American story and making us all safer? Yes, it can. It must.

Source: http://wapo.st/eV7fJT