A while ago I was listening to a program on the BBC World Service, and they were interviewing some young people in sub-Saharan Africa about Barack Obama. As might be expected, Obama was pretty popular with young Africans. But the memorable part came when the BBC reporter asked them if they wanted someone like Obama to appear in their countries. One young woman, who spoke accented but excellent English, said that what they really needed wasn’t an Obama, but a McCain.
Obama was great, she said, but what they really lacked were leaders who were willing lose. Powerful men who could accept that they had lost without rigging an election or launching a coup were in much scarcer supply than transformative idealists. For her, the transition of power was more important than any single leader.
It is in that context that the uprisings in the Middle East over the past month and a half need to be understood. Consider Egypt, a country that is both very important and ahead of the curve when it comes to popular revolt. Yes, Hosni Mubarak has been deposed, but the military that’s currently running things benefitted greatly from his rule. The real test of whether or not the Egyptian people have truly kicked Mubarak’s government to the curb will come when a civilian attempts to take from the military.
And make no mistake, such a test will occur sooner or later. Egypt is a nation that would have a daunting list of problems even if it were governed extraordinarily well and perfectly transparently. It’s a net importer of food. Its people are packed into overcrowded cities because most of the country is inhospitable desert, and more farmland disappears every day. Because of population growth and declining production, Egypt is just now transitioning from being an exporter of oil to an importer of oil, which will only exacerbate monetary problems and make food purchases more burdensome.
A more efficient distribution of resources, which is to say one that doesn’t involve shoveling money into the pockets of the well connected, will certainly help. But any new government is going to quickly face competing demands from the military and civilian populations in regards to food, fuel and money. Just keeping the lights on and the stomachs full along the Nile is a task that is going to redline Egypt’s economy all by itself. Doing so while maintaining a military with an extensive air force and armored component, not to mention an officer corps that’s used to the good life, may simply not be possible.
Will the armed forces accept reductions to their share of the pie when these newly uppity civilians demand them? Will those civilians even have the gall to make the demands? Does anyone feel like rigging an election? Will the losers, fair or foul, accept their defeat? Those are the important questions, because Mubarak and his immediate circle will not be the only ones dispossessed by the overthrow of his government.
Conditions in places like Tunisia, Bahrain, Yemen, Oman, Iraq, Libya, and – gasp – Saudi Arabia are all different from those in Egypt, but each society faces a similar reordering. Dynamic new leadership alone isn’t going to be enough, there are also going to need to be some people willing to accept defeat.
