http://www.nationalreview.com Trade unions have played a surprising role in the Middle Eastern uprisings. Where will they turn next? The revolutions that have swept throughout the Middle East caught not only American policymakers and regional governments by surprise, but also opposition groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. One group that was not caught off guard, however, was the region’s independent trade unions. While Arab states have long sought to regulate, or indeed to run, their countries’ trade unions, in recent years these groups have increasingly asserted their independence from government control. The wave of Arab protests started with the suicide of Mohamed Bouazizi, a 26-year-old Tunisian fruit vendor. Bouazizi’s death might have been just one more forgotten tragedy had it not been for the Tunisian General Union of Labor, which, while nominally “independent,” was until then controlled by the Ben Ali government. During the protests following Bouazizi’s death, the union cut its ties with the government and embraced true independence, organizing its half-million members to join the protests. Not only did the Tunisian General Union of Labor play a lead role in ousting Ben Ali, but its continued agitation led to the resignation of the prime minister and senior Ben Ali aides earlier this month. Egypt proved the pattern to be the rule rather than the exception. Between 2004 and 2008, 1.7 million Egyptian workers had already launched almost 2,000 strikes. As protesters gathered on Tahrir Sqaure, Egyptian workers united to form the Egyptian Federation for Independent Unions, effectively destroying the state-controlled Egyptian Trade Union Federation. Whereas the state-controlled union ordered workers to stay on their jobs, the new Federation led them to strike and to join the protests that ultimately brought about Mubarak’s downfall. In both Tunisia and Egypt, the newly independent trade unions seek democracy, economic stability, and more liberal — rather than religious — government. But Washington should be wary. Historically, Arab trade unions have failed to find a compromise between repression and political co-optation. Not only in Tunisia and Egypt, but also in Algeria and Syria, governments have used unions as mechanisms of authoritarian control. In Lebanon, where trade unions have remained nominally free, they act as extensions of political parties and, in Lebanon’s chaotic politics, major sources of instability. The new unions are no panacea. For example, the Egyptian Federation for Independent Unions calls for wage reform, education, and a more rigorous fight against corruption, all which appear positive; but it also seeks guaranteed employment and wealth redistribution, the first unrealistic and the second an infringement on liberty. The Tunisian General Union of Labor likewise seeks Communist-style wealth redistribution. Arab unions have traditionally also embraced reactionary foreign policies. The International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions, the flagship labor organization in the Middle East, has never been friendly to America. The ICATU’s members embraced Saddam Hussein in his conflict with the United States, and they have pledged assistance for the most militant Palestinian factions. Trade unions might be a valuable tool in the fight against autocracy, but bringing down a dictator is not the end of the process of democratization. Not every union professing to fight tyranny will be like Lech Walesa’s Solidarity in Poland. In Arab states, trade unions could force would-be dictators to remain accountable to the people. But if foreign powers embrace them unconditionally, the new Arab unions might substitute tyranny of the majority for true democracy. Over the past decades, American administrations have looked the other way while governments in various parts of the world have created Potemkin civil institutions. No longer should the White House accept this fiction. It should not recognize nor should Congress allow American aid to go to unions that are mere extensions of political parties. The United States provides nearly $2 billion a year to Egypt, hundreds of millions to Lebanon, and tens of millions to Tunisia. Congress should condition its aid on true independence of those countries’ unions. America need not be an enemy to independent Arab unions. In Egypt and Tunisia, the unions are at their most influential position in decades, and are a bulwark against the ambitions of Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. However, should the Obama administration become complacent now, it might help substitute one engine of dictatorship for another. — Timothy Cramton, a junior at Cornell University, is an intern at the American Enterprise Institute |
Showing posts with label Bermula di Tunisia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bermula di Tunisia. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Arab Trade Unions: A New Force
EDITORIAL: Foreign interventions in Bahrain and Libya
Although Bahrain’s monarch had requested the Gulf Cooperation Council, comprising six Gulf countries, to send their forces to contain the protests in Bahrain, it is nonetheless a foreign intervention. The 1000-strong contingent sent by five neighbouring countries of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Oman and Kuwait, will be used to suppress Shia protesters, who are demanding political and economic rights in a country ruled by a minority Sunni elite. Arguably, Saudi Arabia was more worried than the rest of the Gulf countries because its oil-rich, Shia-dominated eastern area borders Bahrain and if the Bahraini Shias manage to gain the upper hand, it might spell disaster for the Saudi monarchy’s own existence, which has kept its Shia population backward and deprived for decades. It is in the interest of all reactionary monarchs of the Gulf to not let things get out of hand, hence this collaboration. There is no reason to open fire on unarmed protesters, but when an insecure minority is ruling over a restless majority as in Bahrain, perhaps this is inevitable. It would be pertinent to mention that Pakistan’s retired military officers and civilians are being rapidly hired by Bahrain because they are reputed to be most aggressive. It is not certain if the Bahrainis, who have been out on the streets for a month, would be able to sustain their struggle in the face of a brutal crackdown that now seems on the cards.
When the wave of insurgency started from Tunisia and spread to Egypt, in both cases yielding results quickly and relatively peacefully, an optimistic illusion was created that this would be replicated in all Arab countries where the public had risen. It has turned out that all Gulf countries are not at the same juncture of history where their regimes had been hollowed out from within and needed just the kind of push that the people in Egypt and Tunisia provided. Yemen’s long-serving dictator is not yielding to the protesters’ demands to relinquish the office of president, which he has been holding for the last 32 years. There have been protests in Oman as well without much hope for success. In Libya, there are reports that the tables have been turned by Gaddafi’s use of military force and a vow to fight till the last drop of blood. The rebel forces in Libya that had taken over eastern towns are now being pushed back through the use of navy, air force and artillery bombardments. The imbalance of power between the two sides is so great that an untrained, lightly armed, scattered guerrilla force cannot win over a conventional military force in set-piece battles. Being largely a desert excepting the northern periphery, it will not be easy for the rebels to sustain guerrilla warfare against Gaddafi’s air power. It seems that Gaddafi still has the backing of his military and certain tribes who are aiding him.
In this scenario, saner heads in the West are advising the hawks led by France against military intervention in the name of ‘humanitarian’ action. It has been proved in recent years that such intrusions are, after all, not entirely altruistic and are driven by vested interests. The UN Security Council is unlikely to yield to the proposal of imposing a no-fly zone over Libya. It is dangerous thinking, this talk of military intervention and will lead to the expansion of war in Libya and the region. A fig leaf has been created in the shape of the Arab League’s endorsement of a no-fly zone, but this is unlikely to impress anyone. The Arab League has lost credibility over the years and cannot necessarily be taken as representing the interests of the Arab people. Gaddafi may have resiled from anti-imperialist Arab nationalism and may be cracking down on his people, but this should not be used an excuse to call for a foreign intervention. The Arab people must be given the opportunity to settle their affairs themselves. *
Publisher: Salmaan Taseer
Editor: Rashed Rahman
editor@dailytimes.com.pk
Daily Times
41-N, Industrial Area
Gulberg II, Lahore
Pakistan
Editor: Rashed Rahman
editor@dailytimes.com.pk
Daily Times
41-N, Industrial Area
Gulberg II, Lahore
Pakistan
Fruit seller ignites a revolution
Reports by Shahanaaz Habib
Photos by Glenn Guan
The Star visits the family and village of Mohamed Bouazizi, a poor fruit seller who set himself on fire to protest against official harassment. The incident triggered a revolution in Tunisia and also sparked off protests against autocratic governments in several Arab countries.
IT was early Friday, just before 8am. After picking olives from a farm, Manuobya looked in on her 26-year-old son Mohamed Bouazizi, who was still asleep and something stirred inside her.
“I felt a kind of love and affection that I never felt before. I said to myself: ‘Mohamed, you are so tired. May God give you a car and another job,’” she tells Sunday Star during an interview at her home in a village near Sidi Bouzid.
Just the night before, Manuobya recounts, Mohamed Bouazizi, who sold fruits from a push cart, was talking about working harder to earn enough to buy a pick-up truck which would make it easier for him to transport his produce. And that night, he gave his mother quite a lot of cash.
“He told me: ‘You know, mother, I’ve never got so much money as I have this week.’
“He told his sister Leila: ‘If you succeed in school, I will pay for your education.’
“He said to his brothers: ‘If you do well, I will buy you what you want,’” Manuobya relates, looking both sad and proud at the same time as she talks about Mohamed Bouazizi.
Her son, she remembers, was in such good spirits that Thursday night.
And he was teasing, playing and laughing with his eight-year-old half-brother Ziyad a lot more than usual before they went to sleep.
Manuobya says she even ticked them off for making “so much noise” for fear it might disturb the neighbours.
Before he went to bed, Mohamed Bouazizi told his mother of his plans for the next few days.
He said he was getting nicer fruits and would work on Friday and Saturday, and rest on Sunday to go to Sfax (a town in Tunisia) to see his elder brother Salem.
But a few hours later, things changed forever for Mohamed Bouazizi, his family and Tunisia.
On that fateful Friday of Dec 17, after Mohamed Bouazizi had woken up, dressed and gone to his usual spot in the small of town of Sidi Bouzid to sell fruits from his cart, a municipal inspector, Faida Hamdi, and her three aides came after him.
Manuobya says Mohamed Bouazizi was the happy sort but the “police and the government always want money from him and won’t let him do his job”.
“They say he is selling fruits illegally. They want a rasuah (bribe) from him, so he is always fighting to do his job,” Manoubya elaborates.
When Mohamed Bouazizi refused to pay the bribe, Faida and her aides tried to seize the fruits. He then phoned his uncle, who is also his stepfather, for help.
But this angered the municipal officers even more.
“Faida told him that she would leave the other fruit sellers alone but not him and that she would come after him every day.
“She grabbed the fruits but when she wanted to remove the weighing scales, Mohamed Bouazizi wouldn’t let her because the scales were not his.
“That was when Faiza slapped him on the face, spat at him and said terrible things about his dead father,” relates Manuobya, who heard details of the incident from eye witnesses, including her son’s friends.
She believes the public humiliation – being slapped and spat on by a woman who also insulted his late father – was too much for her son to bear.
“He was so shocked and utterly humiliated. It was so shameful and, to him, a loss of dignity.”
When Mohamed Bouazizi, who wanted to seek justice, knocked on the municipal office door, the people there would not entertain him.
“Nobody would listen,” his grief-stricken mother says.
That was when Mohamed Bouazizi made his desperate and last cry for help.
He drenched himself with petrol and then lit himself up – right in front of the government building.
People rushed to douse the flames with their jackets, and someone even grabbed a fire hydrant but found it empty.
It was too late. Within seconds, Mohamed Bouazizi was charred but still alive. And that was how his stepfather Omar found him.
“I couldn’t recognise him because he was totally burnt. Then he uttered the Kalimah Shahadah (a Muslim declaration of faith).
“And I knew from the voice that it was Mohamed Bouazizi. Those were the last words he spoke,” says Omar, adding that both of them were supposed to have gone for Friday prayers that day.
Mohamed Bouazizi was rushed from one hospital to another because they could not treat the severe burns. He lived on for another 18 days and died on Jan 4.
By this time, news of what had happened to the poor fruit seller who just wanted to make a living spread through Tunisia like wildfire. His town, Sidi Bouzid, was the first to rise up.
Noha Farah left her children at home and went to the government building every day to protest and shout for change and for the president to quit.
She says she knew Mohamed Bouazizi personally.
“I always bought fruits from him. He was a very nice person. I cried when I saw what had happened,” she shares.
Through Facebook and Twitter, word spread and the protests grew all over Tunisia, shocking the world.
Here was Tunisia– an educated, moderate and stable country.
Yet its people, fed up with poverty, unemployment and a rotten corrupt system, spontaneously rose up to kick out their leader of 23 years, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.
They wanted to reform their government which made it tough for people like Mohamed Bouazizi to make a living.
And soon, the Tunisian revolution caught on in other Arab countries.
Egypt managed to chuck out its strongman Hosni Mubarak who ruled the country with an iron fist for 30 years.
Libya is still in the process of trying to oust its leader of 41 years, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.
The spark for change has also been lit in Bahrain, Yemen, Jordan, Iraq and even Saudi Arabia. And although Manuobya wishes every night that Mohamed Bouazizi’s death is just a bad dream because she misses him dreadfully, she believes what he did was for a greater good.
“It is unbelievable what has happened. I thank God that things are better for all of Tunisia. I’m happy that He has opened the door for a lot of Arab countries. Freedom is a good thing,” she adds.
Manuobya followed the events in Egypt closely until Mubarak fell and her focus now is on what is happening in neighbouring Libya.
She wants the “evil” Gaddafi who has killed too many of his people to be replaced.
“God help Libya,” she says.
A neighbour, Alfiyah, tells how women, including strangers, drop by to visit Manuobya from time to time and offer words of comfort because they know how painful it is to lose a child.
“The women say ‘thank you for your son and for changing Tunisia’. The situation in Tunisia is still not all that we have hoped for but it is still early days yet,” she adds.
Noha Farah, however, feels something is still missing.
“We are happy but our happiness will not be complete until the Libyan revolution ends and the people there are also free,” she says.
Overnight, Mohamed Bouazizi has become a hero in his town, country and the Arab world.
Muhammad Han Zuli, 31, who speaks flawless English and lives in Sidi Bouzid, has tremendous respect for the fruit seller who triggered off a revolution.
“He gave us the best things in the world – freedom and democracy.”
It started in Tunisia
Monday, March 14, 2011 By Arjun Gupta
It started in Tunisia. A man named Mohammed Bouazizi, a typical Arab youth, was struggling to provide for his mother, uncle and several siblings in harsh economic times. A female officer confiscated his vegetable cart (his only way of making money) then proceeded to publicly humiliate him because he did not have a permit to sell his wares. Bouazizi was angered by the confrontation and went to the governor’s office to complain. After the local governor refused to see or listen to him, Bouazizi said if his complaint wasn’t heard, he would set himself on fire. He was not taken seriously. Then Bouazizi promptly bought two bottles of paint thinner then set himself on fire in front of a local government building.*
That literal ignition was what the youth of the Arab world needed to light the candle to their revolution, the most dramatic change that the region has seen in decades. Tunisia was the first to push for change. After Bouazizi, thousands took to the streets in largely peaceful protests across the country. For some time, the people and the government had an implied social contract. As long as there was relative prosperity (jobs, food and a strong economy), the people would comply with brutally repressive governments and limited freedoms. But once the government wasn’t able to provide those jobs and the economy wasn’t doing well, the system broke down. The Arab youth realized the government wasn’t holding its end of the bargain and the people weren’t allowed to speak about it freely.*
That’s when the people really started to get angry. For a solid month and half, Tunisians took to the streets and protested against their brutally oppressive government. On January 14, ousted President Ben Ali and family fled to Saudi Arabia.
If the Jasmine Revolution of Tunisia was the match, Egypt was a large tank of oil. Inspired by their North African counterparts for most of the same reasons, Egyptians held a protest in Tahrir Square against then-President Hosni Mubarak, dubbed the "Day of Rage." The ruling party’s building was burned to the ground. Anti-Mubarak forces used Twitter and Facebook heavily to organize their resistance. This prompted the Egyptian administration to shut down all internet service in the country for five days, though protests continued. Curfews were instigated and routinely broken by the thousands. Hosni Mubarak made several speeches during the unrest. First he fired his entire cabinet, then appointed Omar Suleiman as Vice president, Egypt’s first in 30 years. Then he announced that he would not be running for re-election for his sixth term of office in September, and that the constitution would be reformed to allow independent candidates to run. After 18 days of protests and the center of the country shut down (imagine Times Square being clogged with protesters for over two weeks) Mubarak finally stepped down as President of Egypt and transferred power to the Egyptian military. The military vowed to control the country for six months and then transfer power to a civilian-elected government.*
Why does this matter? Several reasons:
• Spurred on by Egypt and Tunisia, protests have broken out in Bahrain, Yemen, Algeria, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Libya and Iran. Revolutionary fever is spreading across the Arab world to very important countries.
• Israel is very nervous about what the new Egyptian government will be like. Being Israel’s main ally, the Egyptian elections also matter to America. In the 70’s Egypt was the first (and one of the only) Arab countries to sign a peace treaty with Israel. Mubarak honored this during his three decades in office. Egypt was Israel’s only ally in the region. The new government, however, may not be as friendly.
• Egypt and other Arabian countries experiencing revolt are among the world’s biggest exporters of oil. With all the chaos, moving oil from the field to the gas pump will be much more difficult. Riots in Libya and Algeria have direct effects on the gas prices in Charlotte.
• The War on Terror: One of the main points that Al-Qaeda has based their terrorism on is that the Arab world needs is fundamental Islam. They feel religion should be the basis of all government. However if the Egyptian and other Arab people choose secular democracies for governments, their choice would be a heavy blow to Al-Qaeda. The success of democratic revolutions would show to terrorist groups that the mainstream Arab world does not follow such extremist thinking.
• Depending on the outcome of the protests in all the different countries, the U.S. may have a ton of new governments to become friends with.
• The Suez Canal is a link between the Mediteranean Sea and the Indian Ocean. Much Saudi Arabian oil and other Asian goods flow through that narrow sliver of water, which Egypt controls. Depending on the policies of the new Egyptian government, prices on Saudi Arabian oil and many Asian products going to Europe or the U.S. could become more costly.
• Need a revolution? Get Facebook. Much of the protests were organized through social media sites, especially after Egyptians were banned from having more than three people at a meeting. Many violated this law of course, but others who didn’t or couldn’t used social media to connect and keep the resistance alive.*
*This article was written using information from Time Magazine, Al-Jazeera English, the Charlotte Observer, "10 Reasons Americans Should Care About the Egyptian Revolution" by Stephen M. Walt and PHS senior Wesley Jacobs, a Model UN Veteran and AP Comparative
Bahrain in state of emergency as crowd marches on Saudi embassy
Wednesday, 16 March 2011
The King of Bahrain has declared martial law, giving the military authority to end pro-democracy protests with the backing of 2,000 troops from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
Some 10,000 Bahraini demonstrators marched on the Saudi embassy in the capital, Manama, yesterday to protest against the Saudi intervention, which an opposition statement said amounted to an occupation.
Significant parts of the island kingdom, which has a population of 600,000, remain in the hands of protesters, one of whom was reported to have been killed yesterday by the security services.
Iran has denounced the entry of foreign troops into Bahrain as unacceptable and says that the United States is responsible for Saudi actions, which will have "dangerous consequences".
As the main Shia power of the Gulf, Iran is sympathetic to the Shia of Bahrain, who make up 70 per cent of the kingdom's population and have been traditionally discriminated against by the Sunni ruling class. "The presence of foreign forces and interference in Bahrain's internal affairs is unacceptable and will further complicate the issue," Ramin Mehmanparast, the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman, said.
Iran denies any involvement in the month-long protests and US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks say that there is no evidence for long-standing Bahraini government claims that the Shia opposition receives support and weapons from Iran. Bahrain has withdrawn its ambassador to Iran for consultations.
Iran claims that the US dragged Saudi Arabia into invading while the Pentagon denies that it had any advance warning of Saudi military intervention. But Bahrain is a vital US ally because it is home to the US Navy's Fifth Fleet and the US has been far more supportive of the ruling al-Khalifa family than it was of President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt or President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia. The White House has publicly called on the government of Bahrain to enter a dialogue with the opposition.
The three-month state of emergency hands significant powers to the Bahraini security forces, which are dominated by the Sunni minority. One of the protesters' complaints is that important jobs go to Sunnis, and that Sunnis from Middle East and South Asian countries are brought in as security men and given citizenship to keep the Shia as second-class citizens. The actual imposition of martial law may not make much difference to the security forces' powers since Bahrain is an absolute monarchy. But it is probably a sign of action to come, such as driving protesters from the streets by imposing a curfew, banning public meetings and clamping down on the press.
Despite some reports that the protesters planned to reopen a main road to Bahrain's financial district, metal barricades and piles of sand and rocks still blocked it. At checkpoints near the roundabout, activists, some wearing yellow vests, checked identities and waved cars through. Otherwise the streets were largely empty and shops closed. "We are staying peacefully. Even if they attack," Ali Mansoor, an activist at the Pearl roundabout, told Reuters. "Saudi Arabia has no right to come to Bahrain. Our problem is with the government not Saudi Arabia."
In the first sign of resistance to the Saudi force a security official in Saudi Arabia said a Saudi sergeant was shot and killed by a protester yesterday in Manama. No other details were immediately provided about the soldier, identified as Sgt Ahmed al-Raddadi.
There are growing signs of division between Shia and Sunni. People were placing rocks, skips, bins and pieces of metal on the road to prevent strangers from entering their neighbourhoods. Sectarian clashes between young men hurling rocks and using knives and clubs have become common. Such fighting broke out in different parts of Bahrain overnight Monday, with Sunnis and Shias trading accusations in the media.
Bahrain University and many schools have closed. An armed gang stormed the printing press of Bahrain's only opposition newspaper Al Wasat and tried to smash its presses and stop its publication. It was later published using machinery from other papers.
The opposition had begun by demanding civil, legal and political rights, but the rejection of compromise by the royal family and the violence of the security forces has led to an escalation of their demands. On 17 February the police attacked sleeping protesters at the Pearl roundabout and killed at least four of them. Opposition demands became more radical, seeking a constitutional monarchy or even the removal of the King.
A further miscalculation by the authorities on Sunday resulted in riot police attacking protesters near the financial district, provoking a counter-attack by thousands of protesters who drove the police from the streets. That led the royal family to ask Saudi Arabia for help as a member of the Gulf Co-operation Council to which Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Oman also belong. Bahrain's crisis now involves all of the Gulf countries.
What is the Gulf co-operation council?
The Gulf Co-operation Council is rather an odd organisation to be deploying troops for the benefit of one of its members. The sight of tanks and armoured personnel carriers crossing the causeway to support the Bahraini government's state of emergency is a departure from the GCC's regular work of greasing the Gulf's oil-rich economies.
The confusion is only compounded by a GCC foreign ministers' statement just a week ago, which described Colonel Gaddafi as "illegitimate" for using force against his own people in Libya.
Established in 1981 by Saudi Arabia and the governments of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the UAE, the aim of these oil and gas rich kingdoms was to effect "inter-connection between member states in all fields in order to achieve unity between them", the GCC charter says. Economic and commercial links feature high on its objectives. Sending in troops to quell demonstrations by repressed minorities does not, although its "Peninsula Shield Force" has always allowed for the possibility. Like the EU, which began life as an economic bloc designed to stop Europe's industrial powers standing on each other's toes, the GCC's purpose was to ensure that some of the world's biggest oil and gas producers did nothing to upset the balance in the region. Like the EU, the region's laggards – in this case Iraq and Yemen – were not initially invited to the party.
Huge oil revenues, and until the last decade, massive returns from the financial services and property sectors, have ensured the GCC's importance and relevance, even if the global financial crisis dented the reputations of a number of its members. A GCC military campaign is, however, a venture into the unknown.
Alistair Dawber
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)