The last year saw many regimes, especially Arab ones, fall like palm trees before a tsunami of popular protests. The military-backed regimes of West Asia exercised unrestrained power, accumulated vast wealth and remained as unaccountable as feudal autarchies.
These dictators were backed by their militaries and elites, often comprising of their own kin/ethnic groups, who got a private share of the public pie. They used geopolitics and natural resources like oil, minerals or underground aquifers to leverage support from Western powers, and thought the party would never end. They couldn’t have been more wrong. Popular resistance took down Ben Ali of Tunisia, followed by Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, now in jail, and then, Libyan rebels backed by NATO, gave Muammar Gaddafi a ghastly end in October.
Dictatorships result in mass alienation and anger. Large sections of people are excluded from the governing processes, exercise no choice, can express no grievance and are also physically threatened if they do not conform. Human rights are violated with impunity and anger wells up. Then a trigger ignites mass resentment, and crowds throng streets asking for change and baying for blood. The dictator becomes the symbol of retribution.
Retribution is associated with most wars. But the real questions get swept aside by the mindless orgy that follows, especially by the winners. Does this give justice to victims? Does it herald a systemic change? Give rise to a responsible leadership and dignity to the living/dead? Different examples provide some clues.
In Libya for example, the National Transitional Council that allowed a phase of unrestrained retribution to ‘get even’ with Gaddafi’s supporters, led to a inter-tribal killing spree. The armed militia that tasted blood has been reluctant to let go. There is insecurity for all, breakdown of society, inter-community tension and no semblance of an alternate order or new representative government. Clearly the need is to return justice, elect a new parliament, make a new constitution and establish a democratic federal republic.
Egypt and Tunisia, for all their flaws, have tried to do this. But in Libya this won’t be easy. Violent movements and armed militia have their own logic. A spiral of retribution has gained the upper hand. This will make new victims and enemies. Amnesty has brought out a horrifying report of post-Gaddafi killings and rights violations. How is it different then?
Meanwhile, popular resistance continues in countries like Yemen, where Ali Saleh announced he would resign but didn’t. In Syria, Bashar Assad faces civil disorder. Jordan, Kuwait and Morocco saw dramatic changes. Sudan’s regime has lost its legitimacy, and many others are likely to follow.
It is said those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it. In that case, 2012 will see more resistance from people, whether Arab or Occupy protesters, more repression from dictators and insecure regimes, and more retribution.
For democratic change, what is required is a mass movement. But this should be followed by a process of legal justice. If necessary, truth and reconciliation missions should follow. Retribution and mob rule can only lead to anarchy.
Shampa Dhar-Kamath is on leave