The Lessons of the Arab Revolutions (or Why Corrupt Dictators Can't Win in the Long Run)

I've always been a believer in karma, the concept that every action has a consequence even if it's not seen immediately, that what goes around comes around. The more I delve into history and observe current events the more I am becoming convinced there's also such thing as political karma and political leaders always reap the consequences of their actions, whether they serve their people well or whether they are self-serving.

The recent revolution in Tunisia which ousted Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and the massive uprising in Egypt against Hosni Mubarak, as well as the protests warming up in Yemen, Jordan, and potentially Syria were all inspired by the sacrifice of a man in despair. Tunisian Mohamed Bouazizi lit himself on fire which became an act of political revolt at the state of his country wracked by rising food prices, unemployment, censorship and political repression. His sacrifice has inspired millions to have the courage to stand up against oppression and corruption resulting in a revolution in Tunisia. Against all odds collective action for social justice was incited by the sacrifice of this man who is an allegory for the despair of all those living under corrupt dictatorships. Bouazizi became a martyr for a greater political cause in the Arab world, one that is far too familiar for those living under regimes similar to Ben Ali's. 

The prerequisites to be a dictator is delusion, a certain dose of megalomania and control issues. These regimes masqueraded as democracies with their de facto dictators censoring, detaining, torturing, or outright murdering their political opposition. Social media, whether newspapers, books, or the Internet remained under varying levels of control from mere restrictions such as censorship to total blackouts. Opposition leaders who escaped with their lives have spent or are currently spending years in exile from their homelands. It is no secret that these strongmen ruled by force and repression. Moreover, through corrupt practices these dictators have stolen millions of state dollars into their own bank accounts, into the coffers of their closest henchmen, and even bought certain loyalties through sheer bribery. 

Unfortunately for the United States, these authoritarian regimes now facing potential ousters have been long-standing strategic allies in the region. While some American politicians and conservative media enjoy pointing a finger at China for supporting corrupt dictators for economic advantage in Africa, perhaps the United States should look to cleaning up their own backyard in regards to the foreign policy status quo in the Middle East. While U.S. policy makers and their PR staff paint our country as the 'beacon of democracy' for the world, American foreign policy-making has been a mixed bag of stumbles, stupidities, and outright hypocrisy since the end of World War II. This is in part a consequence of historical changes at the turn of the century: Wilsonian idealism versus balance of power politics, the ideal of collective security versus national sovereignty and self-determination, and finally, among the academic schools of thought and divisive American party lines, liberalism pitted against realism.   

A student of politics would regard the status quo as the norm. After all, Machiavelli wrote that it's better to be feared than loved and realists would argue that political realities call for political expediency. 'Of course, everyone is essentially greedy and self-serving so it's inevitable all countries will work solely for its own interests and dictators will be self-serving,' quips the cynical realist. No one learns from history, after all, regardless that we are told to. The greatest empires have been destroyed due to their greed, taking for granted their military and economic power and over-stretching it, a belief in invincibility, and willful blindness toward the greater human realities of the people beneath their reigns. The harshest dictators have fallen either by threatening too many outside their borders with aggression or by revolutionary reaction from within against their stifling oppression. Political karma in action.

It's time that the world transcends the divisive camps of liberalism and realism with a more holistic approach to politics and governing: moral realism. Political power should not be construed as a zero-sum game but as a responsibility with certain obligations in wielding it. Political leaders, whether in democracies or not, should cease viewing their role as an elitist right for ego validation but as a position where they must serve and protect the people residing within their borders in the best way possible and foster peace and prosperity for those outside their borders as well if they want national prosperity. 

The best metaphorical analogy for moral realism can be rooted in the ancient Chinese concept of the mandate of heaven, a philosophical concept concerning the legitimacy of rulers: "The Mandate of Heaven postulates that heaven would bless the authority of a just ruler, but would be displeased with a despotic ruler and would withdraw its mandate, leading to the overthrow of that ruler. The Mandate of Heaven would then transfer to those who would rule best." While in today's world we no longer believe in divine right, ideally a political leader's legitimacy should be based on his conduct toward his people, his ability and willingness to serve them and his disposition at being just and wise and balanced in his or her actions.

Whether this concept is applied or not, political karma exists and those who do follow a path of moral realism are far better off than those who truly believe it's better to be feared. In the long-run, corrupt and self-serving dictators can't win. Eventually, they'll reap their political karma. Similarly, nations that support dictators need to reconsider and weigh the consequences of that support because it's a short-term plan for the long-term problem of protecting their own interests. The day politicians realize that the interests, prosperity, and peace of others are in their own interests will be the day the world becomes a better place to live.

In the meantime, the mandate to rule has been withdrawn from the likes of Ben Ali, Mubarak, and all those who believe repression and torture are the order of the day and who, in sheer self-deception and perhaps denial sincerely believe they are supported and loved by millions. In Cairo, one National Democratic Party (NDP) spokesman told an Al Jazeera correspondent amid anti-Mubarak protests:

NDP Spokesman: "Millions of Egyptians want the president to stay." 

Al Jaazeera Correspondent: "Where are they?"

As one friend put succintly, concerning these dictators and their cronies: 'Muppets taking the piss.'