In many Middle Eastern countries, there has been civil unrest. Primarily, the unrest is caused by frustration with the government. In some cases, added tension surrounds religion, specifically whether the government should be religiously based or secular. Four countries, Libya, Yemen, Egypt and Syria, are rife with civil protest. While there are similarities among the four as to the particulars of their protests, careful analysis must be made before a decision on a course of action can be determined. Each country has its own history and particular goals to be considered.
Libya has experienced tremendous political unrest. The leader of Libya, Muammar Gaddafi, is a tyrannical leader who refuses to step down from his position of power in spite of clear indication that many Libyans are ready for a new leader. As a result, rebels have taken action. They are steadily advancing towards Tripoli, gaining smaller cities as strongholds. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO, has taken action to help defend the rebels of Libya and overthrow Gaddafi. Many believe that not only would Libyans be better off with out Gaddafi, but so would the world at large. NATO’s assistance to the Libyan rebels adds credibility to their cause, as they now have the support of 28 nations. This power should be used with great caution, as just a couple days ago Gaddafi’s son and three of his grandchildren where reportedly killed by a NATO bomb, an action that could quickly change the tide of sentiment against NATO, and perhaps toward Gaddafi.
In Yemen, the president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, has agreed to step down from his position due to political protest. However, this agreement as reportedly fallen apart, as he continued to add provisions the deal...
... middle of paper ...
...intervention is required is very small. More likely, US action in Egypt would be seen as meddling, which is not beneficial. The situation in Syria may be the most dire, especially from a humanitarian standpoint. Civilians are being killed even as they leave noon prayers, with ministers declaring that they will not be forced to bend to the demands of protesters. The line demarcating necessary humanitarian action if fuzzy, and the US should have some kind of plan in place as these political protests continue. While Americans like to join “Middle Eastern countries” into one group, the countries best described as “Middle Eastern” are different, with different histories, goals, and political systems. Each must be viewed as an individual. As decisions are made regarding foreign policy the US must remember to be mindful of the sensitivities belonging to each country.
There is always that one person that stirs the pot in a situation that could have been solved rather quickly without them interfering. This is exactly what happened in Syria. The Syrian Civil War began when a peaceful protest when a group of teenagers who were writing anti-government graffiti on a wall. Syrian people called on their president who instead of making democratic reforms, acted in extreme violence against unarmed civilians. More than a quarter of a million people in Syria have been killed and over 10 million have been forced out of their homes. The Assad regime continues to suppress their citizens and they have begun using chemical bombs to kill thousands of Syrians and many even
KyivPost, accessed March, 16, 2014, http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/nato-confirms-readiness-for-ukraines-joining-organ-63797.html. "NATO Launches 'Intensified Dialogue' with Ukraine." NATO, accessed March, 16, 2014, http://www.nato.int/docs/update/2005/04-april/e0421b.htm. Lowther, Adam and Casey Lucius. Identifying America's Vital Interests.
In 2010 the Middle East experienced a disturbing series of protests and riots against the government. The term Arab Spring was coined as an allusion for the 1848 revolutions that rocked the Arab world. This devastating revolution saw its inception in a chain of small scale protests for the democratization of the Arabian governments. With its start in Egypt and Tunisia it has not failed in affecting every Arab country from Libya, Sudan and Morocco in the West to Yemen and Saudi Arabia in the East. A branch of the same revolution has successfully managed to become the cause for a civil war outbreak in Syria and even stretched its influence outside the Arab world to affect Iran and Mali.
The authoritarian regimes of the Middles cycled through a pattern of anti-western policy until the globalization effects of economics and information demanded reform. As conservative Arab states try to maintain the autocracy they relied on after gaining independence, their citizens, affected by information and education expansion, challenge their resistant governments as typified by Syria’s unwillingness to capitulate. The proliferation of information and education underscored the protest movements of the Arab Spring because citizens’ contempt for their obstinate governments grew to large under economic pressures, as the current situation in Syria demonstrates.
In legal terms NATO as a regional arrangement may intervene in respect of international peace and security, provided that actions it undertakes are consistent with the purposes and principles of the UN charter2 this is according to article53 of the UN charter. The United Nations charter prescribes conditions to be met by states when it comes to military interventions.
Erupting in 1987, a revolt called the Infitada began in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. This revolt was initially started by local Palestinians residents and was soon characterized by rock throwing as their only means of opposing the Israeli military forces. As images began to circulate of civilians armed with rocks fighting for their rights against the heavily armed Israeli forces in a one-sided conflict they began to win a substantial amount of sympathy for their struggle in the neighboring Islamic communities. A few years later in 1991, the Infitada had all but ended. Instead the increased Israeli repression during this epoch seemed to be laying the initial groundwork for future violence in the region. This time period between the end of the first Infitada and the beginning of the second contain key events that help explain why the outbreak of the second Infitada transpired.
Early 2011 uprisings swept across the Middle East and North Africa, and many rebellions are still going on today. The Arab region has seen revolts and conflict since the 1800‘s, but only recently have these revolts been redirected to the problems of Arab society (Ghannam, J. 2011 pg 4-5)The Arab Spring Uprising was first sparked in Tunisia and eventually struck Algeria, Jordan, Egypt, Yemen and then spread to other countries. Citizens throughout these countries were dissatisfied with the rule of their local governments. Issues like human rights violations, political corruption, economic decline, unemployment, extreme poverty, dictators...
BACKGROUND: In March of 2011, the unrest in Syria was just beginning, with protests g...
This paper will discuss the history of the Houthis and the Yemeni government, the regional instability it causes and implications to the United States. This paper will also discuss consequences that will ensue if these issues continue to go unresolved and there is increas...
The article, “Why Is There So Much Conflict in the Middle East?” written by Mirjam E. Sørli et. al corresponds a great deal with the text Politics and Change in the Middle East as far as the reasons for conflict in the Middle East. Sørli et. al disputes the idea of “Middle East exceptionalism,” which says that there is something different about Middle Easterners that make them prone to violence and conflict (142). Sørli et. al says this is not true, but rather there are very simple reasons as to why there has been conflict in the Middle East. As stated, the lack of regional natural resources such as water, oil, and arable la...
An attack on the Syrian state would fall within the boundaries of the international concept of the responsibility to protect. The crisis in Syria has escalated by protests in March 2011 calling for the release of all political prisoners. National security forces responded to widespread peaceful demonstrations with the use of brutal violence. The Syrian President Bashar al-Assad refused to stop attacks and allow for implementation of the reforms requested by the demonstrators. By July 2011, firsthand accounts emerged from witnesses, victims, and the media that government forces had subjected innocent civilians to detention, torture, and the use of heavy weaponry. The Syrian people were also subjected to the Shabiha, a largely armed state sponsored militia fighting with security forces. Al-Assad continually denied responsibility to these crimes and placed blame on the armed groups and terrorists for these actions.
In those countries that have not experienced government upheaval, a common outcome of the Arab Spring has been sustained civil unrest, political instability, and the extension of political and economic concessions by leaders seeking to appease protesters. Many questions could arise as one contemplated those events. One of these questions would be: Why has the Arab Spring produced different results across the Middle East? This paper is a humble attempt to suggest some answers to this sort of these logical questions.
As the Arab Spring enters its second year, major uprisings and revolts have occurred all over the Middle East, pushing for an end to the corrupt autocratic rule and an expansion of civil liberties and political rights. Most recently, images from Syria have emerged, depicting the government’s use of force to suppress the voice of its people. One might ask, “Is this the beginning of a revolution? Is the country on the path to democracy?” To assess this question and examine the future trends in the region, one must look back on the country’s somewhat tumultuous history, the relationship between the citizens and the state, and the political economy.
The pro-Israel intervention represented the US foreign policy reaction when the violation to regional stability was committed by Israel. The cases discussed above were evaluated against the US reaction to Israel’s regional behaviour; in terms of whether the Israeli behaviour served or hampered US interest in maintaining regional stability and whether or not the US opposed Israel when it acted in ways that the United States deemed undesirable. It was concluded that, as a general rule, Washington was ready to intervene to address any violation to the status quo in the Middle East system except when this violation was committed by its regional surrogate. Israel had contributed directly in destabilizing the Middle East system (pushing the system out of its equilibrium point) in several cases, four of which have been discussed above. These crises, in spite of their negative effect on regional stability, witnessed minimal US reaction.
The international system is an anarchical system which means that, unlike the states, there is no over ruling, governing body that enforces laws and regulations that all states must abide by. The International System in today’s society has become highly influential from a number of significant factors. Some of these factors that will be discussed are Power held by the state, major Wars that have been fought out in recent history and international organisations such as the U.N, NATO and the W.T.O. Each of these factors, have a great influence over the international system and as a result, the states abilities to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social, and cultural development”.