Peaceful young protestors forced Mubarak to end his decades long reign in Egypt

A small incident by single vegetable vendor in Tunisia has engulfed Arab world threatening the despotic regimes. Recent events in Tunisia and Egypt are hailed as the victory for the common people. They have overthrown decade long, dreaded dictator rule using non-violent struggle. In these countries there was ban on assembling of more than five people in the public. Defying of such draconian law, thousands of people took to the streets and protested using the tools of non-violence. Barring Egypt, where the secret police of Mubarak unleashed violence and killed more than 300 people, the 18-day struggle remained peaceful. Tahrir square literally brought ‘freedom’ to the people in Arab world.

Is this phenomenon in the Middle East an indicator of success of non-violent struggle in the 21st century? Is it a powerful tool to overthrow the oppressive regimes? Or it is manifestation of the repressed anger against the authoritarian rule and for installation of democracy?

The events are historic because in these countries there is no history of using the tool of peaceful protest. For generations, they have been witnessing violent conflicts over land and resources, or for establishing the supremacy of religion.

After the middle ages, the discovery of oil in the region and the geo politics has led to installation of authoritarian monarchies. The beacons of democratic values of US and Europe openly supported these oppressive regimes in order to secure cheap supply of oil form these regions. Emergence of Israel escalated conflict in the Middle East leading to deep-rooted violent settings for years to come.

The violent game plan set by rich and powerful democratic countries of west got the biggest jolt in 1979 through the violent revolution in Iran. Dethroning of Shah of Iran, the puppet regime of the west was a clear indicator that the common people would not tolerate the repressive regimes imposed on them. Nevertheless, this violent revolution revealed the hidden power of religion as a rallying point in organising people. Furthermore, the Islamic Revolution in Iran did not bring in the promised democracy and established theocracy instead.

This was the revolt against the domination of US and Europe in the region. These anti American feelings were contained to Iran for the past four decades. In order to contain this, the developed countries had to find allies in the region, which led to installation of powerful authoritarian regimes. Using the age old policy of divide and rule, they sold armaments and technology to these regimes and supported the repression of common people which was an obvious violation of human rights. It is these ordinary citizens long suffering under the repressive regimes who have taken to the streets to express their dissatisfaction.

Devoid of legitimate avenues for expressing their anger against despots, they had two options. One was to challenge it through adopting violent methods as done by the radical Islamic groups. However, the oppressive regimes were intolerant of these violent methods and they successfully extradited these elements. The second option was to protest using the methods of non-violent struggle.

Despite having least experience of peaceful protest, the common people took to this option in order to show their anger against the repressive policies. This Gandhian approach was combined with the modern tool of Internet and the social networking sites like twitter and facebook that provided space to organise mass protests. Tunisia was a spark that showed the power of non-violent struggle. The spark engulfed Egypt in no time as common people assembled in thousands standing in Tahrir Square defying the armored tanks. They forced Mubarak to quit, and now the heat generated is spreading fast to Jordan, Yemen, Libya and to other Arab nations, challenging the monarchies and dictators.

The triumph of the peoples struggle in Arab world is no doubt historic. But we need to analyze these events in deeper perspective. Though common people are the forbearers of this victory, the hidden hands that shaped the event need to be understood. The anti west, anti American feeling is deep rooted in the region. This undercurrent is a common factor for the solidarity of the people. Whether we like it or not, the support of Iran through whatever means for this bloodless revolution cannot be underestimated. Though this has not surfaced openly, its moral and material support is talked in muted tones. If there is some truth in this argument, it has long-term consequences for the new regimes and in the Arab world.

The non-violent Gandhian ideology becomes more relevant in addressing these larger societal challenges. It calls for freedom of the ‘minds’, not to become the robots of modern day consumer culture, but to strive towards a harmonious path of development that does not result in violence either on nature or on communities.

The success of the historic non-violent struggle in the Middle East would be short lived if it fails to address the broader issues of changes in the path of emancipation of individuals and the nations leading to real ‘freedom’ or Swaraj.

If the emerging rulers do not address these issues, the victories will be just cosmetic, regime changes in which the corporate greed and consumerism will take over the places vacated by authoritarian dictators. The fall of Soviet Union and the recent changes in China and India have amply shown how the market driven consumer culture can erode the basic value systems of civilizations that survived for thousands of years.

Will these energies that are unleashed result in changing the fundamentals of society towards more humane, secular, tolerant of the diversity in ideologies and ecologically responsible behavior? Or else will this relapse into the ‘business as usual’ mode catering to the obsessive western style consumer monoculture that would further entrench the common masses into corporate control over their lives? Even bigger worry is about regressive and fundamentalist forces taking control over people’s lives instead of granting the promised freedom of mind. Only future will tell.