The Region: 2012- the year of living dangerously

In Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and around the region, there is no reason for Islamists to turn from violence.

By BARRY RUBIN
January 15, 2012 21:27
4 minute read.
Abo El-Maty of the Salafist party

Abo El-Maty of the Salafist party 311 R. (photo credit: REUTERS/Amr Dalsh)

Coverage of the region-wide upheaval known as the “Arab Spring” would make it seem that terrorism, especially Islamist terrorism, is pretty much as dead as are its thousands of victims. After all, if the protest demonstration and balloting have proven able to resolve grievances then who needs to blow people up?

And the same applies to intimidation and instability since presumably people vote, a government is elected, and democracy immediately ensues.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


But the Middle East is far from through with violence. Where should we look in 2012 for the greatest threats of terrorism and what will be the targets? If we think this through in advance we can better plan to avoid or minimize these problems.

Let’s start with Egypt. If the military refused to move forward with elections or turn power over to the winners (that is, the Islamists) there would be a violent response. And that’s one of the reasons why this is unlikely to happen. The moderates are not going to engage in violence, which is one reason the military feels free to repress them. The problem of crime and general anarchy has already become very serious.

Yet political violence in Egypt is very likely and it will come mainly from the Salafists. Remember that there are numerous groups and leaders, even within the al- Nur party which has done so well in the elections. Some radical Salafists will not be satisfied with the pace of progress (?) toward Islamism. They will target Christians, liberals, secularists, women demanding rights, tourists and Israel. Continuing attacks on Christians are inevitable, with the goal of forcing them to submit or encouraging them to flee.

The Muslim Brotherhood has no interest in promoting violence – except against Israel – but it has a great interest in condoning violence since to oppose attacks on Christians, moderates, or others will reduce its popularity. But the Brotherhood doesn’t have to worry since the military will be blamed for violence and be pressed to turn over power to the civilians, that is, the Muslim Brotherhood. Talk about having your cake and eating it, too.

A ROUGHLY similar pattern will emerge in Libya and Tunisia. The West will praise “progress” toward democracy while the radical Islamists chase or intimidate anyone who pushes for moderation on key issues, much less supports secularism. The governments will from time to time condemn the murder, beatings and threats against the moderates but will not necessarily do anything about it. And there aren’t too many moderates in Libya to begin with.

This might be characterized as: We won. The Americans won’t save you. Shut up.

For Hamas in the Gaza Strip violence is also, thanks to the West, cost-free. Why? First, while some fighters and civilians will be killed by Israeli retaliation, Hamas doesn’t care about that. Those deaths create martyrs (urging the rest to fight harder and hate more) and the West will blame Israel. Again, killing and fighting is a win-win situation. Or letting others kill and fight, since Hamas can allow smaller groups to do the attacking (Islamic Jihad; the local al-Qaida affiliate) and blame them while posing as peaceful and moderate.

And then it can always hope that terrorist and rocket attacks on Israel will provoke enough violence to bring Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptian government, and even Egyptian army support.

In Syria, there’s no real cost for the regime continuing to murder its own people. There’s little media coverage; the Arab League has no stomach for actually doing something about it.

Iraq? The violence there will continue, especially against Christians, until they are all pretty much forced out of the country. The Sunni and Shia will keep fighting, to the detriment of civilians on both sides, even if the main factor determining power will be politics.

Lebanon? Hezbollah will use violence against its rivals and nobody in the West will do anything effective about it. Once again, radicals murder moderates; moderates complain. The same point applies in Iran; the regime’s oppression of the opposition won’t make sanctions worse.

As for al-Qaida, well, Osama bin Ladin’s dead, yet it will continue to claim victims in such far-flung places as Yemen, Somalia, Iraq and very possibly Morocco, Gaza and even perhaps Jordan.

Am I cynical? What I’m trying to do is to rouse people against cynicism, to realize that their countries’ policies are encouraging violence and repression because it most cases they won’t say anything about it and in a few others they won’t do anything about it. Precisely because there is now an open political struggle, the most radical Islamists will use violence against anyone who speaks up or acts up.

And the more “moderate” Islamists who the US government is courting will not stop their militant brethren while benefitting from the incitement, threats and violence they dispense. If 2011 was the year of the “Arab Spring,” 2012 will be the year for the Islamists to consolidate their gains and eliminate their domestic critics.

The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and a featured columnist at Pajamas Media. His latest book is Israel: An Introduction (Yale University Press)


Related Content

February 23, 2018
Can Israel remain strong and stable after Netanyahu?

By YAAKOV KATZ

Israel Weather
  • 10 - 23
    Beer Sheva
    12 - 19
    Tel Aviv - Yafo
  • 9 - 16
    Jerusalem
    10 - 18
    Haifa
  • 15 - 26
    Elat
    12 - 21
    Tiberias