Americas Strategic Repression of the Arab Awakening

: Andrew Gavin Marshall , 09 2011 06:30

(Global Research, February 9, 2011)

North Africa and the Global Political Awakening, Part 2

Overview

In Part 1 of this series, I analyzed the changing nature of the Arab world, in experiencing an uprising as a result of the Global Political Awakening. Ultimately, I assessed that these could potentially be the birth pangs of a global revolution; however, the situation is more complicated than it appears on the surface.

While the uprisings spreading across the Arab world have surprised many observers, the same could not be said for the American foreign policy and strategic establishment. A popular backlash against American-supported dictatorships and repressive regimes has been anticipated for a number of years, with arch-hawk geopolitical strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski articulating a broad conception of a Global Political Awakening taking place, in which the masses of the world (predominantly the educated, exploited and impoverished youth of the Third World) have become acutely aware of their subjugation, inequality, exploitation and oppression. This Awakening is largely driven by the revolution in information, technology and communication, including radio, television, but most especially the Internet and social media. Brzezinski had accurately identified this Awakening as the greatest threat to elite interests regionally, but also internationally, with America sitting on top of the global hierarchy.

This spurred on the development of an American strategy in the Arab world, modeled on similar strategies pursued in recent decades in other parts of the world, in promoting democratization, by developing close contacts with civil society organizations, opposition leaders, media sources, and student organizations. The aim is not to promote an organic Arab democracy of the people, and for the people, but rather to promote an evolutionary democratization in which the old despots of American strategic support are removed in favour of a neoliberal democratic system, in which the outward visible institutions of democracy are present (multi-party elections, private media, parliaments, constitutions, active civil society, etc); yet, the power-holders within that domestic political system remain subservient to U.S. economic and strategic interests,

1/4

Americas Strategic Repression of the Arab Awakening

: Andrew Gavin Marshall , 09 2011 06:30

continuing to follow the dictates of the IMF and World Bank, supporting Americas military hegemony in the region, and opening up the Arab economies to be integrated into the world economy. Thus, democratization becomes an incredibly valuable strategy for maintaining hegemony; a modern re-hash of Let them eat cake! Give the people the image of democracy and establish and maintain a co-dependent relationship with the new elite. Thus, democracy for the people becomes an exercise in futility, where peoples participation becomes about voting between rival factions of elites, who all ultimately follow the orders of Washington.

This strategy also has its benefit for the maintenance of American power in the region. While dictators have their uses in geopolitical strategy, they can often become too independent of the imperial power and seek to determine the course of their country separate from U.S. interests, and are subsequently much more challenging to remove from power (i.e., Saddam Hussein). With a democratized system, changing ruling parties and leaders becomes much easier, by simply calling elections and supporting opposition parties. Bringing down a dictator is always a more precarious situation than changing the guard in a liberal democratic system.

However, again, the situation in the Arab world is still more complicated than this brief overview, and American strategic concerns must take other potentialities into consideration. While American strategists were well aware of the growing threat to stability in the region, and the rising discontent among the majority of the population, the strategists tended to identify the aim as democratization through evolution, not revolution. In this sense, the uprisings across the Arab world pose a major strategic challenge for America. While ties have been made with civil society and other organizations, they havent all necessarily had the ability to be firmly entrenched, organized and mobilized. In short, it would appear that America was perhaps unprepared for uprisings to take place this soon. The sheer scale and rapid growth of the protests and uprisings makes the situation all the more complicated, since they are not dealing with one nation alone, but rather an entire region (arguably one of, if not the most strategically important region in the world), and yet they must assess and engage the situation on a country-by-country basis.

One danger arises in a repeat in the Arab world of the trends advanced in Latin America over the past decade: namely, the growth of populist democracy. The protests have brought together a wide array of society civil society, students, the poor, Islamists, opposition leaders, etc. and so America, with ties to many of these sectors (overtly and covertly), must now make many choices in regards of who to support.

Another incredibly important factor to take into consideration is military intervention. America has firmly established ties with the militaries in this region, and it appears evident that America

2/4

Americas Strategic Repression of the Arab Awakening

: Andrew Gavin Marshall , 09 2011 06:30

is influencing military actions in Tunisia. Often, the reflex position of imperial power is to support the military, facilitate a coup, or employ repression. Again, this strategy would be determined on a country-by-country basis. With a popular uprising, military oppression will have the likely effect of exacerbating popular discontent and resistance, so strategic use of military influence is required.

This also leaves us with the potential for the Yemen option: war and destabilization. While presenting its own potential for negative repercussions (namely, in instigating a much larger and more radical uprising), engaging in overt or covert warfare, destabilizing countries or regions, is not taboo in American strategic circles. In fact, this is the strategy that has been deployed in Yemen since the emergence of the Southern Movement in 2007, a liberation movement seeking secession from the U.S.-supported dictatorship. Shortly after the emergence of the Southern Movement, al-Qaeda appeared in Yemen, prompting U.S. military intervention. The Yemeni military, armed, trained and funded by the United States, has been using its military might to attempt to crush the Southern Movement as well as a rebel movement in the North.

In short, the Arab Awakening presents possibly the greatest strategic challenge to American hegemony in decades. The likely result will be a congruence of multiple simultaneously employed strategies including: democratization, oppression, military intervention and destabilization. Again, it could be a mistake to assume one strategy for the whole region, but rather to assess it on a country-by-country basis, based upon continuing developments and progress in the Awakening.

The Council on Foreign Relations Strategy to Democratize the Arab World

3/4

Americas Strategic Repression of the Arab Awakening

: Andrew Gavin Marshall , 09 2011 06:30

The United sectors NGOs, related strategy players Council States, civil to of often for American society society, American on and and Foreign almost (media, is etc.), imperial one policy, Relations always where of banking, the interests and central they come wields (CFR) academia, work around from institutions enormous is together the the the military, premier rank world. for influence to and socializing construct intelligence, U.S. As file such, foreign within of the a American the consensus CFR policy diplomacy, policy CFR itself. circles, think often elites on corporations, tank sets major where from in the all the issues key major In entitled, Madeleine the second of Democratic 1996 500,000 2005, Yugoslavia first interview term. term In the Iraqi Albright Support Republic CFR of As children and with President such, published the and 60 of of under Rwandan Arab Minutes, she Vin Congo, Bill played Weber. a Democracy: the Clintons Task and when genocide age crucial Albright Force she of asked administration, five, also Why roles Report and was Albright about oversaw and subsequent in the on the How. the U.S. a replied, lead and the new sanctions The Ambassador UN up was civil American we and Task imposed U.S. war think resulting responses Force and Secretary strategy the to sanctions genocide the was price in the United to for co-chaired of the is deaths State the on worth in dismantling Nations the Iraq. Arab for of it. by In his over world a for [1] Security Albright professor Relations. Jimmy Trilateral National Carter got Council Security Commission who co-founded her became supervised start staff. Adviser. at into the President Columbia her Trilateral Brzezinski his administration, dissertation. in University, 1977, Commission then he offered Brzezinski, brought where including with Madeline she with banker a himself, studied member him Albright David over but under of two also Rockefeller the a job Zbigniew dozen Council Brzezinski on his members in on Brzezinski, National 1973. as Foreign his When the her [2] including Adviser, David the NSC, Rothkopf, CIA Samuel Brzezinskis Director, former Huntington and National NSC Brzezinski today and staffers Security is Robert the also Secretary are, Gates, Council had to this several who of staff day, Defense later other member very became key loyal in wrote officials to Obama Deputy their in his on former National administration. his book Council boss. on Security staff, history As [3] Today, International democracy NATOs Trustees Albright new for Affairs, around strategic the serves Aspen an the on concept organization world. Institute, the board Recently, over as of dedicated the well directors next she as chaired chairing decade. to of promoting the a Council NATO National and committee on funding Foreign Democratic US-supported which Relations, Institute developed the for Board Congressman, democratic members Rights for Affairs Democracy, Council, IMF. International National other Watch, (NDI), Goldman of co-chair regime the Endowment the First who Task Peace, U.S. Brookings Sachs of National change has State the Force the served for CFR Group, Department, World Institution, Report Democracy Bank around Task on the Bank, of the include Force the American Chicago, board the world National (NED), the report Hoover individuals National of in Occidental Enterprise the advancing on Security Institution, CFR, premier Arab Democratic with and democracy Petroleum, Institute, Council, past U.S. U.S. the is also or strategic organization Institute National present National AOL a is the member Vin Time Carnegie interests. for Endowment affiliations Weber, Intelligence International Warner, dedicated of the Endowment former Other to board and for Human to U.S. the of [4] It is not the is proposing simply CFR very clear report advisory a that new have this strategy to to is policy, say a highly about for but America influential democracy integral in to the and policy in Arab active formulation world, Arab group world? which of and individuals makes implementation. their and recommendations interestswhich So what did The East. democracy it explored: report Whereas stated and emphasis freedom that, Washington have on stability become has was a a priority. once chance the The to hallmark help report shape of posed U.S. a more Middle two central democratic East questions policy, Middle which First, policy account does goals? the a full Second, policy range of of if promoting so, its interests? how should democracy the United in the States Middle implement East serve such U.S. a interests policy, taking and foreign into [5] interests long-term will be answer less and dangers. likely entails to foreign the to first certain If turn policy Arab question to inherent more citizens goals was extreme in risks, are the inevitably, able Middle the measures. to denial express East. yes, of The promoting freedom grievances report carries elaborated, democracy freely much and Although serves more peacefully, significant U.S. they [6] cautious problems about it could the pose process for American of democratic interests: change, and recognized However, the the potential CFR report instability was very and [T]he over sudden, the United traumatic long States term, change mindful should is that promote neither democracy necessary the development cannot nor be desirable. imposed of democratic from the institutions outside and and practices that should be to encourage democratic evolution, not revolution Americas goal in the Middle East . [ 7] [Emphasis added] Further, country-by-country they acknowledged strategy, that democracy promotion in the Middle East requires a [8] ultimately a too populations, instability evolutionary, present, stability, delicate superficial, and but and making balancing so a not or, undermine deeper will it if revolutionary, the could the the act, process United and opportunity further where U.S. stronger States all interests. change. the damage meaning the to report basis pushes more create The relations Thus, identified for that complicated a reform dangers friendship new it explained cannot between and too that that hard more and between be if Americas accompany a the potentially and one-size-fits-all balanced report, United Americans too democracy they fast, rapid States unstable. foundation favour this change and and strategy, could promotion The a Arabs. Arab for view will create process Arab still toward is be is [9] In Americans American and this diplomatic Arabs. strategy language, as aiming friendship at promoting should a more be reliable read as dependency dependence, between thus we The promotion fearing emergence friendly peace, potentially alternatively, region report, across and it Arab if may of democratic damage Washington however, counterterrorism of democracy Arab governments, the Islamist place board. leaders the U.S. acknowledged change governments pushes credibility in interests the could this operations. among Middle Arab would dig of in opposed the indigenous leaders in jeopardy, Arab East, likely their deep There civil have with heels too to divisions society is or groups the several hard a also and that deleterious United on the actively it within promoting viewing could reform, risk States opposition U.S. that effect oppose lead it contributing and democratic as policy with to on potentially the groups, ethnic U.S. America regional circles West policies to conflict reform, this the on in too actively stability, general. could the collapse risky, in or or, the the of [10] referring, who American Hussein be rid was of also him. armed of power, course, shows and America to that supported Americas when turned The a by dictator once-close on America. latter him scenario and digs But ally cast in once and his could him heels, suddenly-new he as started a referred new it can to Hitler. often become to enemy, as take The the too Saddam a case Saddam very autonomous of long Saddam Hussein, option, time to So promoting while clearly democracy there are in the a number Arab world, of potentially the CFR disastrous made their consequences position clear: for U.S. interests in While that greater and understand sustain clearly a peacefully policy transitions indicates risks hostile that geared to attitudes in U.S. the that the to United toward democracy interests the political toward best States maintaining process, and kind the can foreign supports of United lead stability they the to policy States... are their authoritarian instability is democratic less goals... exercise The likely in overwhelming If the status of to Arabs stability. short liberty, turn quo are to term, radical they in allowed the empirical the are Middle measures. Task less to participate evidence Force likely East If to poses finds they freely [11] One of by governments issues. International on work governments. the the creating pivotal with Arab Bush Much independent world constituencies area administration Development reform of this through was work agenda through and which had within (USAID); with indigenous in the previously the the Arab Middle area CFR express however, governments NGOs of report East been economics, purpose and while Partnership done advocated civil-society for USAIDs through of politics, change, coordinating implementing Initiative the work groups, education, the United has (MEPI), rationale and as focused State the managing well and established democratization for as Agency womens to MEPI with some the for was U.S. in extent 2002 to [12] Another Progress), the sessions development Assistance foundations, resources Future, avenue that which Dialogue, which international and brought support was emerged job is designed growth. together which political Broader financial from brings The civil to and a Middle 2004 foster Partnership institutions society together economic G8 communication East activists, summit, development (the Initiative for change. Progress World of business which (also on Bank institutions reform-related also known a leaders, main and established IMF), as priority in emphasizing the the to issues. Partnership was Middle the coordinate Democracy the It East, economic Forum held for the use for [13] maintains structure purpose which American without remains America a change and the is Western same. seeking of substance, political to ensure and where that economic democratic the image hegemony. transition of In the other state In words, effect, in alters, the it Arab a is but change a process the world power of However, European explained European further the reluctance nations importance problems to undermines support of for having it or democratization the Europe take potential it seriously. as a efficacy partner strategy As of the in pursuing the were Task project: presented Force reform. report in The the explained, report unwillingness further Despite is to better take the than a history lead that in of promoting the European United human colonial States. rights Consequently, domination, in the Arab the it world. perception may be helpful of Europe for the in European the Arab world Union [14] The organizations through as government, many Task U.S. Middle Force fearing democracy-promotion did recommended eastern not that come this NGOs directly would that are from groups taint it reluctant would U.S. these like be to government organizations the best accept National if funding direct institutions, Endowment in transfers for the Arab eyes but civil from of for rather their society Democracy an arm constituencies. funneled of the (NED), U.S. [15] In the conclusion, the report stated that: Although present long-run potential some benefits a policy short-term of predicated a Washington more risks democratic on to political, Washingtons might and confront economic, economically interests, in the and foreseeable these social developed risks change future. are Middle in worth the East Arab taking. outweigh world The may the [16] We sake way cake! American-sponsored undermine result the people, this Political region, must is that of a If democracy if thus coordinated Awakening, Awakening the serves acknowledge, successful and legitimizing Arab creating co-opt U.S. world and in strategy and interests. brand a the it the more screams however, freedom, would taking Arab ever-increasing new of stable to democracy have Thus, puppet world; confront, efforts out but that and the for rather it this an to amounts governments democracy secure effect manipulate assault address and strategy desires that freedom, of environment it to pacifying against is and a and acknowledging scenario as and not forces manipulate democratic and freedom, aimed the pacify resistance therefore for Arab for akin at the American change give promoting this to Awakening. emergence the and saying, to America them Awakening reality Americas in representative interests. the the democracy Let that is region. of able them the hegemony is in In the such Global to short, As eat for Global a of a the the in for install examination, realities, my freedom last new challenges essay regimes. from not on to the frame the However, and Arab subject, opportunities it world in either the I which identified situation a of black must the these requires or not Awakening white be protests simply a context, much and as discarded more an but the organic rather uprisings. nuanced as seek a growth, covert and to explain detailed a U.S. rallying plot the to cry Conceptualizing Arab Awakening For architect in explains but almost Further, phenomenon radicalizing. pose which Relations Awakening power American dealt America, global years, a with America structures. all challenge the the of report) of foreign easily: power arch-hawk globalization, of in humanity Awakening worldwide As of the such still global Brzezinski structures are policy. both Thus, emergence perches. a intent American way is to political yearning the politically However, existing as has that upon emphasizes, and need essentially Brzezinski and been awakening... maintains imperial interests. for developing states to activated, pressing as control human warning Brzezinski the and as geostrategist These and He well greatest reality dignity That others the strategies politically elites explained secures as Awakening energies elaborated, awakening of to across is (as historical the the Zbigniew conscious American for evidenced that, Global central existing transcend the managing is it For is challenge Western the is socially Brzezinski, Political challenge not imperial and global the most by sovereign a the first politically and challenge world, massive prescient to hierarchy, Awakening. Council interests time pacifying not inherent an and only intellectual in borders interactive. and that human on problem in and on American, in Foreign particular politically this can He top the global and history be of in [The] military masses one million million major people might of the people world is than world greater powers, than to is control at to than a physically new historic ever, one and million their low. old, kill capacity To one also people. put million face it bluntly: a impose people; novel in reality: earlier control today, times, while it over is infinitely the it was politically lethality easier easier of awakened to to their control kill one [17] In dealing facing for securing governance, of a response: a 2008 more the with and article new inclusive this unify, or institutionally president as threat in the he enlarge, system termed New to is elite expanding to of York engage regain it, global structures global Times, U.S. and management. the management. Brzezinski pacify. global and process interests, legitimacy emphasized Thus, globalization Brzezinski explaining Brzezinskis by spearheading a unveiled multi-faceted that, into strategy the a evolution monumental a four-point collective rests strategy of on strategy global effort better for task [18] America deliberate prepared response and to effort play Europe, to to unify a nurture significant a refers point a wider role to that the in coalition promoting effort CFR to report committed re-establish more acknowledged. effective to the a shared principle global To sense management. enlarge of interdependence of purpose refers to between a and [19] identified ultimately the state prime or the manifested government. group G8 as for having global itself in economic outlived 2009 its governance the function, form of the and at the G20. proposed level The of G20 a ministers, widening has subsequently governors of it, which and become He heads [20] Herman global governance. von Rompuy, the President of the European Union, referred to 2009 as the first year of [21] Brzezinski these elites also identifies are intent as upon being advancing the solution global to management, managing the Global which is Political the exact Awakening. strategy The through Japan, without point becoming moving explained become to a constructive next Russia pacify forward informal China, the point that, bogged crisis and in in many on Brzezinski talks American Brzezinskis of this down the possibly global of among dynamically Israel-Palestine the in the role stability. referred India, problems key strategy vast is global powers, changing in area to Thus, particular we the issue, engage chaos. ranging face specifically requirements from world, Iran, collectively between Brzezinskis from Afghanistan, refers the the Suez crisis of the U.S., to cannot a to United the point of deliberate India. the American and cultivation be of European States Pakistan. laid view, In particular, U.S. to leadership and The rest. of effort Triad, top Brzezinski China, only In officials he to the China, alternative could avoid advised as final [22] So, However, the easier nature, control to control kill as spread one is Brzezinski key one million and to million this mobilization people himself strategy, people than identified, with than of the control global to which Awakening: physically one management is million important kill To one people. put to million being it keep bluntly: the people; in mind ultimate in earlier today, when solution. times, assessing it is infinitely it was [23] States chooses, military constructive engineer, is might playing the co-opt American fire could with can and potentially spread fire, role control and is and global while be the get employed. Awakening, chaos. attempting out of hand. He to it In said light is such important it a himself, controlled a situation, to the acknowledge fire the only to Thus, lethality manipulate alternative while that of attempting the as to Americas a United it so [24] managed overcome age-old barriers, transition imperial war tactic then destroys it of often divide them becomes and (and conquer managed everything is never chaos. else off in the the Where table process). diplomacy of options. If fails it cannot to be Now strategies democratization, present opposition country-by-country American turning an power that groups incredibly our are attention stretched have but basis), unstable the could been to scope, the thin. the be or rapidity situation Arab employed. are velocity in Awakening and for and process confluence American The rapidity preferred and of strategy. being of of uprisings, recent these route well While uprisings developments for established we American must ties taking with examine (varying power civil in place the society is Arab on has range and world of Engineering, is relegated for U.S.-sponsored Serbia premier National more a precise focused East contested not a Albert more and securely a in timeline new democracy all and Democratic 2000, North to Einstein delicate, the election specific tactic nuanced co-opting establish incidents Africa. Georgia for colour in Institute, managing promotion coordinated pockets within Institute, approach and revolutions themselves in of American 2003, the democratic controlling as the organizations country, well which and Ukraine nations, process International strategic throughout as and controlled revolutionary major remains regime giving their in often of 2004, circles; (the American organization strategies the Republican Eastern change undertaking. absent with National organizations however, movements significant Kyrgyzstan from philanthropic Europe listed for and Endowment Institute, democratic the This it above mobilization. time has and current and or was in democratic in Central in USAID, foundations foundations) took 2005, the between for context regime place case past Democracy, where This Asia, Freedom been with in change. regime in required involved starting were the order Americas the the largely Middle context House, the change able to a with a allow to of [See: Research, A.G.Marshall, 3.11.2009: Colour-Coded Revolutions and the Origins of World War III, Global http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15767 ] Further, Movement attempt democratization developed million, Twitter, succeed strategy interference. and Facebook at a would in similar a in imposing arose involved highly 2006, require strategy in to and coordinated largely response install the regime patience, Youtube. State was a organized U.S.-friendly change. to Department undertaken and However, the intelligent organized contested covertly At the (i.e., in as coordinating manipulation, Iran time, posterity by effort client) Presidential the for Zbigniew on CIA, the regime shows, the efforts summer moral at part elections. a Brzezinski in cost the with of support, Iran. of a strategy of social 2009, covert approximately This The explained but media strategy in was, American did no which not political in such that fact, ultimately was the $400 strategy the as Green an 17.12.2009: Andrew Gavin Marshall, A New World War for a New World Order, Global Research, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16535 ] So manipulation, could Europe. pose. suspicious American simply scenario Eastern groups such effort well-organized oppose leaders, we domestic more civil strategy of not Managing can a to the attempting Europe In thus society sham dangerous overtly stand strategy. the of see which regimes, Arab presenting civil seems the Arab election and that behind were organizations, such fund society strategy regimes, Further, to pre-planned. even world, mobilize for they to largely promote opposition a in one have strategy American the with and which are while did authoritarian leader, which potential organized opposition emerged not $400 opposition not particular these the America in While and necessarily interests. are succeed. countries to million leader efforts civil for make well in many through forces. opposition a groups regimes the has society and power aware wins the However, run Arab opposition being and a Moreover, a effort by presents by highly organizations vacuum of been generally strategy continues world, a authoritarian figures, mobilized the margin much it consistently coordinated threat groups must and an to the of do but more of to open incredibly bringing has be around colour to not 97%, engage in nothing are their acknowledged regimes coordinated appeared Iran up, hold working thwarted attempt presenting revolutions any together own making as challenging with elections, that it that clear power could opposition as is closely at and are the and evidently all intelligent a and a that patched-up in this the hampered throughout unless situation difficult very cohesive. scenario together Eastern absolute opposition could groups U.S. it is all by for to No Another domestic funded, economic and threatened, ultimately known America opposition to militaries be process secure materializing that trained major must in militaries. counter-productive actors groups America the both they of undertake problem supporting military and Tunisia may in itself their The armed is coordinating simply the structures. inherent in militaries own and a civil principle delicate by overtake Egypt right to America, society form the in the within (more If this balancing sponsor of are American the removal constructing the strategy supporting. and militaries the so entire opposition in authoritarian of act strategy Egypt of these in process the between become feel the transitional entrenched than military groups Arab that in and the Arab Tunisia). powerful their world structures. region, with engineer military, regimes governments, position despots. is that Thus, the political, especially of a civil role are This is continuing coup, America This insecure society largely being social implies which strategy which since played must supported, and or to that the it is support is seems balance widely by the The greatest organizing somewhat 2010, outcome. not altogether situation America the challenges However, protest off-guard. democratic is absent. was intensely movements paying Western inrecent No This regime doubt, complicated detailed is media history. an and change from important uprisings attention coverage the While and in beginnings the conflicting, point the have to of Arab obvious the the to emerged address. situation, world first of presenting the intent four are Tunisian could weeks attempting present, and America have even protests of I protests taken believe the to with influence means in America one December the was of rapidity of minimal, the its of in if For the This Western warning applying revolution.). which up government. growth world, as aims all was a did including the and rapid the media public of absent not other democratization direction. rest This The response arise pressure played outlets cynically Algeria, organized of in spark could the in Tunisia, Meanwhile, a Arab a were pre-coordinated to was imply Egypt, proclaimed critical to a efforts promote until suicide world lit, covering and that and Morocco, role. of however, at freedom, America of course, America reforms democratic a From the a monumental and young potential Jordan events the the was sparks previously advanced in in moments man President full trying line regime extensively, and for ignited and achievement in with this Yemen. to a on established active personal change protests quietly fled to their across Tunisia spread espousing to support strategy manage Saudi for and began many protest in timeline, to democracy, an colour their of Arabia, of nations attempt in the the against evolution, these countries righteousness protests but demonstrators. revolutions, when in to rather and countries, the control suddenly not (thus, started in Arab sprung Tunisia, its of Subsequently, would nations, countries, emerging much vulnerable of control kill control one or seek one million appearing more suddenly. a is and million to more an control. than people America incredibly important coordinated people by it Yet, has than and For took America dangerous. to than factor the large to gain. advantage control first response to to to Like physically is few be take potentially one Remembering organic a days of into cornered was million these and kill consideration: undertaken, reactions stretching one people. even sparks animal, million Brzezinskis weeks to itself with America events ignite people; in of earlier the very protests the words in massive is today, thin, Tunisia process simultaneously times, regarding possibly it many organized is it and in was infinitely within of direction risking the easier the incredibly problem protests easier their other as to it own to [25] military maintain as the intervention, and, Yemen in fact, Option, covert strengthen in and which overt its the contacts warfare. strategy and In entails such relationships an scenario, effort This with to promote it domestic could is essential potentially destabilization, military for America be structures. referred to So, intensely absolute: involvement analysis likely cannot rather Task clearly it Force a does, as simply process within complicated, an thus, the Report in in effort dismiss fact, situation the while that for evolution context emphasized, seem will acknowledging America these multi-faceted is stretch as not of and protests if the we to out direction control Global are should certainly and and as seeing American the potentially Political examining not of Awakening. over the the be protests addressed emergence Awakening. the machinations disastrous. the next evidence and As one, in the opposition, I a No if argued a black-and-white and Council not global for outcome several, Americas covert in revolution; on we Part operations, is Foreign must decades. 1 preordained deep of analysis. keep this yet, Relations essay We this but this It or is is Americas democratic evolution, not revolution goal in the Middle East should be to encourage . [26] incremental to Thus, in the direct if this context we revolution. strategy cannot strategy of the dismiss either Global of This evolution changed the makes Awakening. uprisings in the and the situation as into intermittent entirely the all strategy the orchestrated, years, more of or being dangerous America forced but instead has for to American been respond understand thrown to interests. It and seems out them seek of its Taking flawed this not inter-twining responses highly that development due authoritarian and of American a see situation the to growth global complex any analysis. the this uprisings strategy and revolution position humanitarian of as developments. regimes, is of the an nave developments interaction this Alternatively, are Arab either-or to that strategy control (which and the but Awakening everything qualms lone the rather of development, Society, has the in different, evidence taking from result the process that on been is first below; the itself. of the after the organized opposing, a American place. does part long position strategy and but all, Indeed, and of not time rather while development The the thus, from support that and strategy was coming); in democratization U.S. being a society this on America conflicting congruence developed elite high context, this directed neglects of however, itself for in assessment. the was the social and this in revolution. from of caught the corridors people response strategy over-lapping it does the processes. reasons also above, direction entirely However, living mark marks of did to must power behind the under the not The unaware the it emergence react beginnings takes we emerge is active claim the must to is of the a Historically, predominantly as complex revolution social the bottom-up either process strata interaction an often process, revolutions of elite-driven always do revolution. do not not but and or come often emerge are rather or balancing In people-driven never about this seek a without mitigation context, the to through of mitigate, various product the revolution, we the awareness cannot social control, of actions interaction a one-sided groups. dismiss but repress, of of rather one the between The revolutions upper development. segment influence they context classes, come of two simply or and society, about co-opt That approaches. therefore, conditions as through is, often and a revolutions top-down control the polarized for a upper a or revolutionary developing democratization evidently air. Clinton If freedom, West are groups need informed cultural, the America, processes not revolution to in would and willing the be people psychological, citizens. not it strategic from would kicked and region. President naturally, fast uprisings need to of spreading would starting took accept), organizing enough ultimately in The out, objectives As to a its have Obama be process true such, international is in intellectual own to desperately openly the American for across implement revolution to be and course, military the Arab are control have of forced establishing challenged people evolution, aimed world. debts influence stressed. aid and region, a their attempting will to ultimately, strategy living challenge at sought have For would own ultimately and not instead transitional the over Thus, under to country to need revolution. true discussed, to past be global. and manage the manage America the not promoting change, repressing to six role contact and Arab end simply be years governments and to declared become the However, the has (a regimes, populist Arab with an political, prospect influence or IMF situation and been so, orderly civil Awakening and active, co-opting odious America democracy extensively and society but World the and of evolution unity transition revolution America engaged economic, domestic repress and has the Bank and by governments. cancelled, involved organic promoting been was opposition and would as a is militaries ultimate social, true in Hillary the the in The remove opposition government, short-to-medium-term reflecting ideologies). until crushed, change Over liberation 1954, Republic, Africa, should American seek protesters present the Haiti Palestine, American in past invaded struggles the to Cuba, groups populist in earn The help day, as trend 1959, 60 power must they trouble Laos, their the years, Iraq, America and and seen and democracies. the challenge poor are despises, leadership, occupied, scenario Western Venezuela, Cambodia, proposed Congo attempts America with across likely and has this oppressed co-opted. not actively in would it control Latin bombed leaders scenario has is at not 1960, Democratic Vietnam, Lebanon, simply populist autonomy repressed simply America be over overthrown, Ecuador The who to and make their is see democracy. Chile, their be that Yemen true governments are destabilized (although, despotic crowned themselves the or it in nations. over thrust new Argentina, is supported 1961, orchestrated emergence and also the leaders governments, to Since as on not Algeria, the They world: or the that leaders. quick and implemented necessarily Afghanistan, the most front the should must of are on Iran coups, repression enemies Peru, Arab beginnings unlikely. lines and accountable also in The come but populist 1953, the on. imposed and imposing be best must Indonesia, democratic of Dominican If from of very into American there of Guatemala possible democracies, ultimately democracies, the to the dictatorships, cautious the is Cold people, South one same people regime power. War in thing of preventing organizations West, regimes, disservice they lit difficult in democracy situation the would have the flame Arab Israel, World not. to the have cast is to world and While emergence a and is control. Bank ceased dangerous aside opposition as of the and has the course, the outcome with Global IMF, of always protests and leaders a the America. populist international formation difficult is Political been. as ultimately themselves, controlled democracy, It There one is Awakening of a corporations for transition monumental unknown, is the a and the large including protesters, great totally marches and what constituency and challenge, nations unity co-opted. many is banks, just on, clear governments, of and as neighbouring is the which but If the this that that world pro-democracy it struggle would will have a were spark which be East an be a Arab for has very interest a of case, freedom and great course been In taking the next place part in Tunisia of this series, and Egypt I will within examine the in strategic more detail context the explained specific revolutions in this part. uprisings Andrew Gavin Marshall Globalization (CRG). He is co-editor, a Research with Associate Michel Chossudovsky, with the Centre of for the Research recent book, on " The Global Economic Crisis: The Great Depression of the XXI Century" . He is currently working on a forthcoming book on'Global Government'. November/December the on Major The 25, ; Council Trichet, York, November 2008: International (Council [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=56 http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/4424.html [18] http://www.onlinecic.org/resourcece/multimedia/americasgeopoliticaldilemmas [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] The Americas Foreign Architects 2004: Rahul David Madeleine Ibid, Dilemma http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/opinion/16iht-YEbrzezinski.1.18730411.html Ibid, Ibid. Jean-Claude Herman Zbigniew Madeleine Choice: 26 Foreign on President on April page pages pages page Rothkopf, Mahakan, 2009: Foreign Relations http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/opinion/16iht-YEbrzezinski.1.18730411.html Geopolitical Foreign Affairs, of Global Von 2010: of 3. 3-4. 4. Brzezinski, Albright Policy 174-175 11-12. 39. 40. 43. Albright the American 12. 13. 36-37. 38-39. of Rompuy, Trichet, Relations: Relations Last 85: the Running Domination We Task Challenges 2001: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzm_R3YBgPg and Dilemmas. 1, European and Sovereign. http://www.bis.org/review/r100428b.pdf Think The Major Force Power (2009), Global Vin Speech Vin the April Task Global Weber, the http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084 Weber, or Report, Foreign World: for (PublicAffairs, Governance page Central 23, Speech Force Global Price The Upon the Political 2010: In 54 The Next In American 2005), is Policy Support Report, Accepting Bank, Leadership. Support at Worth Inside US the Awakening. Today, pages 2006), Challenges at President, Canadian 2005), It, of Interest the Story of the Arab Fairness Arab Keynote 49-54 Speech page Council EU page of Democracy: The Magazine, Democracy: International the for Presidency, 17 International 4 and New address at on the National the Foreign Next Accuracy York Carnegie Autumn Why by Why US Security BBC Council Times: Affairs, Relations, Mr and President, in and News, Jean-Claude 2005: Council: Reporting, How. December Dec and Council How. 85: 22 New 1, Montreal 16, (Council (2009); March 2008: and 16, ; in

4/4