Arab Spring: ‘more blood is needed’

As the post-Arab Spring era has been cluttered with protests, mass killings and political unrest, a straightforward question crops to mind: Has the Arab Spring failed to blossom?

When revolutions began to unfold in North Africa and the Middle East, the world watched as regimes and leaders that had retained their stronghold for decades were toppled. Libya's Muammar Gaddafi ruled for 42 years, Hosni Mubarak led Egypt for around 30 years and Tunisia's Ben Ali for 23 years. After the overthrow of a whole generation of North African dictators, the future seemed bright.

But as Egyptians wrote down their names on their forearms in case they were killed during demonstrations, the international community became aware that the North African region had finally got rid of totalitarian regimes, only to enter into a political and security vacuum.

Arsalan Alshinawi and Valentina Cassar - who both lecture in International Relations at the University of Malta - believe this is just a phase of transition.

"How could a person imagine that by toppling a few leaders, in a system that did not function in hundreds of years, it would instantly solve all problems?" Alshinawi asks.

The Baghdad-born academic points out that revolutions have never lasted one or two months and that violence was always present in revolutionary changes in the history of mankind. He believes the European perspective on the issue is quite shortsighted.

"For how long did Europe have political stability? Just 60 to 70 years after World War II. Before this, there were centuries of violence. The French Revolution lasted a century; academics say the Russian Revolution is still incomplete.

The Arab Spring did not come to a halt; there may be periods of slowing down and others of 'acceleration'. I suffered violence and I'll be the first one to condemn it, but sadly, more blood is needed. Which successful revolution was only resolved with the words of Shakespeare or Voltaire?"

Valentina Cassar says that North African countries are undoubtedly in a state of transition, with the end result still unclear.

"Civil society is still in the process of becoming sufficiently organised and mobilised; Divergent and more established alliances are still coming to terms with how to function side-by-side. The events in Egypt over the past months have proved that even where we were hopeful that transitions would take place peacefully, challenges inevitably prevailed. Transitions towards political and social systems characterised by a pluralistic bottom-up approach, rather than an elitist iron-fist, will inevitably take time."

In recent weeks, the international community was under pressure to intervene and stop the atrocities and mass killing. But when asked whether this should take place, Cassar states it may harm long-term interests.

"The transition will only be successful if it evolves according to local needs and realities, and cannot be externally imposed or modelled according to systems that have functioned within different geopolitical realities.

The extent to which international community should intervene varies according to the context and the country. Whilst we may see an immediate need for intervention for the sake of the cessation of violence in the short term, we also need to keep in mind the long-term implications. Stability imposed and maintained from the outside is neither desirable nor sustainable," Cassar underlines.

The academics believe that prior to the revolutions, the regimes were already coming to an edge over worsening social conditions.

Unemployment was extremely high, while the education and health sectors were not functioning.

"The Arab Spring was a volcano that erupted after a long time. People lived in such deteriorating conditions that if you suffered a heart attack the hospital could only offer you paracetemol. The turmoil erupted and what was next? Chaos, since there was no hegemony.

With the toppling of dictatorships, the gates of hell opened; people became ungovernable. But this chaos was a dream five years ago!" Alshinawi says.

It was in this context of chaos that fundamentalism kicked in. In Egypt, the conflicts represent the culmination of tensions between two of the oldest and most established movements in the country: the military and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Muslim Brotherhood, which rose to power after winning several elections in the immediate post-Mubarak era, backs Morsi and had vowed to maintain protest camps until he was reinstated. They had rejected the military's proposal of constitutional amendment and new elections early next year.

While Islam continues to be very attractive to the electorate, the military remains one of the most powerful in the regions with unlimited budget.

According to both academics, the only way forward in the short term for Egypt relies on both parties' willingness to reach compromise.

"Hopefully people will become more mature and accept their differences. They should also try to minimise the impact and importance of ideology," they conclude.

While it is certain the Arab Spring is not over yet, it is still unclear whether political and economic stability might be achieved in the near future.