Evolution vs. revolution

Change is brought about essentially in two ways: revolution and evolution.

Which approach is more suitable to our part of the world at this point in time?

On the basis of both recent and older events that have unfolded in Arab countries since independence from European colonisation five to seven decades ago, one would say evolution.

Overall, revolutions have not succeeded in achieving their declared objectives: freedom, justice, democracy and development. This applies to nearly all revolutions that occurred in Arab countries prior to, during and after the so-called Arab Spring.

In some ways, in fact, revolutions made matters worse and were the cause of much of the chaos we have been witnessing for well-over half a century.

The 1952 Egyptian revolution, a military coup led by Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt and later his comrades, gave the impression that the Egyptian society would be transformed positively and that Egyptians would enjoy equality, freedom, democracy and prosperity.

Some of those objectives did materialise. Overall, however, the revolution failed to achieve all the declared objectives.

This is why Egyptians revolted in 2011 — peacefully at the time — against Nasser’s third successor Hosni Mubarak, and toppled him.

The revolutions, also military coups, that took place in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Libya met the same fate. They all ended in dictatorships that oppressed the people and divided society along class, ethnic or sectarian lines.

The early Arab-Spring days promised an end to oppressive regimes and the dawning of an era of freedom and democracy. Soon, however, hopes began to dim and now are almost entirely shattered.

The failure of the Arab Spring revolutions might be attributed to the foolish and destructive resort to militarism and violence.

Militarism breeds militarism and violence breeds violence. This is why Libya, Yemen, Syria and Iraq are in such a sorry state, with unruly parties and factions of all sorts wreaking havoc, turning them into dysfunctional states and gravely harming the people instead of protecting and advancing their rights.

The failure of post-independence revolutions and coups as well as of the Arab Spring is largely due, one would argue, to the false assumption that change can happen quickly.

There are things that can happen overnight. Given ample funds, technology can be imported and installed, roads and highways can be constructed, several development projects can be launched, etc.

But what about attitudes, opinions, beliefs, convictions, abilities, performance, skills, etc.?

One thing we learned quickly in the aftermath of the Arab Spring is that democracy cannot be implemented so easily.

Several mind-boggling issues and obstacles emerged: Are there viable political parties to fill the vacuum created by the departure of dictators?

Can these political parties compete for power honourably and civilly?

Will they respect the outcomes of ballot boxes? Is democracy simply winning the elections? Will those who win depart honourably if they lose in the following elections?

Will the minorities be protected? How does one deal with extremists and radicals who also want a share in power?

How does a society deal with ethnic groups, sects, geographic regions? What does one say and give to the poor and the unemployed?

One lesson learned from the tragic Arab Spring events in nearly all Arab countries is that change takes time and should be given time.

Creating viable political parties, participating effectively and civilly in the decision-making process, conducting political networking, involving all segments of society in the political process, respecting diversity, building institutions, eliminating poverty, providing job opportunities and many other necessary things take time.

In other words, evolution is crucial. This does not mean, however, that a country should be either neglectful of or too slow in bringing about reform, development and progress.

There are limits to patience, and there are clear indicators of whether a country is sincerely implementing reforms and development plans or not.

People can tell. And if they conclude that they are being bluffed, the reaction could be disastrous.

This is another lesson we should have learned from the Arab Spring.

Some may say, we need revolution and evolution at the same time. Well, this would be fine as long as the balance is maintained and as long as evolution does not become a mere slogan and is hijacked by the revolution, the way it was in the examples mentioned above.

Maybe Tunisia is an example of a revolution followed by efforts at evolution. This remains to be seen.

Our way out of the current quagmire, destruction and chaos — now that we have had our uprisings and revolutions — is evolution.

We need vision, wisdom, patience and a lot of hard work in order to collectively strive to achieve our common goals.