Regime change obviously, but why now? Egypt and Tunisia have had the same leaderships for decades so why is this all kicking off now?

Anywhere else going to kick off soon?

Last time I remember this sort of stuff happening all over the place was in the 60’s.

but why now?

Well for Egypt it’s obvious – because of Tunisia. Tunisia, because of unemployment, food inflation, etc, and enough is enough.

Anywhere else going to kick off soon?

High Street Croydon this Saturday, and every Saturday.

Tunisia, because of unemployment, food inflation, etc, and enough is enough.

Yep but el Presidente has been having them over for 20 years or so and all of those things have been in place all that time so whats changed?

ditto Egypt

Yep but el Presidente has been having them over for 20 years or so and all of those things have been in place all that time so whats changed?

What’s changed ? Well as you have already pointed out it’s 20 years now, and it wasn’t before.

Also maybe this : Tunisia: The WikiLeaks connection

ditto Egypt

I can’t see why the connection with Tunisia is so hard to understand – people need to feel confident before they attempt to overthrow their government, obviously events in Tunisia helped instil confidence in the Egyptians.

Egypt seems to have been set off by events in Tunisia, and Tunisia had seen constant increases in the price of food and fuel and the decline in peoples living standards and the fact that the ruling family were essentially rubbing their wealth in the rest of the populations face and using the police to protect them from the public, but the straw that seems to have broken the camels back was apparently the public self immolation of a just graduated student with no prospects for the future.
Yemen, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon all have mutterings of discontent as well. I guess with modern technology it’s harder for autocratic rulers to keep their populations in the dark and ignorant of the rights that other people take for granted.

Last time I remember this sort of stuff happening all over the place was in the 60’s.

Oh I don’t know, regime change seems to crop up quite regularly. It wasn’t that long ago when the USSR collapsed and half a dozen new(ish) Eastern European countries popped up. Then there’s a few of the African states which chop and change quite regularly too, Zimbabwe, south Africa and Sudan seem to have gone through similar stages ove the past decade or so.

I wouldn’t be surprised if something similar happened in India or China over the next decade or so. Unless power decentralisation can be carried out in a managed way. We’ll see.

Then there’s a few of the African states which chop and change quite regularly too

What??

Mugabe in Office since 1980 (since 1987 as president)

South Africa : A stable democratic republic since 1993

Sudan : Omar Il Bashir President since 1989

If having the same government for 20 years or so is chopping and changing we must be on the magic roundabout.

or China

Really ? I would have thought that the Chinese government was one of the most secure in the world…….as long as they keep delivering growth and increased standards of living to the people. Sure the rural areas are lagging behind the urban populations, but the government is seriously focusing on that now. Not only to keep them docile, but also because the global recession has made them realise the folly of over dependence on exports. They are now actively developing their internal markets – and spending on their infrastructures. And despite the recent uneven lopsided development of Chinese society, rural standards of living have increased – although at a slower rate.

I have never been a fan of the Chinese CP, far from it – I have always considered them to be a bunch of self-serving gangsters/thugs. But it would be completely dishonest of me to pretend that I would rather be a struggling worker in India, than a worker in China. The irony is that if China held multi party elections the CP would undoubtedly easily win. That’s not to say that multi party elections are the solution of course, as we in Britain know.

imo

not sure why you failed to get their point
Zimbabwe was Rhodeshia before [80 iirc) you know and has a few electoral issues that are ongoing.
S Africa had apartheid before being a democracy and Sudan is still in state of civil war and holding a referendum to split in half.
This is what you call stable then?

No wonder the recent events took you by surprise do you sometimes get “spooked” by your Reflection or shadow 😉

roughly;

from 1980, till 2000, egypt was producing twice as much oil as it needed, so it had 200,000+ barrels of oil to sell every day = a nice little earner.

this meant the government could subsidize things like food and energy.

in the last 10 years, oil production has fallen, oil consumption has risen.

it no longer has any oil to sell, so the government has run out of cash.

no more food/oil subsidies mean rising prices, means poor/hungry people. means regime change.

easy.

Worrying thing from “the west’s” point of view is that we have supported these dictatorships because they were/are pro western dictators and put that above the pretence of supporting democracy. The new regimes now may not be quite so pro western.

A lot of the oil producing states have exactly the same types of dictatorships and we have been supplying them with some fairly advanced military hardware over the past few years, if only we had seen this happen before so we could have known to avoid the possible pitfall… oh…..

(of course when I say we I mean our governments, I have had no personal involvement)

ernie – As you may have guessed, my knowledge of China, Chinese politics and history is pretty limited! I was thinking along the lines of large countries that have a tradition and history of ethnic differences/tribalism, currently being run from a centralised leadership. My (limited) knowledge of global politics and history suggests this isn’t a particularly stable, long term arrangement.

However, as I’ve learnt from my time here at STW there are people more learned than me and I’m happy to accept your suggestions as more accurate than my thoughts!

Berm – Junkyard I think explained my thinking with this:

not sure why you failed to get their point
Zimbabwe was Rhodeshia before [80 iirc) you know and has a few electoral issues that are ongoing.
S Africa had apartheid before being a democracy and Sudan is still in state of civil war and holding a referendum to split in half.
This is what you call stable then?

Also, wasn’t there a bit of a to-do in Somalia and the Ivory Coast recently? Anyways, my point was that power seems to change hands quite regularly and many nations/countries are often in a state of flux.

Tunisia had seen constant increases in the price of food and fuel and the decline in peoples living standards

That sounds rather familiar, have they got a coalition government too

we have been supplying them with some fairly advanced military hardware over the past few years

The US props up the Egyptian government with $1.3 billion of military aid every year. The tanks rolling in Egyptian cities today were made in the US, I doubt whether the significance of that is lost on the protesters.

And of course all the political/government decisions concerning who to sack, appoint, etc, are being taken in Washington, not Cairo – the regime in Egypt is in no position not to comply with the wishes of the White House.

I was watching a BBC News 24 report on Egypt last night, and every politician and commentator they interviewed was American, not one single one was Egyptian. Not even British for that matter.

I my point was that Egypt and Tunisia seem to have had their governments nailed on for a couple of decades and suddenly things have flared up with a popular uprising. Just wondered why. I don’t think events in Sudan, Zimbabwe, or South Africa are in any way similar currently, nor China for that matter, (where incidentally I agree completely with Ernie). Can’t see any signs of a popular revolution in Somalia or Ivory coast either for that matter.

ernie – As you may have guessed, my knowledge of China, Chinese politics and history is pretty limited!

Hey, I’m no expert………….that’s why I added “imo” at the bottom of my post.

Don’t let the fact that you’re not an “expert” on a subject, stop you from having your own opinion……..I know it doesn’t stop me 😉

Toppling Dear Leaders =>
vacuum =>
new “democratic” govt formed =>
new problems =>
fanaticism increases =>
new “democratic” govt toppled =>
new fanatical govt formed =>
religious wars start =>
all doomed =>
return to dark ages =>
The cycle completes.

😯

Put the whole of Africa back under colonial rule?,it was better run and safer then.

Edric 64 – Member

Put the whole of Africa back under colonial rule?,it was better run and safer then.

Unfortunately, those “elites” that lead those independence only want to proclaim themselves the Dear Leaders to enslave their own people once again. But then they called the process legitimate because they are of the same race. Any better? Probably worst. South Africa will go the same way once Mandela pass away.

🙄

For me one of the most ironic things with these regime changes is that here in the west our governments are all pro democracy whilst the change is happening, and all happy for the countries citizens, right up to the point where they vote for the “wrong” party and then feel the need to apply sanctions and start to engineer the overthrow of the democratically elected governments and install a more sympathetic regime. And then wonder why there embassies get attacked. 😯 🙁 🙄

So which democratically elected governments have we been engineering the overthrow of then?

So which democratically elected governments have we been engineering the overthrow of then?

If we means US and us,

Quite a few in Central and South America. Most of them in Central America.

Iran is another one.

Iran …. democratically elected?

And which particular south and central American countries?

Personally I’m not aware of any democratically elected government that “western governments” meaning ours is involved in engineering the overthrow of. Absolute load of cods

Incidentally are Jordon demonstrating the efficacy of having a monarch or is someone hanging onto power?

Iran …. democratically elected?

Personally I’m not aware of any democratically elected government that “western governments” meaning ours is involved in engineering the overthrow of. Absolute load of cods

Well since you mention it, how about Iran as an example ?

Quote :

“In 1951, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh was elected prime minister by a parliamentary vote. As prime minister, Mossadegh became enormously popular in Iran after he nationalized Iran’s petroleum industry and oil reserves. In response, the British government, headed by Winston Churchill, embargoed Iranian oil and successfully enlisted the United States to join in a plot to depose the democratically elected government of Mossadegh. In 1953 US President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized Operation Ajax. The operation was successful, and Mossadegh was arrested on 19 August 1953. The coup was the first time the US had openly overthrown an elected, civilian government.”

The US/Britain/the West had of course covertly overthrown elected civilian governments before, and went on to do so many times, too numerous to mention, again.

Actually one of the ways which Iran can limit the meddling of the US and Britain in its internal affairs, and the establishment of another hated Western backed directorship, is by restricting the amount of democracy there is.

Is that the the best example you can come up with, something from 60 years ago?

How about those bastard Frenchies invading all their neighbours eh? ….. what do you mean that was 945 years ago….its like yesterday to me.

Iran was a functioning democracy before we put the Shah in.

You know precious little about Central America! Try reading up on Nicaragua for a start.

Is that the the best example you can come up with, something from 60 years ago?

The best example ? Well I thought it was definitely the most fitting – since your asking about Iran.

I’ll remind you what you said, quote :

“Personally I’m not aware of any democratically elected government that “western governments” meaning ours is involved in engineering the overthrow of. Absolute load of cods”

See ?……no mention of “Personally I’m not aware of any democratically elected government in the last 30 years that “western governments” meaning ours is involved in engineering the overthrow of”

I’m sorry if you think 59 years ago is too long – you should have mentioned it. There are plenty of more recent examples, although now I can’t be arsed anymore 🙂

Here’s a nice page to get you started, Berm Bandit Wikipedia page

Nit picking again ernie?

I believe the use of the words “is involved in” indicates current affairs rather than ancient history. We were involved in the slave trade, doesn’t mean we still are, neither by the same token does the fact that we were instrumental in stopping it mean that we have entirely clean hands in that respect. These our historical events that have brought us to where we are now. Bit like what happened in Iran during the cold war frankly.

Regarding Nicagura, I suspect that the fact that the sandinistas were trained and funded by Cuba and the USSR at the height of the cold war and the location of the country on the southern doorstep of the USA wouldn’t have appeared even slightly provocative at the time? Obviously both Cuba and the USSR have had a long record of supporting free and fair elections without any anticipation of reward or favour …….right? And I presume the acknowledgement by of all people, GDubya, of the 2007 election result finally putting that dispute to bed would mean that matter is obviously still current?

There are many many examples, BB. Try looking into it yourself. Basically, anywhere that gets a government that nationalises major assets and takes away profitability from, for example, major oil companies typically gets some level of destabilising treatment from the US, and from us. Like Iran. Like Venezuela. Like lots of others.

Before hair-splitting commences, obviously no political situation is 100% black and white. But the fact remains that there are dozens and dozens of examples of double standards and illegal interference.

Nit picking again ernie?

LOL says the man who claims that Iran was “too long ago” ! 😀

You asked for an example and you got one. You should have mentioned the precise time span if it is so important to you.

For more recent examples, look at all the military dictatorships which overthrew elected governments in Latin America – none of those would have been possible without US approval and involvement – they simply would have failed. Operations were generally directed from the US embassies in those countries.

And btw, you can find all the “excuses” you want to claim that it was justified – Cuba, the USSR, etc, but remember, you had said that it had never happened !

And btw Berm Bandit, the US even had/has a special school in which the CIA trains Latin American soldiers and coppers to overthrow their elected governments, it’s the “School of the Americas”

Although they changed its name a while back (because they don’t do that sort of stuff anymore 😉 )

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Hemisphere_Institute_for_Security_Cooperation

Ive seen “Clear and Present Danger” too 🙂

And btw, you can find all the “excuses” you want to claim that it was justified – Cuba, the USSR, etc, but remember, you had said that it had never happened !

Actually Ernie, I what I asked was

So which democratically elected governments have we been engineering the overthrow of then?

To date I’ve been told a whole lot about what the US gets up to and something about Winston Churchill directing the US to overthrow the government in Iran 60 years ago.

As the OP had to hastily emphasise his point is only valid if you take it to mean

If we means US and us,

, or taken another way perhaps the US does, but there is no current evidence that we, ie GB inc does it. Mind you if you listened to the twaddle on here, you would expect us (the Brits) to trade solely with countries that have heartily pissed us off.

And btw, you can find all the “excuses” you want to claim that it was justified – Cuba, the USSR, etc, but remember, you had said that it had never happened !

oh yeah and btw no I didn’t, what I was suggesting was that there is little evidence to support the supposition that the original political activity in 1960’s Nicaragua was “free and fair”. In fact the weight of evidence is that it was heavily funded and manipulated by the Cubans/Russians in precisely the way the Op is suggesting that the greater “we” do. That being the case and bearing in mind that my question was regarding democratically elected governments hows that for you misintepreting so you can nit pick??

I’m off home now, so please don’t misinteprete the forthcoming silence for anything other than what it is eh? 😉

Berm Bandit – you challenged Bazz’s assertion that “in the west our governments apply sanctions and start to engineer the overthrow of the democratically elected governments and install a more sympathetic regime”, by claiming that we had never done such a thing. He was right and you were wrong – we have.

You are now attempting to “nit pick” by claiming that it wasn’t us in the West, but the US.

Yes, unlike 60 years ago when Britain still had empire, Britain generally now leaves most of that sort of work to its more powerful ally the US. Britain does however provide crucial and vital support, included intelligence gathering which is highly instrumental in the success of the operations – especially in regions which were formerly part of the British empire. As well as training of the military, political advise, support in UN for US actions, money, international recognition, naval support, bases, etc.

Occasionally, if a country is small, and Britain has a very strong historical connection with it, it will undertake most of the operations itself, as an example British Guiana :

In 1953 Britain overthrew the democratically elected government in British Guiana

Such action is rare however, as the US doesn’t generally like other countries taking a leading role – a subsequent coup in 1963 in British Guiana, had much more US involvement.

But the fact that we are happy for the US to do most of the dirty work, does not in any way deny British complicity.

Obviously we don’t undertake these things with our red coats on, a cavalry charge and embedded sky news reporters,it tends to be a bit sneaky and underhand. The currently democratically elected government of Palestine has sanctions against it, which whilst it may be claimed is because of there “terrorist” background the over all aim is to destabilise it, we may find out in another 20 or so years some of what MI6 and CIA were up to.

And before it’s mentioned i only wrote terrorist like that because as the saying goes, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, i do not condone some of the acts of Hamas (or Israel for that matter), but i do support the right of people to determine their own leadership by democratic vote free from outside interference.

You are now attempting to “nit pick” by claiming that it wasn’t us in the West, but the US.

Wrong again Ernie, what I am suggesting is that the view is very “Cold War” and out of date especially in respect of the UK. I really don’t have an insight into what the US state department gets up to so can’t comment except where there is a historical perspective. I also think that people do tend to rubbish our country and what we do rather too easily. Obviously our government acts in what it believes to be our national best interest, but then so does every other government in the world. What the hell do you expect?

Obviously our government acts in what it believes to be our national best interest, but then so does every other government in the world. What the hell do you expect?

So now you have gone from denying that the West has ever “engineered” the overthrow of any democratic government anywhere, to trying to somehow justifying it on the grounds of “our national best interest”.

Well just like you were wrong to claim that the West had never engineered the overthrow of any democratic government, you are wrong to claim that “our government” only ever acts in the nation’s best interest.

Expanding and protecting British interests isn’t designed to benefit ordinary British people you know – only the gullible and hopeless naive would think that.

Britain at one time was the most powerful and wealthiest nation on earth, that didn’t however translate into any meaningful benefit for its people. For example, in the 1840s Britain had complete global sea supremacy, she had a significant and continuously expanding global empire. The government of the day was, you could say, committed to “Britain’s national best interest”.

However, for the overwhelming majority of the British people life was a short miserable existence of unending toil and wretched abject poverty – only a tiny minority which made up the ruling classes actually benefited from Britain’s great power and wealth.

In fact life for an average Englishman, was shorter and more miserable, than the life of a slave in the 1840s (slaves were a prized possession) Urban and rural life expectancy in England, and I’m talking about lower and middle classes not upper classes, was less than 25 years. A slave in the Southern United States could expect to live until about the age of 30.

And exactly the same self-evident truths apply today. Our recent military adventures in Iraq might well have increased Britain’s global influence, but that has not translated into any meaningful rewards for the overwhelming majority of British people. Our standard of living has not increased one iota as a result of our invasion of Iraq, despite the fact that it has undoubtedly brought vastly increased profits to US and British companies. We paid for the war – they reaped the rewards.

Imperialism and neocolonialism is only designed to benefit the ruling classes. If the people benefit at all, then it is by accident rather than design. Governments might well beat the patriotic drum, but it is absurd to suggest that classes with diametrically opposed interests should share a common purpose – rarely does that happen. One notable exception was 1939 when both the ruling class and the people shared an obvious common purpose – to repel a foreign invasion. But that is clearly the exception, rather than the rule.