Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Re: Egypt, the middle east and the rest of us.
It is extremely unsettling to watch the events unfolding in Egypt as I write this. Hosni Mubarak has certainly been a stabilizing force for the past while in the region, strong arm or not, and it is unfortunate that he and his colleagues are not able to see the writing on the wall and accede to the demands of the Egyptian people. It is clear that he and his colleagues are well past time and it is equally clear that the Egyptian people are well ready to take on some modifications to their 'democracy'.
What could have been a remarkable transition has now given the very radical elements that were apparently so feared, the opportunity, and a legitimate voice, to oppose any real or perceived repressive measures.
It is generally not a good thing to witness a military coup but at this instant, a military coup in Egypt may be the only short term way out of the situation. The army has, to outward appearances, been a moderating influence and has managed to place themselves between some of the more aggressive groups on the street.
The greater problem, however, is that this extreme discord in Egypt sets the tone throughout the middle east and, instead of encouraging rational and peaceful dialogue based on compromise to ease this transition, we have resistance and a violent reaction from the ruling party that encourages and legitimizes violent reaction from clearly repressed peoples.
If Mubarak could have found the way to step aside gracefully and started the transition process immediately he well could have diffused what is likely to become a firestorm throughout the region.
How this affects the rest of us is that it gives, to the organizers of such recent events in Canada as the G7 and the G20, justification to create a locked down, police state like, environment in such extremely peaceful cities as Toronto. For months preceding these conferences we were warned of 'violent elements' who would try to 'upset' the meetings. The instant any confrontational behaviour surfaced, we were immediately told that the massive police presence had been necessary to control the mobs. Eventually we find out that the few miscreants, less that 1-2% of the crowds in the streets, probably could have been controlled by a dozen police men with fire hoses.
And the whole event probably could have been diffused by legitimate, democratic forums for communication, led by statesmen/women. Unfortunately these people, our elected and/or appointed leaders, are engaged at virtually the same level of rhetoric. Rather than taking every opportunity to espouse true ideals, respect others whose ideals my appear to be at variance, and then engage in discourse and, when necessary, compromise to find solutions; we rather to choose to debate with hyperbole and live in fear. With police 'protection'. Another opportunity missed.
What could have been a remarkable transition has now given the very radical elements that were apparently so feared, the opportunity, and a legitimate voice, to oppose any real or perceived repressive measures.
It is generally not a good thing to witness a military coup but at this instant, a military coup in Egypt may be the only short term way out of the situation. The army has, to outward appearances, been a moderating influence and has managed to place themselves between some of the more aggressive groups on the street.
The greater problem, however, is that this extreme discord in Egypt sets the tone throughout the middle east and, instead of encouraging rational and peaceful dialogue based on compromise to ease this transition, we have resistance and a violent reaction from the ruling party that encourages and legitimizes violent reaction from clearly repressed peoples.
If Mubarak could have found the way to step aside gracefully and started the transition process immediately he well could have diffused what is likely to become a firestorm throughout the region.
How this affects the rest of us is that it gives, to the organizers of such recent events in Canada as the G7 and the G20, justification to create a locked down, police state like, environment in such extremely peaceful cities as Toronto. For months preceding these conferences we were warned of 'violent elements' who would try to 'upset' the meetings. The instant any confrontational behaviour surfaced, we were immediately told that the massive police presence had been necessary to control the mobs. Eventually we find out that the few miscreants, less that 1-2% of the crowds in the streets, probably could have been controlled by a dozen police men with fire hoses.
And the whole event probably could have been diffused by legitimate, democratic forums for communication, led by statesmen/women. Unfortunately these people, our elected and/or appointed leaders, are engaged at virtually the same level of rhetoric. Rather than taking every opportunity to espouse true ideals, respect others whose ideals my appear to be at variance, and then engage in discourse and, when necessary, compromise to find solutions; we rather to choose to debate with hyperbole and live in fear. With police 'protection'. Another opportunity missed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)