Reflections upon rioting because of American anti-Islamic video

Dear readers

I have been slow to respond to the riots in response to a disrespectful video about the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) affecting parts of the Muslim World, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan. I needed time to think about it.

Mostly I feel sad. I feel sad that a Coptic Christian would embarass his group-- and Christians worldwide-- by producing such garbage. For those of us people of the book who reject this nonsense, I extend my apologies: this video does not represent us.  I tried to watch the trailer, and it was really painful for me that someone could be so ignorant, and so hateful.

Of course, holding the US Government responsible for the acts of a private citizen also strikes me as unusual, and that is what the rioters are essentially doing by attacking embassies and affiliated centers. Of course, it is true that I was raised in the US. It is no secret that I advocate free speech. That being said, I have noted in this blog and elsewhere that that is a global value, enshrined by the United Nations, and with roots in the great philosophers of the world, including those of the enlightenment.

I have also expressed my admiration for aspects of Islam, as well as the rich, multi-cultural melange which has historically been the Arab World. I am worried that we are losing this culture's history of tolerance and understanding as Wahabis and Salafis attack Christians, Sufis, Shiites, and anyone whose views do not align perfectly with theirs.

I think that Salman Rushdie speaks for me in this piece.

Salman Rushdie Interview with Steve Inskeep, September 17, 2012

For more thoughts, Jeffrey Fleishman is a genius. What's Next in the Arab World

I also thought that since everyone is worried and depressed you might enjoy this.

"Muslim Rage" Explodes on Twitter, but in a funny way

 Praying for peace, understanding and tolerance. . . 

~WMB 

Liberated Libya

Dear readers

Liberation is breaking out all over. I am thankful for the positive outcomes in Tunisia's election. For more detailed coverage, I refer you to The Arabist. A Personal Note on Tunisia's Elections, The Arabist.  But, I have limited time and energy, so will keep my focus on things closer to home.

Presciently, Democracy Now had reported before Qadaffi's death that Qadaffi was particularly threatened by Islamists, and ordered them detained, tortured, and killed. Nermeen Shaikh, Anjali Kamat, and Amy Goodman discussed the fact that Islamists will be free to speak under the new government.

Democracy Now also interviewed Mahmood Mamdani, of Uganda, who I think is a genius. He noted that Libya is more divided than neighboring Tunisia and Egypt. He commented on the increasingly military focused approach of the West towards Africa. Concerns were expressed by both Kamat and Mamdani that the NATO powers would try to extract concessions from the Libyans, with the potential for turning Libya into another Iraq.

Overall, DN has great Libya coverage. Here is a taste.

Muammar Ghadafi killed in Libya as Interim Government Seizes Last Stronghold. Democracy Now.

Democracy Now generally has great coverage of a lot of things, and even the New York Times has noticed.

A Grassroots Struggle Gives Voice to Struggles, New York Times.

Meanwhile, not everyone is happy about Qadaffi's death. Qadaffi was particularly close with Uganda. Many Africans believe that the west only intervened in Libya to gain access to the oil. Nigerian Muslims also mourned Qadaffi's demise, and some leaders suggested retaliation was possible. Qadaffi cultivated many African allies, and was a strong supporter of the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa. South African mercenaries may have been involved in helping Qadaffi escape.

Josh Kron, Many in Sub-Saharan Africa Mourn Qadaffi's Death, The New York Times.

Gadaffi's SA Soldiers, the New Age.

Meanwhile, the leaders of Libya's transitional government, including Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, the chairman of the Transitional National Council, has vowed that the new government will be based on Islamic tenets. Islamic banks will be established, and Libyan men can marry more than one wife now. (Hurrah for them).  The New York Times characterizes this move as "a new piety."

Adam Nossiter, and Kareem Fahim, Revolution Won, Top Libyan Official Vows a New and More Pious State, The New York Times.

In my view, this statement in and of itself is not that controversial, as elements of Sharia are present in most countries, including Egypt. I have written many posts on this, including this one Initial Thoughts on Shariah Law and Women. The issue is whether having law based on Islamic tenets will result in discrimination against those who are not Islamic, such as Jews, Christians and Bahai. This is, in my opinion, a matter of both interpretation and enforcement. Has the US and NATO bet on the wrong horse again? Taliban anyone?

Sorry to be a contrarion, but I am one of those who is a bit concerned that Qadaffi was captured alive, and then executed. A better approach would have been to put him on trial, like Saddam Hussein or Hosni Mubarak. The right to a fair trial is, after all, one of the cornerstones of democracy.

Max Fisher, Qaddafi was captured alive, who killed him? The Atlantic. 

I was appalled by Secretary Clinton's comments on Qadaffi's demise. Have some, gravitas Madame Secretary. Death is not a game.

We Came, We Saw, He Died.

WMB

Thoughts (some humorous, some serious) on the death of Qadaffi

Of course, by now, various news agencies have verified that Colonel Muammar El-Qaddafi is dead, killed in his home town of Sirte. 

I am not sure what I am feeling right now. Here are some random thoughts on his demise. 

Has any dictator inspired so many dilemmas about how to spell his name? Ghadafi, Qadafi, Qadaffi, Ghadaffi, two dds or one? two f's or one? Q, G or K? the list goes on and on. I have been thinking at night, before I fall asleep, why more people do not go for the straight phonetic of Kadaphee?

Further, you have to congratulate the man on his audacity to make everyone read his "Green Book." The allusions to Mao are as inescapable, as Qaddafi's arrogance was spectacular. 

From a political perspective, the most important aspect of The Big Q's death is that the rebels can now officially establish a transitional government and officially announce the country's liberation, and schedule elections. Of course, scheduling elections in Egypt has been harder than it sounds.

Some, such as Robert Grenier, suggest that Qaddafi's demise signals the end of Nasserist Arab nationalism. This is an interesting thought. I think a more expansive idea might be that nationalism itself is in its end days. Meanwhile, regionalism is an increasingly more important concept, recalling the Ottoman empire, which encompassed Libya, Tunisia and Morocco on its very periphery. It is interesting that in a way Qaddafi was important to actually helping found Libya as a distinct nation.

Many in Sub-Saharan Africa are mourning Qaddafi's death. He was very generous with African countries, building mosques, hotels, and telecommunications companies. Honestly, I cannot help but be impressed at how long he kept the rebels on the run, despite their strong support from NATO. You have to admire the Q man's tenacity. Okay, maybe you do not, but I am impressed at how long he hung in there.

The real question for the new Libya is who are the rebels?

Furthermore, given that we here in Egypt are struggling to get our first democratic election off the ground, the road ahead for Libya may not be as easy as it looks right now, and jubilation may be premature.

However, as I always tell my friends, when you are happy, laugh out loud, and when you are sad, let those salty tears run down your face. Feel what you are feeling, because who knows what the next moment will bring?

Selected Sources

Muammar Gaddafi killed as Sirte falls, Al Jazeera.net
Gaddafi: Death of an era, dawn of an era, Al Jazeera.net
Violent End to an Era as Qaddafi Dies in Libya, New York Times

Is Libya Free Yet?

Photo Credit: AFP. Libyan rebels fight off Qadaffi.

Well,

Tripoli seems to be controlled by the rebels, but we still have not found Qadaffi. Hard to know what is going on.

According to the New York Times, "Aug. 31, 2011 Rebel fighters claimed to have cornered Colonel Qaddafi the desert town of Bani Walid, about 150 miles from Tripoli. Rebel leaders confirmed reports that a Qaddafi son, Saadi el-Qaddafi, had offered to negotiate a coalition government, but that the rebels rejected that out of hand. Another Qaddafi son, Khamis, was reported killed."

Also according to the NYT, The CIA was apparently very cozy with the Libyan intelligence unit. Charmingly, the American government would send terrorism suspects to Libya for questioning, despite the country's reputation for torture. This was part of the US rendition program.  Nice to know what the US government is spending my taxpayer money on . . .. James Bond's friends at the British MI-6 also were pretty lovey dovey with the Libyans, and the Americans even assisted Qadaffi with speechwriting. Files Note Close CIA Ties to Qadaffi Spy Unit . 

Egypt is prepared to help Libya as much as it can, according to Al Masry Al Youm. Libyans (which ones?) have reportedly asked Egypt's assistance in the fields of education, health and training. Further, Egypt's government (such as it is, or is not) says that Egyptian companies have a chance to share in Egypt's reconstruction.(Of course, everyone wants to get their hands on those tasty Libyan oil fields).

Also according to Al Masry Al Youm, as many as 100,000 have fled Libya streaming into Egypt and Tunisia, and exacerbating the humanitarian crisis. Refugees include Tunisians, Libyans, Chinese, Asians. There are almost certainly some Black Africans in there somewhere, but it was not in the news report I read.

According to Democracy Now, Col. Qadaffi's main compound has been captured by the rebels, however, the whereabouts of the new "desert fox" are unknown. At least he is keeping them guessing. I was soooo dissapointed by Saddam Hussein cowering in a pit. Keep the romance alive, Muammar! Britain may unfreeze Libya's assets to assist the National Transitional Council. Professor Gilbert Achar of SOAS says no one really knows who the Libyan rebels are. 

Human Rights Watch has asked that the Libya Contact Group put human rights at the top of the agenda in discussions with Libya's National Transitional Council. HRW also has asked that all political, ethnic and cultural groups should be included in building the new Libyan state. HRW: Put Rights at Top of Agenda 

Well, Ramadan is over folks. It is on.. . .

WMB. 

Strange Days

Map credit, Al Jazeera

Dear readers

Of course, it is a relief to know the end of the Libyan civil war is near. The Libyan rebels seem to have occupied the capital, which means the war is likely to end soon.

A few notes of caution. Qadaffi has said he will fight to the end. This could drag on for a period.

Further, I was nonplussed by the appearance of Saif Al Islam. It makes the rebels seem unreliable if they (and the ICC) claim to have three Qadaffi scions in custody, and then one appears.

Finally, who are the rebels? Are they being supported by the CIA or even scarier, Saudi Arabia or Al Qaeda, or are they in fact legitimate freedom fighters? I hope that the rebels in Libya are secular civilians who support democracy and are not racist or tribal. (See tribal map above) But time will tell.

As I have learned the hard way from studying African politics, the rebels are not always the good guys, i.e. Renamo in Mozambique. Worse still rebels can come in well, and become dictators, i.e. Mugabe in Zimbabwe.

Is Qadaffi worse than Bashir in Syria? Why is the US supporting Libya while ignoring the bloody and autocratic crackdown in Syria. Is it the oil? Will Saif asl Islam try to make a coalition with Islamists that will push Libya, secular under Qadaffi, towards a Wahabi future.

Here is some more reading

R2P Nato lies!
http://crossedcrocodiles.wordpress.com/2011/08/13/r2p-nato-too-lie/

Snipers Fight on at Qadaffi's compound
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/08/2011824688335330.html

Al Azhar's grand sheikh congratulates Libyans
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/489110

Don't Call Us Rebels
http://blogs.aljazeera.net/africa/2011/07/08/dont-call-us-rebels-0

Libya's uncertain future
http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/libyas-uncertain-future

Libya Update August 20, 2011

According to the New York Times, the hold of Colonel Qadaffi on Tripoli is weakening. Tripoli's residents believe Qadaffi's departure is imminent. Zawiyah, just 30 miles west of Tripoli has been captured by the rebels. The rebels have also captured Gharyan. Roads supplying Tripoli are closed. There was fierce fighting yesterday in Zlitan. Qadaffi has vowed to fight to the end.

Al Jazeera reports that Libyan rebels have taken control of Brega. There are conflicting reports about whether rebels control oil facilities. The fighting has been fierce and close. 50 of Qadaffi's forces were killed in the fighting. The rebel fighters took heavy losses.

I pray to the God of Abraham that war ends soon, and that Libya finds peace.

Libya Update August 19, 2011

The Washington Post reports that the International Organization for Migration is evacuating large numbers of Egyptians and journalists from Tripoli.

Rebels have claimed control of the road from Tripoli to the Tunisian border. The Rebels are advancing on the capital of Tripoli. The end of the war may be near.

WMB

Protecting the Internet from Dictators (The Libyan Case)

This piece was published on July 31, 2011 in Al Masry Al Youm

Find it at www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/482164

On January 27th, the Egyptian government shocked the world when it cut off Internet connectivity and telephony from the outside into Egypt with the goal of repressing political activism. The Egyptian case highlights some important technical and political considerations regarding ensuring, enabling or even expanding Internet access under attack by authoritarian regimes in crisis.

In Egypt, Mubarak was completely successful in shutting off multiple means of communication for nearly a week. Yet, after Mubarak’s fall, the Internet, Facebook, Twitter and other social media have become vibrant tools for organizing and reporting, both inside and outside the country. By contrast, Libya represents the worst case scenario of a communications configuration, where the government has nearly full control over means of communication। Yet, the rebels in Libya have— through grit, ingenuity, and support from the private sector—retained some communications access throughout a punishing war.

Colonel Muammar El Qaddafi came to power in the oil rich nation of Libya forty years ago in a military coup. Demonstrations in Libya against the Qaddafi government began in February, 2011, as part of the wave of protest sweeping the Arab world. On February 22, Qaddafi initiated an armed crackdown which deteriorated into civil war. Activists on the Internet announced a “day of rage,” in the capital Tripoli, echoing Egypt’s revolutionaries.

Shortly after the Libyan demonstrations started, Internet access and cellphone access deteriorated sharply. Colonel Qaddafi mimicked Mubarak’s actions, creating an information blackout in Tripoli. Qaddafi controlled the movements of foreign journalists, shut down mobile phones and the Internet, and interfered with television transmissions. By late February, even the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and Al Jazeera were experiencing difficulties in communicating effectively with Libya.

Protesters and journalists have been limited in large part to satellite phones to get news and information out of the country. Nonetheless, Libyana, one of the country’s two main mobile phone providers, was somehow able to provide free telephone service inside the country throughout the uprising. According to Evan Hill of Al Jazeera, Qaddafi shut down the other provider, Al-Madar and further ordered the monopoly telecommunications company to switch off landline access and physically cut Libya’s backbone fiber optic cable, which connected the phone and Internet in the eastern part of the country to those in the western part of the country .

Libyana was able to stay online in the entire country because it was not centralized and had key infrastructure and equipment in rebel-held Benghazi. Users had difficulty calling out of the country, and calls often disconnected, but calls could be made, and that, by itself was a huge accomplishment. The situation was alleviated somewhat when an Etilsalat team arrived from the UAE with a large satellite dish, a modem, routers and other equipment, and was able to connect Libyana to the rest of the world.

What technological and policy lessons can be learned from the Libyan case? From a technological standpoint, Libya teaches us that activists in countries likely to experience similar problems should invest in “redundancy” as well as “distribution।” Redundancy is an information concept which emphasizes building multiple lines of communication, should one line fail. Distribution is the idea that independent means of communication should be used, and should be distributed throughout multiple users—preferably in different sectors— not centralized.

Further, Egypt, Syria and Libya all have one Internet gateway each, controlled by the government-owned telecommunications company। These centralized systems of control are extremely vulnerable to being shut down by dictators. To the extent that the system remained resilient in Libya, it did so because infrastructure was geographically distributed in areas out of control of the main government. Increased connectivity was gained by the use of VSATs (Very Small Aperture Terminals, like satellite dishes), although they provided limited bandwidth. Finally, the private sector bravely stepped in, in the form of Libyana and Etilsalat, to provide connectivity despite a military threat from Qaddafi.

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should secure satellite links, or find other means to create non-vulnerable gateways। Further, ISPs must decide at what point they choose to cooperate with government repression, and at what point they resist. Eventually, even the most resistant provider eventually complied in Egypt. Building a more distributed communications network creates a network less vulnerable to errors and attacks and less easy to manipulate by abuse of authority. It will allow ISPs more opportunities to act independently and resist.

The January 25th Revolution has powerfully demonstrated that social networks and the Internet can play a powerful role in empowering people and promoting democracy. Yet, the January 27th shutdown also demonstrates the fragility of access, particularly in countries with high governmental control. Alternative private sector gateways should be developed in countries like Egypt so that the government no longer has the power to shut down the only gateway. In addition, current efforts to secure routing should be informed by the range of technologies used to isolate and destroy Internet connectivity. By focusing on building more survivable and reliable communications systems, emerging democracies can help secure a free technological future.

Update on Libyan Crisis Week of June 1, 2011

Libyan Refugee Camp. Photo Credit, AP. From Business Insider.

250,000 workers have fled Libya since the start of the civil unrest and have temporarily relocated to a refugee camp. Here a man looks for his belongings scattered by a sandstorm

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/photos-libyan-refugee-crisis-2011-3#250000-workers-have-fled-libya-since-the-start-of-the-civil-unrest-and-have-temporarily-relocated-to-a-refugee-camp-here-a-man-looks-for-his-belongings-scattered-by-a-sandstorm-2#ixzz1OCaCXNMP

Dear readers

I apologize I have been remiss in updating this page. I went on a much needed family vacation. Anyway, I will do my best to get back on top of the Libyan situation.


Last updated, 5:33 p.m. June 6, 2011

According to the NYT "As NATO airplanes and attack helicopters struck fresh targets in Tripoli and the oil port of Brega on Sunday, senior British and American officials said there was no way of knowing how long it might take for the rebellion against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi — already in its fourth month, and the third month of NATO airstrikes — to drive him from power"
According to Democracy Now, NATO continues to bomb Tripoli, and carried out at least 10 airstrikes on June 3, 2011 alone. Rape victim, Oman OBeidi stunned the world and brought approbation against the Qaddafi regime by reporting her rape by Libyan forces to western reporters gathered in a tourist hotel in Tripoli. She had fled to Qatar, but has been deported by the Qatari government to the rebel held east of Libya.

Refugees attempting to flee Libya were injured when their boat capsized off of the Tunisian Coast. 850 passengers were crowded onto a 100 foot fishing vessel. The fishing vessel, the Wave, set off from Tripoli, Libya, around noon last Friday, Colonel Baili said, and was carrying migrants from the African nations of Mali, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast and Morocco as well as from Pakistan and Bangladesh. (NYT June 2, 2011). 

In talks with South African President Jacob Zuma, Qadaffi emphasized he has no intention of leaving Libya. [Note, to his credit, Qadaffi was a steadfast supporter of the anti-apartheid movement, hence the friendly relations with SA] The meeting was held in Tripoli. Qadaffi says that NATO bombing has claimed the lives of his son and granchildren, although these reports cannot be independently verified.

Mr. Zuma also had visited with Colonel Qaddafi in early April, trying to present an African “roadmap” for an end to the conflict between Qaddafi loyalists and the antigovernment opposition based in the eastern Libyan city of Benghazi. The plan calls for an immediate cease fire, a halt to the NATO bombings, and negotiations between the Qaddafi government and the rebels. (NYT May 31, 2011)

NATO suspended bombing for 72 hours to allow the talks with Zuma to proceed. NATO resumed its airstrikes on Tripoli after dusk on Tuesday. Qadaffi's spokesperson, Moussa Ibrahim, has bluntly stated "We will never give in." [I think it is interesting that Qadaffi is willing to let his country be bombed into oblivion rather than surrender. What does this tell us about culture, politics, or Qadaffi's mental health?]

The increasingly shrill words appeared to reflect a darkening sense of isolation, brought on by 10 weeks of NATO bombing, rebel advances in the east, Western leaders’ recent reaffirmation of demands for Colonel Qaddafi to quit, and the fact that Russia, an old ally of Libya, joined those demands last week. Also, prosecutors at the International Criminal Court announced two weeks ago that they would seek war crimes indictments against Colonel Qaddafi and a son, Seif al-Islam el-Qaddafi, narrowing the destinations the Libyan leader might choose if forced into exile. (NYT, May 31, 2011)

More soon. Prayers for the Libyan people. WMB

Updated Facts on Libyan Crisis: Week of May 1, 2011

May 2, 2011

According to Al Jazeera, the UN Staff left Tripoli after a mob attack. Western embassies and UN offices have been targeted after a NATO bombing reportedly killed Ghadaffi's son and grandchildren. Al Jazeera also reports that doubt has been cast on the claim that Ghadaffi's son has been killed. NATO says that it is stepping up attack is on Libyan targets. NATO plans to step up attacks on the palaces, headquarters, and communications centers that Ghadaffi uses to maintain his grip on power in Libya. (New York Times).

NATO officials and western leaders are defending the increasingly aggressive air strikes in Libya after the Libyan government said one barrage had killed four members of Ghadaffi's family. The US, British, and Italian embassies were attacked and burnt by mobs in the Tripoli. (Washington Post) Ghadaffi, tanks shelled Misurata, amid fears that Ghadaffi will use chemical weapons against NATO and Libyan rebels (Washington Post).


May 1, 2011.

NYT reports that three of MG's grandchildren were killed. Cannot believe that Ghadaffi's grandchildren were killed. I am really sad about that. I was telling a friend that I hoped Ghadaffi had the sense to move his grandchildren to somewhere safe. They are just children. Of course, the same can be said for children killed by his forces fighting the rebels. I mourn for them as well. I am a mother and I am soft-hearted, what can I say. On that topic, here is what has happened to rebel families according to NYT:

     "The pro-Qaddafi forces resumed shelling and firing rockets into the city in the morning and again late at night. At least 15 people were reported killed, including at least five rebel fighters, an old man who was struck by shrapnel, and a young father of four children.  The young man’s children and his wife were all wounded. They huddled at a Red Crescent clinic, unaware he was dead. “It is not easy to tell them,” said Absalom Essid, who stood at the door to the room where the dead man’s wife was being treated.   At another clinic, the wounded included a baby girl who appeared to be about 10 months old and suffered a broken leg. She was teary-eyed with a pacifier in her mouth as doctors prepared to set the bone."

Al Jazeera reports that the Libyan government announced the death of Ghadaffi's youngest son, Seif al-arab Ghadaffi, in an airstrike. At least one missle fired by NATO hit the Ghadaffi Tripoli home in the al Garghour neighborhood. (Note to self, are they suicidal? I am sure they are not living there, unless MG totally insane).

It does seem NATO's mission has crept, and that it no longer has anything to do with protecting civilians. I agree with Libya Spokesman Ibrahim Moussa on this.

According to the NYT, (link here)

     "Earlier Saturday, NATO officials had rejected an offer by Colonel Qaddafi to call a cease-fire and negotiate as false. The proposal was delivered in a rambling and often defiant speech, broadcast over Libyan state television, in which Colonel Qaddafi insisted he would never leave Libya."

WMB

Back in the MASR

Dear readers

I have been gone for ten days for some much needed rest and relaxation. The last few months have been completely exhilarating, and also completely exhausting. I spent some time in the US, tending to my garden, sipping on mint juleps, and enjoying time with my husband.

Back here in Egypt, the weather is perfect, 75 degrees farenheit, sunny and perfectly dry. The grass is green, and I awoke to birdsong. The sky is not quite blue, it has a tinge of grey in it, and the clouds are not distinct, but wispily intermingled in the background.

The weather has an edge to it, as if the sky is saying "enjoy this bout of spring, it won't last long." The coming months will be fiercely hot.

In my neighborhood I noticed for the first time that some of the palm trees in El Rehab are fake. Large metal contraptions with artificial palm fronds, topped by radio transmitters of some sort. I wonder what their function is?

Things are fairly quiet in Egypt politically, compared to weeks gone by. There is discussion of transferring Mubarak to a military hospital. The Libyan civil war rages on, with heavy fighting in Misurata and Libya's western mountains. Muslim Brotherhood members believe they are under attack by Islamophobes.  Mohammed Hassan argues that "He said the media is spiralling out of control, adding that there should be a kind of media freedom that respects the teachings of Islam." A 3400 year old statue of Amenhotep of King Amenhotep III has been discovered  in Luxor, as well as a black granite statue of the goddess Sekmet. Popular committees from around Egypt met in a demonstration in Tahrir Square on Friday afternoon in an attempt to inaugurate a prolonged coordinated effort.

While I was in the US, my husband remarked that I was spending money like there was no tomorrow. Perhaps because in the past few months, it has often felt that way. WMB

Updated Facts on Libyan Crisis: Week of April 11, 2011

Dear readers

This update is culled from Al Jazeera, the New York Times, the Washington Post and Democracy Now. WMB

Gaddafi accepted the African Union's road map for peace, which calls for an immediate cease fire, and a dialogue with the opposition about the reform. The rebels said that the only thing that will satisfy them is the ouster of Gaddafi and his family. The African Union is not thought to be neutral because it is packed with Gaddaffi allies. (Washington Post, 4.10.11)

The Libya contact group has met in Qatar. The Libyan rebels are seeking international recognition. They are to tell world powers at a meeting in the Qatari capital Doha that Gadadafi's removal from power is the only way out of their country's deepening crisis. (Al Jazeera 4.12.11) Libyan rebels offensives on Misurata. Widespread fighting continues as NATO comes under pressure to step up its military campaign against Gaddafi's forces.  Qatar has delivered oil products to Benghazi. The gulf state also confirms it has marketed one million barrels of Libyan crude oil on behalf of rebels. (Al Jazeera 4.12.11)  Misurata is under siege by Gaddafi's forces. (Al Jazeera 4.12.11) France and Britain want NATO to fight harder against Gaddafi's forces (Washington Post, 4.12.11)

A truce plan for Libya is rejected by the rebels (NYT, 4.13.11)  Rebel groups in Libya have rejected an African poposal to end the fighting unless leaders Muammar Gaddafi agreed to leave office immediately. Ali Suleiman Aujali, the former Libyan ambassador to the US argues that Libyans cannot accept Gaddaffi or his family. (Democracy Now, 4.12.12)

Updated Post on Facts of Libyan Crisis: Week of April 3, 2011

Dear readers


Sorry for the hiatus on news reporting. I went to Kenya to pick up my children this weekend. I evacuated them from Egypt during the Revolution. So we are all back in a New Egypt. Okay, back to work! WMB


Updated April 9, 2011, 11:21 p.m. Cairo time. 


There is the possibility that Libya will be partitioned as war continues into a stalemate. 


http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/392903


Updated April 8, 2011, 12:03 p.m. Cairo time. For previous updates, click here . 


According to Democracy Now, Libyan rebels accuse NATO of killing rebels in air strikes near town of Brega. Rebel leaders have sharply criticized NATO of failing to stop advance of Qadaffi. {editors, note, surprised what a big difference between NATO and US, and also surprised at how strong Qadaffi is.} Four journalists, including two Americans, have been detained in Libya.


April 5th
Democracy Now reports the following:  The FBI has begun questioning Libyans and Libyan Americans living in the US. Libyan Rebels have rejected a proposal that would depose Qaddafi but leave one of his sons in power (Seif Al Islam el-Qaddafi). Rebels are beginning to export oil to fund their operations. Libya is Africa's third largest oil producer. Mohammed Nabous, a Libyan citizen journalist in Benghazi was shot and killed Saturday morning. According to the New York Times,  "Forces loyal to Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi battered rebel fighters on the road outside a strategic oil town Tuesday." Libyan Rebels Flee Brega. Apparently, since NATO has taken charge of the air command, air strikes are less frequent. The Libyan government spokesman stated that Qaddafi must remain in power or risk a power vacuum. 

What's Going On? Egypt Edition

I would like to take a moment to think about the relevance of Marvin Gaye's lyrics  to Libya and Egypt at this moment. Peace out. WMB


What's Going On
(M. Gaye, Renaldo 'Obie' Benson, Al Cleveland)
Tamla Records Original LP release: Jan. 1971
Album: What's Going On Deluxe Edition (2 disc)
Motown Record Co. 2001 LP MOTD 3404


Mother, mother
There's too many of you crying
Brother, brother, brother
There's far too many of you dying
You know we've got to find a way
To bring some lovin' here today - Ya

Father, father
We don't need to escalate
You see, war is not the answer
For only love can conquer hate
You know we've got to find a way
To bring some lovin' here today

Picket lines and picket signs
Don't punish me with brutality
Talk to me, so you can see
Oh, what's going on
What's going on
Ya, what's going on
Ah, what's going on

Implement Better Development Regimes in the Arab World (Guest Blogger)

Views contributed by my brilliant colleague and social geographer, David Rutherford, and endorsed by me! Right on, Brother! WMB

Sixty percent of the people across the Arab world are under 30 years of age, and they have terrible prospects for the future, largely as a result of the autocratic regimes that have failed to concern themselves adequately with improving conditions in their countries. I just heard that one in ten people in Libya are affiliated with the secret police, working to maintain the status quo which has had enough oil money to marginally improve the lives of the people of the country while lining their own pockets and ruthlessly suppress any dissent.

As flawed as democracy is in the U.S. and the West-- and I believe it is deeply flawed and that we need to make significant improvements-- the principles of free speech, liberty, democracy, and others that this country and the West developed over the last 250 years or so are worth promoting globally. Of course, those principles are not going to look the same everywhere, and we must be more sensitive and careful than we have been in many cases in the past, but nevertheless, the West seems justified to me in working to advance those principles. 

Muammar Qadaffi: Pan-Africanist Hero, or Genocidaire?

Dear Readers

Pan-Africanists (and Leftists) are in an uproar about the bombing of Libya. This post will examine the different sides of the issue.

My quick take

Qadaffi worked hard to defeat apartheid. He has struggled to position Libya as an African country, not an Arab country. He has supported the African Union. He should be praised for these notable accomplishments. Qadaffi has tortured journalists, cut off all communication with the outside world, and fired on innocent civilians. Libya is in a humanitarian crisis as refugees flood into Tunisia and Egypt. It looked like Qadaffi was willing to fire on his own people in order to stay in power. The bombing of Libya is justified. It should cease as soon as a no-fly zone is enforced. No troops should be used. The West should retreat, and turn over the enforcement to Egypt, Tunisia, and other African and Arab countries as soon as possible.

Review of Events

The unrest in Libya began on February 15, 2011. The main reasons for the protests were the lack of political freedom, the spread of corruption under the Qadaffi regime, and the need to expand freedom of speech. Thousands turned out peacefully in Benghazi holding signs and chanting to challenge Colonel Muammar Qaddafi's 41 year strongman rule. On February 26, 2011, The UN Security council called for a no-fly zone in Libya.

On March 3, 2011, The Arab League asked Qadaffi to stop the bloodshed. "The Arab resolution called on the Libyan government to respond to the "legitimate demands of the Libyan people" and to stop bloodshed. The Libyan authorities must lift restrictions on media and mobile networks and allow the delivery of aid." Libya was suspended from the Arab League. The Secretary General of the Arab League is Amr Moussa, a likely Egyptian Presidential Candidate. On March 13, the Arab League endorsed the concept of a no-fly zone over Libya. On March 17, 2011, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution calling for military action in Libya.

According to the Nation, in an article entitled Libya and the Dilemma of Intervention Libya and the Dilemma of Intervention published on March 18, 2011, the UN Security Council took some diplomatic steps before authorizing military intervention. The UN Security Council mandated freezing the regime's assets, imposing sanctions on Qadaffi and his associates, and organizing humanitarian assistance.  (Thanks to Olga Martin for sensitising me to this issue)

On March 19, 2011, The US, France and Britain launched air strikes to enforce the no-fly zone. According to Kenya's Nation Newspaper, on March 20,The African Union's panel on Libya on Sunday called for an "immediate stop" to all attacks on Libya.The AU committee on Libya is composed of five African heads of state. But the Nouakchott meeting was only attended by the presidents of Mauritania, Mali and Congo. South Africa and Uganda were represented by ministers

On March 21, Libya Released four New York Times journalists. Stephen Farrell, Tyler Hicks, Lynsey Addario and Anthony Shadid were captured while covering the conflict between Loyalist and Rebel forces in Libya in the eastern city of Adjabiya. The journalists were tied up, all were punched on a daily basis. The female journalist was fondled, groped and beaten. They were threatened with death and denied food. According to the New York Times "Others have died. A Libyan broadcaster was killed Saturday while covering a battle near Benghazi. A cameraman for Al Jazeera was killed in the same area on March 12, the first death of a journalist in Libya during the current conflict."

On March 24th, according to Al Jazeera, air strikes are not deterring Qadaffi. Western war planes bombed Libya for a fifth night, but Libya is still shelling the opposition. The US says it has successfully established a no-fly zone over Libya's coastal areas. The allies have flown 175 sorties in 114 hours, and the US has flown 113 of those. The Washington Post reports the US and its allies are straining to maintain Arab support for the conflict in Libya. Egyptian officials are worried that the conflict will spill over the border. Qatar has deployed fighter jets in the region, and could help enforce the no-fly zone in coming days, although no action has actually been taken yet.

A Review of Positions:

Yoweri Museveni, President of Uganda saysWhy Not Let Libyans Solve Their Own Problems?  Obviously, Museveni has a dog in this fight. He came to power by military means and he is an autocrat, although a benign one, who allows some kind of elections. He has been in power for a long long time (over two decades) He provides a review of Qadaffi's good points, some of which resonate with me, and some of which make me chuckle! These "good" points include the fact that Qadaffi is a true nationalist, he gave Museveni weapons during his own struggle for power, he helped raise the cost of Arab oil by encouraging cartel behavior, Qadaffi has made Libya a middle income country, and, Qadaffi is a secular leader. Museveni argues that it was proper to use force against the protesters, because they were "insurrectionists." He says the Libyan rebels should fight their own wars, lest they be called puppets. So bottom line - Museveni says No foreign involvement in sovereign countries.

Gerald A.Perreira writing in the Liberator on March 4, 2011 made an argument that is fairly compelling. His position shakes me down to my toes, and makes me wonder if I am wrong. He argues "The battle that is being waged in Libya is fundamentally a battle between Pan-African forces on the one hand, who are dedicated to the realization of Qaddafi’s vision of a united Africa, and reactionary racist Libyan Arab forces who reject Qaddafi’s vision of Libya as part of a united Africa and want to ally themselves instead with the EU and look toward Europe and the Arab World for Libya’s future." [Long sentence Gerald :-)] This is a strong argument and I am listening.

However, Qadaffi's decision to shut off all channels of information, and torture journalists from the Times strikes me as fundamentally undemocratic. Accordingly, I am going to maintain my position for the moment while I keep reading . . . .

March 24, 2011

Riz Khan, a journalist from Al Jazeera, reports that there is a growing chorus from developing and Bric countries including Turkey, China and India in opposition to the strike Putin says that the UN resolution is "a medieval call to crusade." Question to Prime Minister Putin, since the Arab League asked for the no-fly zone, how can it be a call to crusade? Puzzled . . . . .

Richard Falk has a good piece on the moral ambiguities of intervention. He argues that "But with respect to Libya there is no firm evidence of a genocidal intention on Gaddafi's, no humanitarian catastrophe in the making, and not even clear indications of the extent of civilian casualties resulting from the fighting." Very thoughtful analysis, and definitely made me reconsider my views. One issue I have with Falk's piece is that the West has already intervened, where do we go from here? We need action steps at this point, not analysis of past actions.

Juan Cole argues that the UN no-fly zone over Libya is risky but it can have a good outcome if it has an expiration date, if it is not a war, but is just a no fly zone, if it moves towards a diplomatic solution, and so forth.

The Ugandan Daily Monitor says that the African Union should move with the times and oppose Qadaffi's four decades of oppression. That paper says that they recognize the need to respect a nation's sovereignty, but they strongly disagree that sovereignty should be maintained when the people are at risk, and are opposing the government with their loves.

Writing in the New York Times, Nicholas D. Kristof argues that the military intervention in Libya has averted a humanitarian catastrophe. He states that this intervention should be recognized under the United Nations' label of Responsibility to Protect. He suggests that it is much better to intervene quickly in Libya, than to wait and allow the slaughter to proceed as occurred in Kosovo [and might I add Rwanda. WMB] Kristof and I believe that most Libyans support foreign intervention. The costs of inaction, argue Kristof, were the slaughter of the civilian populations in Benghazi and Tobruk.

Comments on Positions by African Scholars

My colleague Matunda Nyanchama from the Kenya Studies Association says to the group in an email conversation "As I wrote in another forum, the Libyan strongman's time is long gone; he has overstayed the welcome. He has done terrible things (sponsoring terrorism, supporting murderous regimes such as Idi Amin's, etc.) and he hasn't opened up the democratic space (but who has in the Arab World?). On the other hand, Libya has invested heavily in Africa and in many countries like Italy . . . A time comes for leaders to go; having fed Libyans, offered good medical services and education, they are demanding better; and if he were a statesman, he would have stepped aside and hand over the baton. But again, he came to power by the sword; he could possibly die by the same.The question remains though [regarding] the criteria of intervention target selection by western nations. How come they aren't in Bahrain? Or Yemen?"

Matunda makes a valid point. Why is the West bombing Libya, but not supporting protesters in Bahrain? Indeed, the US is essentially allowing Saudi troops to crack down on civilian protesters in Bahrain with no comment. 

John Mulaa, a researcher and consultant at the World Bank, argues that "The simple fact is that foreign policy is never a fertile ground for perfect consistency. You do what you can, where you can, when you can. If theWest could topple the Iranian or North Korean regimes at no cost in lives or treasure whatsoever, they would do it tomorrow. But the West can’t. This is a game opponents of any intervention always play, “What makes X so different than Y?” The easiest answer is that we have a ripe opportunity in X and not in Y. Now, there may be good substantive arguments against intervening in Libya. But saying “Why not Bahrain, too?” is not one of them."

Kenyan attorney Bosire Maragia notes that each state has a set of foreign policies that define how it relates with other states.

My gut reactions


March 22, 2011

I am beginning to get a headache. Was I wrong to support intervention? I am questioning my own position now. Uggh, this is very, very difficult.

March 24, 2011
8:49 p.m. Feeling a little better about my position after reading Kristof's article. Headache subsiding.

March 25, 2011
11:00 a.m.
I am beginning to worry about how long this conflict is going to drag on. I am also frustrated that the other Arab nations are not stepping up and taking the lead on this. Of course, they are worried that they are next. Syria and Bahrain are very distressing politically as the crackdown on dissidents intensifies. 

The Middle East Should Follow Egypt’s Lead Towards Democracy

A version of this article was published in the Clarion Ledger on March 27, 2011

Date: March 21, 2011


The change sweeping the Arab world is now entering into its second month. The people of Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Jordan are demanding political representation, free speech and democracy. Only one Arab government other than Egypt is responding to the protests sweeping the region in a manner which respects the right of its people to participate in government: Jordan.

Indeed, in countries such as Yemen, Libya, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, the people's demands for change are being met not with reform, but with force, and violence. Protests began in Saudi Arabia this Friday asking for political reform including more representation for the people, and action against poverty. The Saudi government responded to this action by arresting and beating protesters. In Bahrain, protests started in which the majority (Shia) people asked to be involved in government decision making. In a disturbing development the Saudi and Emirati governments did not send troops to support the rebels in Libya, but did send troops into Bahrain to crush the protests. Protesters in southern Syria are also asking for political reform, including free speech and economic growth. The Syrian government is reacting by arresting dissidents. In Yemen, protests began at the beginning of March asking their authoritarian “president” to leave now, and not wait until the end of his term. Violence broke out in Yemen when snipers shot peaceful protesters. The president then imposed martial law.

The journey towards democracy in the Middle East and North Africa will be long, and full of obstacles. I suggest that analysts and readers think of the transformation sweeping the Middle East as a process, not an event. To examine the potential risks and rewards of this transformation, I consider the cases of Egypt and Libya as point and counterpoint: one country is moving swiftly towards democracy, while the other country is in the midst of a bloody civil war, and humanitarian disaster.

Egypt has taken the first of many steps towards a democratic transition. On January 25th, the Egyptian people spoke out. They demanded a change in leadership, and asked that an autocrat of thirty years step down. Their actions were largely peaceful, and they used the tools of non-violent resistance. They were rewarded on February 11th when President Hosni Mubarak left office. The Egyptian people refer to this period as the “January 25th Revolution.” Theorists point out that in fact, Egypt has not experienced a true revolution. According to Professor Steven Levitsky, a democracy expert at Harvard University's Department of Government, what Egypt is currently experiencing is more accurately termed a regime transition. At the moment in Egypt, the military is in power. Accordingly, Egypt has removed a dictator in the person of Hosni Mubarak but is currently being ruled by the Supreme Committee of the Armed Forces. Egypt has not emerged as a full-fledged democracy. Arguably the Egyptian people are still living under a form of semi-authoritarian rule, all though that rule is certainly liberalized with comparison to the previous government.

Nonetheless, Egypt is making excellent progress on its journey towards democracy. A constitutional referendum was held on Saturday, March 19, 2011. This represents the first major election ever held in Egypt. The election was marred by some drawbacks, and in my view, was not totally free and fair. Most importantly, not enough time was given for Egyptians to understand the meaning of their vote. Voters were "encouraged" by the Muslim Brotherhood with rice and oil to vote “Yes.” There were inadequate numbers of polling stations. Some polling stations erupted into violence, as when Nobel Prize Laureate Mohammed El Baradei was attacked with stones and glass when he attempted to vote. Yet, the successes of the Egyptian Constitutional Referendum of March 19, 2011, greatly outweighed the problems. Egyptian universities worked hard to train election monitors. A peaceful rally was held in Tahrir Square in which people tried to educate each other about the meaning of their vote. Soldiers provided protection for the protesters. The election was hotly debated in the press and the television: free speech is emerging. Most polling stations were peaceful. Normally boisterous Egyptians queued quietly as they awaited their first opportunity to cast a vote that "mattered."

In contrast to the peaceful and promising transition in Egypt, Libya is experiencing a violent outcome in response to people's demands to political liberalization. The Libyan uprising is entering its fourth week. The Libyan people must be praised for their determination, and persistence in the face of unrelenting force. Libya's leader, Colonel Muammar Qadaffi has responded to peaceful protests with brutal violence, hiring mercenaries, and ruthlessly targeting civilians. The unrest in Libya began on February 15, 201. The main reasons for the protests were the lack of political freedom, the spread of corruption under the Qadaffi regime, and the need to expand freedom of speech. Thousands turned out peacefully holding signs and chanting to challenge Colonel Muammar Qaddafi's 41 year strongman rule. Qadaffi responded by firing on the protesters, turning the situation into a bloody civil war between loyalists and rebels.

A broad campaign of airstrikes led by France, England and the US began pounding the Libyan coast on March 19, 2011. US missiles are attempting to enforce a United Nations no-fly zone to keep Qadaffi from crushing rebel forces. Some critics have expressed concerns that military intervention against Qadaffi could backfire badly, causing resentment in the region. There is a need, as expressed by writers in the Nation, and in AlJazeera, to balance the desire to act in solidarity with the rebels against the risk of harming civilians. In addition, the desire to support the rebels must be balanced against the need to support Arab self-determination.

Overall, the weight of history, humanitarianism, and self-determination fall on the side of intervention in Libya. Qaddafi’s efforts to frame the rebellion against him as a "Western Plot," play on a well worn fear and paranoia present in Arab states that they are not fully in control of their own destiny. It is important for regime change to be organic, and driven by the citizenry. Indeed, the failure of democracy to take root in Iraq can be blamed in large part on the fact that democracy was imposed by the West, not asked for by the Iraqis. This is not the case in Libya, where the people have clearly asked for the removal of Qaddafi through protests, and by fighting bravely alone although they have been outmanned and outgunned.

Further, international opinion is firmly on the side of intervention. On February 26, 2011, The UN Security Council correctly called for a no-fly zone in Libya. Such a no-fly zone should help the anti-Qadaffi rebels to regroup, and should limit Qadaffi's ability to respond to the uprising. On March 13, the Arab League endorsed the concept of a no-flight zone over Libya. On March 17, 2011, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution calling for military action in Libya. Obama wisely waited to initiate Western supported military action  until after the Arab nations agreed that a no-fly zone area should be enforced. This decision to wait until help was requested from regional powers respects the Arab need for self-determination, and also represents an international consensus that action was required.

A few key lessons can be drawn from the contrasting scenarios in Egypt and Libya. First, it is no accident that Egypt is one of the first Arab nations to liberalize. Egypt is basically a secular country. Egypt’s population includes Christians, and even a few Jews, and there is support for religious freedom for all citizens. Second, Rwanda taught us that genocide must be stopped. As Anne Marie Slaughter of Princeton has argued, the air strikes in Libya are in support of humanitarian grounds. Third, autocrats must not be tolerated, even if they are politically useful, or even if they have oil the West wants. In the short and medium run, human rights and democracy require that the United States stop tolerating autocratic and oppressive regimes such as those found in Saudi Arabia. Fourth, change must come from below. The Arab people have a right to self-determination. The West should respect that. President Obama and the UN were wise to wait to take action until they were asked by the Arab League. The UN has asked for a no-fly zone, not an international conflagration. The US should not commit ground troops, but should merely “soften the targets” so that the Libyan rebels have a fighting chance. Finally, the West can support protesters by sending money and supplies to non-profit organizations, political parties, and other civil society groups oriented towards reform. In addition, educational exchanges between academics and students can facilitate exchanges of ideas. Egypt should be viewed as a beacon for democracy in the region. Egypt is already exporting the idea of freedom by holding its historic vote this weekend. Any support the West can supply for democratization in Egypt can only lead to more reform and liberalization in the region.

West Pounds Libya with Air Strikes

The Libyan Uprising has now entered its fourth week.

A broad campaign of airstrikes is pounding the Libyan coast. US missiles are attempting to enforce a United Nations no fly zone to keep Qadaffi from crushing rebel forces. Apparently France, Britain and the US are working together to keep up a barrage against Qaddafi, however, US air power is dominating. Tomahawk missiles are being fired from American warships. French Mirage and Rafale fighter jets have also conducted strikes.

Overall, I support the decision of the United States to enforce the no fly zone. I appreciate the need to support the Libyan rebels. Qadaffi has had a history of being a great ally of African causes, but he lost my support completely when he fired on civilians. The war is causing a humanitarian crisis on the border of Egypt, as refugees flee the fighting and attempt to escape to safety.Qadaffi claims he is observing the UN mandated ceasefire, but rebels claim he has continued attacks against them unabated.

It is excellent that no military action began until the Arab nations agreed that a no-fly zone area should be enforced. This helps to avoid the perception that the West is unilaterally moving against the Arab world. The secretary general of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, is a likely candidate for the Egyptian Presidency, and he called for an enforcement of the no-fly zone. Many Arab leaders have called for Qadaffi to quit.

I am very dissapointed that the Saudi Arabians have chosen to send troops into Bahrain instead of sending troops in to support the Libyan rebels. Obviously, the Saudi government is one of the worst examples of an oppressive authoritarian regime in the region, so it is no surprise that they are reluctant to remove another autocrat.

March 20, 2011 11:19 p.m.
In a slightly confusing development, Amr Moussa, Secretary General of the League of Arab States, has criticized the coalition strikes against targets in Western Libya. He claims that the intention was to protect civilians, not bomb civilians. Apparently, the Arab League had said there was no need for military intervention.


March 22, 2011 12:16 p.m.
According to Juan Cole, "Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants."






References
US Missiles Strike Libyan Air Defense Targets, New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/world/africa/20libya.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=middleeast
West Pounds Libya with Air Strikes, Tomahawks, AlMasryalyoum
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/365381
Amr Moussa Criticizes Allied Bombing of Libya, AlMasryalyoum
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/366790
The Drawbacks of Intervention in Libya, AlJazeera
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/201132093458329910.html
March 22, 2011 12:13 p.m.

Governing the Egyptian Internet

This piece was published today, March 25, 2011. In the Cairo Review of Global Affairs.

Governing the Egyptian Internet

Dr. Warigia Bowman
February 28, 2011

In a futile effort to cling to power and quell dissent, Mubarak’s government used many avenues to restrict or control information during the January 25th Revolution, including shutting down the Internet on January 27th.  By January 29th, 91% of Egypt’s Internet networks were down.[1]  What does the Egyptian Government’s decision to shut down the Internet mean for information governance globally?

What Happened?

Multiple methods were used to take Egypt offline. To get access to the rest of the Internet, Egyptian Internet Service Providers (ISPs) need a “gateway”:  a physical link to other ISPs outside of Egypt, which ISPs lease from the Egyptian Government.[2] First, the government asked Internet Service Providers to disconnect their services or lose their licenses.[3] As the ISPs complied with the government’s order,  network addresses within Egypt became unreachable.[4] To its credit, Vodafone resisted, until, in the words of the New York Times, “it was obliged to comply.”[5] 

Had ISPs chosen not to comply, Telecom Egypt could have physically cut off connection to the network at the gateway level, which would have severely disrupted traffic in other countries.[6]   In addition the government reportedly took down Egyptian country code Domain Name Servers,[7] halting all traffic to and from local sites.[8] Finally, Internet Exchange Points (IXPs)[9] were disabled, severing in-country connectivity.[10]

Impact

With the Internet down, Egypt seemed cut off from the world. The sense of disconnection was heightened because the government had shut off mobile texting and twitter, pulled Al Jazeera Arabic TV, and even stopped all mobile telephony temporarily.  Egyptian business was devastated, untold millions of dollars were lost from electronic transactions, and the banking system and stock exchange were crippled.

Shutting off the Internet is not a new tactic during civil unrest, but the scope of the Mubarak government’s effort was unprecedented. According to the Open Net Initiative, similar blockades have been imposed by Burma, Nepal and China.[11] Colonel Qaddaffi has mimiced Mubarak’s actions, creating an information blackout in Tripoli.[12]

The Mubarak government probably intended that shutting down the network would slow political agitation. Although we will never know the true impact, in fact it likely sped up the regime’s fall. In the absence of new technologies, people were forced to rely on traditional means of communication, including knocking on doors, going to the Mosque, assembling in the street, or other central gathering places. Thomas Schelling (1960) won the Nobel prize for discovering that in the absence of information, people will coordinate by selecting a focal point that seems natural, special or relevant to them. Given the protests, Tahrir was the obvious focal point. By blocking the Internet the government inadvertently fueled dissent and galvanized international support for the people of Egypt.

Next Steps

Both technological and policy solutions are urgently needed to respond to the autocratic blackouts imposed by Mubarak and Qadaffi. From a technological standpoint, activists in countries likely to experience similar problems should invest in “redundancy” as well as “distribution.” Redundancy is an information concept which emphasizes building multiple lines of communication, should one line fail. Distribution is the idea that more independent means of communication should be used, and should be distributed throughout multiple users, not centralized.

A blend of old and new information technologies is best for maintaining true connectivity. “Pen and paper” lists of staff, friends, landlines, mobile, home addresses and other key information to prevent isolation even if the Internet goes down. Further, robust and tested methods, such as FM and shortwave radio are an outstanding means to communicate with the outside world.

The Internet network is inherently not governed. Yet, each player has a valuable role. January 27th teaches us that a move away from centralization, particularly in the presence of autocratic governments, is crucial. Universities and NGOs who can afford to do so should invest in Very Small Aperture Terminals (VSATs). VSATs provide independent wireless link connectivity through satellite, not cable connections. VSATs can only be forced to stop operating by physically disabling them.  In addition, ISPs should secure satellite links, or find other means to create non-vulnerable gateways.[13]  ISPs must also decide at what point they choose to cooperate with government repression, and at what point they resist. January 27th suggests the market will reward those who take efforts to keep the network up.

The January 25th Revolution has powerfully demonstrated that social networks and the Internet can play a powerful role in empowering people and promoting democracy.[14] Yet, the January 27th shutdown demonstrates the fragility of access, particularly in countries with high governmental control.[15] Efforts should be made to expand Internet connectivity and computer access in rural, poor and remote areas throughout Egypt, the Middle East and Africa, so that future political movements can empower and mobilize the grassroots. Finally, activists and policy people should  demand that rights to telephony and Internet connectivity be incorporated into freedom of information guarantees.

---

[1]“Egypt Internet Shutdown Q& A,” ISOC Monthly Newsletter, February 2, 2011, available at [http://isoc.org/wp/newsletter?/p=3100]

[2]James Glanz and John Markoff, “Egypt Leaders Found “Off” Switch for Internet,” The New York Times, February 15, 2011.

[3]Matt Richtel, “Egypt Cuts Off Most Internet and Cell Service,” The New York Times, January 28, 2011,

[4]One of the only websites still active in the entire country was the AUC website.AUC owns the IP prefix 213.181.237.0/24 announced by the AS8524. This connects with RAYA Telecom and Noor Data Networks. AUC was able to maintain very limited connectivity by switching between these two service providers. See, Claudio Squarcella, Roma Tre University, “Three Case Studies on the Egyptian Disconnection,” RIPE Labs, available at [http://labs.ripe.net/Members/csquare/three-case-studies-egyptian-disconnection]

[5]Email communication with L.Jean Camp, Professor of Informatics, University of Indiana, February 2, 2011.

[6]ISPs operate at level three in this diagram, whereas Telecom Egypt controls the gateway at levels 1 and 2. See Novell Connection Primer, available at

[http://www.novell.com/info/primer/art/prim02.gif]

[7]Johnson, p. 2.

[8]ISOC Newsletter, p. 2.

[9]Fahim, p. 3.

[10]Email communication with Timothy McGinnis, African Internet Infrastructure Consultant and Ambassador to the World Summit on Information Society Ambassador, February 18, 2011.

[11]ISOC Newsletter, p. 3; Richtel, page 1; Bobbie Johnson, “How Egypt Switched off the Internet,” Gigaom.com, January 28, 2011, available at [http://gigaom.com/2011/01/28/how-egypt-switched-off-the-internet/]

[12]Kareem Fahim and David D. Kirkpatrick, “Qadaffi’s Grip on the Capital Tightens as Revolt Grows,” The New York Times, February 22, 2011.

[13]Email communication with Badru Ntege, Systems Engineer, one2net, Uganda. February 16, 2011.

[14]Mohamed Abdel-Baky, Cyber-Revolution, Al Ahram Weekly, Available Online at [http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/print/2011/1034/sc30.html]

[15]Rick Ferguson, as quoted by Bobbie Johnson, p. 3.