Several names were associated with this period of history - the Sick Man of Europe, Sykes-Picot, the Balfour declaration, the Great Arab Revolt, mandates and independence, the birth of Israel, etc. The epoch inherited a generation of rulers who were allied with the Ottomans and who, upon their defeat, turned against them. It also yielded a number of small states having equivocal borders with disputed legitimacy. Lawrence of Arabia offered a brilliant description of this stage by the concise line “We pushed them to death by thousands, all for the corn, wheat and oil of Mesopotamia.” Today, the bigger image stands as strong as ever: Rulers+ Israel+ Oil= Civil wars and backwardness.

In 1949, Husni Al-Zaim seized power in a coup d’état, which, according to archives, was orchestrated by the CIA. It was the first time that people heard of the word “Inqilab” on the radio. His revolt was the opening gambit for an avalanche of coups sweeping across the Arab world. Al-Zaim delivered to his masters: the Israel-Syria armistice Agreement and the Tapline Agreement.

Military leaders started successively rising to power: Al-Hennawi in Syria in 1949 followed by Adib Shishakli in 1949 and 1952, the Baath party in 1963 and Assad in 1970. Jamal Abdul Nasser seized control of Egypt in 1952, Abdul Kareem Qassem of Iraq in 1959 followed by Abdul Salam and Abdul Rahman Aref in 1962 then Bakr and Saddam Hussein in 1968. Gaddafi became President of Libya in 1969 and Boumediene President of Algeria in 1965. In Sudan, Gaafar Nimeiry assumed presidency in 1969 and Tunisia came under the rule of Zein Al-Abidine Bin Ali in 1987. Mauritania has also suffered several coups throughout its history. As for those interested in the history of Iran and the region, it would be wise to look back at the fate that befell Mohammad Mosaddegh, the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran, when he was replaced by the Shah in 1953.

During this period of revolts and wars with Israel, the Gulf region witnessed large-scale changes, and power was handed down from a generation of misers to a generation of squanderers; from Shakhbout to Zayed in the UAE, Khalifa to Hamad in Qatar, Sultan Said of Oman to Qabous and King Faisal to King Fahd in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Resounding slogans were raised in praise of stability, the wars of liberation and attrition, the largest airport and highest tower of the world and the success in winning the bid to host the World Cup in 2022. Against the ambiguity of these vague slogans, there was a crystal clear vision in the decision-making capitals of the world in London, Paris and Washington. From feudal lords (1920 until 1949) to army generals (1949 until 2003) to extravagant Sheikhs, we are standing today at a crucial crossroad.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said during the Forum for Future in January 2011 in Qatar that “in too many places, in too many ways, the region’s foundations are sinking into the sand. The new and dynamic Middle East that I have seen needs firmer ground if it is to take root and grow everywhere.” And so, Bin Ali, Mubarak and Gaddafi were ousted after the 2003 invasion of Iraq while Syria plunged into a war that, according to the calculations of General Martin Dempsey, would drag on for no less than a decade. The vision of western powers was just as clear in the early twentieth century. They pitted the Arabs against the Turks with an empty promise of liberty, then later, used the same lure of freedom to have them fight communism. Once again, their promises vanished into thin air.

Today, “the process” is one of the most common slogans making headlines in Washington DC. The US does not promise the peoples of the region anything else but “the process”. Mubarak and Morsi are thrown in prison, hundreds of thousands of victims fall in Syria, dozens are killed in Iraq and tens of settlements are set up in Palestine every year, but the focus remains on the process. And so that we do not feel alone in this, let us not forget that Obama had pledged to bring change to the American people too. Therefore, the objectives become stretchy; change is process and process is change.

The answer is found in George Orwell’s writings as well as in the conclusion drawn by Zbigniew Brzezinski: “In the technotronic society the trend would seem to be towards the aggregation of the individual support of millions of uncoordinated citizens, easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities exploiting the latest communications techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason.” This is the “roadmap” set for us.

Jawad N. Adra