Sharia: 3-Democracy: 0

Ah, just smell that Spring air. The Arab Spring, that is. What a glorious example of oppressed peoples rising against tyrannical governments in order to achieve freedom. Why, it's just like 1776 all over again and- wait, what's that? All of the countries that have seen real changes (Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya) are adopting hardcore Sharia as the basis for their new governments? But... but Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said that the Muslim Brotherhood is "largely secular." Okay, some people like Glenn Beck pointed out the dangers of the Arab Spring from the very beginning, but that guy is "really angry" (Business Insider), "delusional" (David Brooks), engaging in "hysteria" and brings to mind "Robert Welch and the John Birch Society" (William Kristol). Plenty of these useful idiots on both the Right and Left have been trying to put their words into the mouths of the revolutionaries (after all, it's not like any of these commentators actually understand Arabic) in order to advance their own agendas. The academic Left sees it as an end to "imperialism" or "neo-colonialism" or whatever other "ism" has earned their ire (simply because they've been told it's bad) and the revolutionary Left sees both a collection of kindred spirits and a means to further destabilize things. Meanwhile those on the Right who support the revolutionaries see the Arab Spring as a fulfillment of the Bush-era idea that Islamism will be halted by spreading democracy in the region. Oops.

While tensions have been high for years, it was the revolution in Tunisia that really kicked off the landslide. Dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali (try saying that three times fast), who had not really faced any well-organized opposition up until that point, was overwhelmed by the sudden uprisings. In a stunning turn of events, Ben Ali resigned and fled to Saudi Arabia less than a month after the riots began. The international media rejoiced. The plucky underdogs had defeated the oppressive regime, and they had done it quickly enough that the viewing public had not grown bored with it. Of course, in all the excitement no one bothered asking, "How did these uprising spring up so fast, and who was coordinating them?" Well, now we have at least some idea. The Islamist party Ennahda, which was banned by Ben Ali, won the election and took control of the government. While the media has portrayed Ennahda as "moderate" (at least they didn't say "largely secular"), the group was founded according to the teachings of Sayyid Qutb (one of the major theorists of modern Islamism) and has been tied to a series of terrorists attacks. The Tunisian group still maintains close ties with the Muslim Brotherhood and have also reached out to Turkey's AK party (see "Islamists Flexing Their Muscles in Turkey" for more on them). Ennahda has made the imposition of Sharia one of its top priorities. Rachid Ghannouchi, Ennahda's founder and leader, defended the move. "Sharia is not something that is strange or alien to our societies... For example, in Britain we have Islamic finance and Islamic banking, and Islamic family law can be applied for marriage and divorce."
In other words: Sharia Law- Coming Soon To A City Near You!

Egypt was the next domino to topple. The Muslim Brotherhood was formed in Egypt and has engaged in acts of assassination and terror against the government for the better part of a century. Now they have formed an official political party for the first time since 1954, known as the Freedom and Justice Party, and are poised to make big gains in parliamentary elections. Meanwhile, Egypt's Coptic Christian population has suffered tremendous persecution since Mubarak was deposed (to be fair, it wasn't exactly sunshine and lollipops while Mubarak was in power). One event on October 9th, which would see the worst violence since Mubarak's fall from power, involved a massive mob that attacked a group of Christians who were protesting for better conditions in central Cairo. Rather than prevent the Muslim mob from beating, stabbing, and shooting the Christians, the security forces either stood by to watch or actively joined in the fray, including one incident in which a security van smashed into a crowd of Copts. When the dust settled, over twenty-five people were dead and hundreds more injured. To make matters worse, the military (the same ones that failed to stop the violence) have used the massacre as a tool to further strengthen their grip on the country.

While Ben Ali and Mubarak agreed with Shakespeare's Falstaff that "The better part of valor is discretion," Libya's Moammar Ghaddafi decided to stay and fight the revolutionaries that threatened to overthrow him. It worked in the short-term. Ghaddafi stayed in power much longer than Ben Ali or Mubarak had. But in the end, thanks in no small part to military intervention by NATO, Ghaddafi ended up with a bullet in the head. I've already written a post on this subject. However, it is worth repeating that the same people who very likely executed their prisoner in cold blood and are suspected to be responsible for mass graves have taken control of the government. At least Ghaddafi waited until he was in charge before committing war crimes. Some experts believe that Libya could be the next Afghanistan, run by a radical Taliban-style government and a safe haven for Islamic terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. Already the National Transitional Council under Mustafa Abdul-Jalil has declared that they will follow a more strict interpretation of Islamic law than many Western analysts predicted (go figure). Included in the new decrees were orders to reverse the ban on polygamy (Muslim men can have up to four wives under Sharia) and to forbid banks from charging interest in accordance with Sharia regulations.

We face an interesting dilemma when looking at the Arab world: every leader is tyrant on some level and as (mostly) freedom-loving people we despise tyrants. However, the current attitude of "We should support any movement to topple these dictators" is incredibly nihilistic. There are many in the West who say, "Who cares that Sharia is taking hold of these countries? That's what they want." The problem is that whenever a democracy votes itself into a dictatorship, it doesn't simply return to a democracy during the next election cycle. The German people elected Hitler, but it wasn't like the Nazis just said, "Okay, well we've been a totalitarian nightmare, but our term is up so we're going to go home." What happens if the people decide they don't want to be governed by Sharia any more? It has been so entrenched in the system that it would take another revolution, and a much bloodier one at that, to simply give people the option. And for those of you who still don't give a flying crap about the people in the Middle East (which probably aren't a lot if you've come to this blog), consider that these radical regimes are sitting on significant natural resources as well as critical supply choke points like the Suez Canal.

So now we know what "democracy" looks like: women in burkas, polygamy, virulent anti-Semitism and brutal apostasy laws. It doesn't appear as much like 1776 as it does 776.