The State of the World Revisited

Having talked about a number of negative events in the world news recently, I’d like to balance things a bit with some brief comments on two mostly positive events that have taken place in the past week or so in north Africa.

A few days ago, the Tunisian people succeeded in driving out the country’s long-time dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. Ben Ali’s regime was corrupt and oppressive; his family blatantly enriched itself at public expense, and opponents of the government faced imprisonment and torture. The Internet police that the government used to crack down on dissident bloggers were as pervasive and technologically savvy as China’s. However, as a stable, pro-Western regime in one of the most prosperous African countries, Ben Ali’s Tunisia received relatively little pressure from the US and other Western countries to reform. It took street protest powered by the country’s educated youth to bring down Ben Ali, which they did with surprising swiftness, though not without bloodshed. The overthrowing of a dictator is always something to celebrate, and I’m glad to see it happened in Tunisia, a country I have a particular interest in (despite never having visited), due to my childhood fascination with ancient Carthage, located near Tunis, the modern capital. Unfortunately what’s not clear at the moment is what sort of government will replace Ben Ali’s, as most of those left in charge after his departure were his cronies, and the organized opposition is weak and divided after decades of oppression. A period of chaos is probably to be expected, but I hope Tunisia can eventually form a stable, relatively liberal government that respects the right to free speech.

Also in the past week, Southern Sudan completed its referendum on independence. Getting through the vote without any major problems is in and of itself a major accomplishment. Furthermore, it is probable that Southern Sudan has voted for independence, rectifying yet another idiotic early 20th century boundary drawing exercise by the British (Iraq being another classic example). Northern and Southern Sudan were never compatible and it never made sense for them to be part of the same country, which is why there has been almost constant conflict between the two regions for Sudan’s entire existence. Separating the two is the only logical thing to do However, in this situation there are still potential problems, some quite serious. One is the border region of Abyei, a region more sedentary residents are kin to people in Southern Sudan and want to be part of expected future state but which is also a traditional grazing area for nomadic Arab people aligned with the north. Another issue is the division of oil revenues, as most of the oil is in the south, but all the pipelines run through the north. Then there is the extreme poverty of the south, and its potential for internal dissension (the main unifying force being a desire for independence). All of these problems could potential lead to widespread conflict. Hopefully they can all be overcome or at least minimized, and what will be the world’s newest nation can become firmly established, incidentally showing once again the possibility of legitimate, peaceful separation from a larger nation, despite the efforts of countries such as China, Russia and Indonesia to deny that such a thing can be permitted.