 |
 |
Cynthia Boaz
By JEREMY HAY
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Observers worldwide were captivated in February as millions of Egyptians overthrew President Hosni Mubarak, who has been in power since 1981. Many also described it as spontaneous.
It wasn’t, said Cynthia Boaz, a political scientist at Sonoma State University.
She met with some of the students who became its leaders in 2008, at a workshop co-organized by the Washington-based nonprofit where she is a paid consultant, the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict.
They discussed the lessons and methods of nonviolent mass civil resistance, and the skills it requires.
Boaz remains in contact with them and said that what is now known as the January 25 Movement, while sparked by a similar revolt in Tunisia, was anything but impromptu.
“I didn’t know they were planning … to start on Jan. 25,” she said, “but I knew the movement had planned for a major action. It’s an organized, planned, disciplined movement.”
Despite the scattered violence that continues, the revolution was overwhelmingly peaceful, waged not with weapons but with voices and placards and mass gatherings.
Boaz, 40, is an expert in nonviolent struggle who consults with educators, activists and students from countries ranging from Spain to Iran. She said toppling repressive regimes is a milestone in the capacity of organized civil resistance movements.
“What happened in Egypt represents a systemwide demand for a new alternative,” she said. “It’s not just about removing the old system from power.
“It was important to get something new for Egyptians, and that really is about democracy.”
Some of the effects are already evident in the largely peaceful protests happening across the Middle East in countries from Bahrain to Yemen.
“It isn’t like these movements have emerged overnight. They’ve just been waiting for an opportunity,” Boaz said.
Libya is an exception because “it’s not organized, there’s not a coherent, unified message,” she said. “It’s not disciplined, and it’s not non-violent.”
Egyptian activists worked for years to identify and neutralize the sources of power in the nation of 83 million. Their effort extended to having coffee with members of the Army.
“It’s a very nuanced divide and conquer strategy,” Boaz said. “You genuinely build real relationships with people, and you begin to help them question the legitimacy of the ruler and the system they’re upholding.”
—–O—–
With the events in the Middle East, Cynthia Boaz is in demand. Before flying to Chile Friday to meet with Latin American diplomats, she talked with The Press Democrat about Egypt’s revolution.
Q: What took place in Egypt has variously been termed a revolt, an uprising, a revolution. Which would you use?
A: Revolution. When power shifted from the regime to the people, that’s what made it a “revolution.”
Q: The revolution is often described as a spontaneous event ignited by the events in Tunisia. To what degree was it organized and why does it matter?
A: This question represents a common and unfortunate misconception about nonviolent action, which is that when you see it, it’s ad-hoc, it’s spontaneous; people just decide to show up in the city square and protest.
But that takes away credit from the activists. When nonviolence succeeds … it’s planned, organized and disciplined.
Q: But doesn’t the suddenness of these events, and how they took place almost simultaneously in these countries, signify a degree of spontaneity?
A: The disaffection and frustration that people feel is long term, so in many of these cases there will be a spark that ignites a population to action.
But that doesn’t mean it’s spontaneous. It means that there may be a movement waiting for a strategic moment in time.
Q: Is it significant that the Egyptian revolution was largely nonviolent?
A: What’s won through violence has to be sustained through violence, so the only truly legitimate way to create democracy is through a bottom-up, nonviolent process.
Also, the long-term consequences of a nonviolent victory in Egypt are that it really increases the credibility of nonviolence.
Young people who are natural bases of recruitment by terrorist organizations are now seeing another option for pushing their grievances — nonviolence.
Q: Regarding legitimacy, what about the American Revolution?
A: Mass non-violent action is relatively new, since the beginning of the 20th Century. It was really perfected by Gandhi …and (the Egyptians) were also looking at Eastern Europe and what happened there in Serbia and Ukraine.
Q: Of the students you know, are any members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is expected to play a role in Egypt’s next election?
A: No. In fact, they are very clear that the movement’s goals and objectives are secular.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
@Josh Stevens,
That links to a blog post that represents ignorance or willful misrepresentation of the facts.
The referendum did not put the Muslim Brotherhood into power, as that blog suggests. It lifted restrictions on rights and liberties, so that more parties can participate in the June parliamentary elections.
It increased democracy in the process. Are you only in favor of democracy when it guarantees the winner you like?
@ Professor Cindy,
What we’ve been trying to explain to you is already happening:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/03/brotherhood_the_victor_in_egyp.html
Read it and weep.
@ Dr. D
OK I support the revolution in Egypt.
So far it has been relatively non-violent, at least from the rebels.
If a faction arises determined to hijack or negate the gains made in the revolt, and that faction resorts to violence, should the rebels slink away and return to their prior oppressed status rather than fight back?
If violence is the only route left open to the forces of democracy in order to hold their gains, would using violence invalidate the nobility and morality of their revolution?
Peaceful revolutions are an oxymoron for a reason.
Those who are being replaced usually fight back.
What should happen then?
Finally, do you support the US using violence in the form of 112 cruise missiles to assist the Libyans as they fight QKGadaffi for their freedom?
There is nothing patriotic, noble, or smart about asking other people to suffer under tyranny in exchange for your own security.
People who support democracy should support the nonviolent uprising of the people of Egypt.
Ms. Mendoza is right. Cynthia Boaz has done more to support democracy and the well-being of people around the world (including the US) than almost anyone I know. Instead of berating her, you should be thanking her.
@ Cynthia Boaz….click on my picture and send me a message on my Facebook. I searched a little and didn’t find an email for you.
Professor Boaz …respectfully, the more you respond the more credibility as a reputable resource on the topic is greatly diminished. Your responses are academic with no mention of any life’s experience or active involvement in the Eygpt situation nor any other association or involvement in foreign democracy movements. You state “Wouldn’t you at least agree that a nonviolent transition from Mubarak’s rule is a better start to what comes next than a violent transition would have been? That it gives them a leg up as they move into the next phase?” I understand that the non-violent activity could be a positive transition but don’t agree that is what is going to happen. We simply do not know. This statement is speculative assumption. You have not provided any identifiable or verifiable evidence that is the case. Nor has there been any published indication in any media to support your statement.
You ask the question” Do you really think you have the right to tell the Egyptian people that they should have continued to suffer under Mubarak because you- as an American- might not like who they choose to succeed him? Yes, I do have a right to say what I feel if our country may be threatened. As an American I would say something like this” We are very enlightened at your apparent movement to be a free and democratic country. As you may know the United States of America was born out of the primal scream for freedom by a small group of Christians who were persecuted in England in 1600′s. We live under a constitution, which took about 175 years to achieve but is now the most successful in world history. Despite some societal issues we are a non-violent country that helps people throughout the world, primarily because of military and economic might, achieve freedom. We want to be good friends. However, we are concerned about the current radical and terrorist movement within the Muslim Religion of which most of Egypt belongs. This radical element has attacked and killed our citizens and there indications they want to do it again. We will not allow this. Please remember if you bite us we bite back. Do you believe foreigners have the right to enter the US illegally and have taxpayers pay for education, education and more. Do they have the right to march on the streets of Santa Rosa and demand more?
You ask, ” Have we really come to a place in this country where education and intellectual discourse are not virtues but fodder for ridicule?” Education and intellectual discourse is how this country was started. Did you ever read the Federalist Papers, the letters and discussions between Adams and Jefferson? Education and intellectual discourse will always be fodder for ridicule! I’ll present a simple question? Did you ever watch TV to see the highly educated and presumed intellectuals masquerading as politicians who represent the people?
You comment, ” I wish people would use their real names and stand behind their comments publicly. It seems cowardly to toss out cavalier insults behind the mask of anonymity.” I, for one, am following the optional guidelines created by the editors. I do not have the slightest interest to know you or any other poster. I am not a political ideologue wanting to make a name or promote myself. I do not want over zealous activist types who may disagree with me call me to straighten me out. Posters and opinion writers have the option to respond or not. I agree with the moderator that comments should not have expletive language or direct personal insults. I occasionally respond to opinions for my own reasons. You do not know me but think guideline is cowardly. You opened the door to discussion and when you can’ t answer the responses you say good bye.
Peace, Caio and Amen.
Given Kevin’s last comment, it seems my good intention to share knowledge and dialogue on this topic have not been received in the spirit I intended. My regrets.
Thanks all for food for thought.
Heather, the Egyptian people identified forcing Mubarak from power as their goal. They achieved that. The fact that what happens now may not be your vision doesn’t make it any less of a victory.
Let’s say your goal was to get your PhD and you worked hard for years to do it. When you finally achieved it, you would perceive it as a victory, even if others thought your work was pointless to them.
Your anxieties about what happens next in Egypt aren’t relevant to whether the movement they achieved their goals or not. And I find it quite bizarre that think the criterion for whether something is worthwhile is whether it serves US foreign policy goals. Many Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Central Americans, Palestinians, and others around the world who’ve been harmed as a direct result of US policy would find that quite offensive.
Wow Kevin I was logging on to say the opposite
I think Prof Boaz has been very reasonable considering all these attacks calling her naive, ignorant, unpatriotic, etc for being pro nonviolence.
I am impressed that she took time to communicate here when she obviously didn’t have to and I for one am grateful for all the effort she puts in trying to make the world a better place! Thank you Prof Boaz!
@Cynthia Boaz… I have no doubt that you are an expert on this topic. But I will say that you come off as defensive, dismissive, superior and condensending. Perhaps those qualities are what is required of you in your field. Peace.
Cynthia:
I think most historians would say America has treated people from around the world better than any other country in recorded history. We might get things wrong from time to time but we are always fighting the good fight and working to advance freedom around the world.
Second, no one is entitled to anything in this world. Your liberty and freedom to do as you wish has been paid for by Men and Women who have been willing to defend this Country against all those who wish to do us harm. The same type of people who you and your lefty friends seem to love so much and very possibly just put in power in Egypt.
Mike,
Your history teacher and/or textbooks did you a grave disservice.
You seem to think that I believe every historical act should be chalked up to nonviolent action. Rather, I think we need to give the phenomenon credit where it’s deserved (the examples I named) and commit to understanding it’s power so that we are less inclined to resort to violent means so quickly to address grievances. Not just because it’s more ethical but because it tends to result in more long term legitimacy and stability.
Kevin,
The Chilean referendum against Pinochet was a nonviolent campaign. Having just returned from
Chile where I spoke on this very subject, I feel pretty confident saying that the Chilean people’s version of events does not square with yours.
Heather, why do you think Americans are more entitled to security and democracy than anyone else? Has it occurred to you that the more we (the US) treat people with dignity, the less we have to be concerned about? It’s the essence of the Golden Rule, which, I’m guessing you believe in.
Joyce, will you email me privately at my SSU account? I would like to continue conversing with you directly.
@ Boaz
Hitler took over Germany non-violently. He was elected. Not a good thing as it turned out. As you would say, East Germany fell, not because the people voted non-violently, but because the Russian tanks and troops withdrew. You may not be old enough to remember that, but that is what happened.
The British withdrew from their empire in Africa and Asia peacefullly, not because the non-violent movement forced them out.
The load of coal you sell is just history dressed up as something it never was and never will be. Too bad you and your minons continue to spread this gospel like it was real history in our colleges and universities.
@Cynthia Boaz. Perhaps we define success differently. It’s late so I’ll address Chili. In Chili, Pinochet was never overthrown. The non violent protests were sucessful in getting the government to permit a greater freedom of assembly and speech. However, Pinochet maintained the capacity to repress and to commit human rights violations and it wasn’t altogether non violent as he was the victim of an assassination attempt by the FPMR which also bombed electrical and water plants. He left power only after losing a democratic election.
And glancing at the other countries you mention I can see several that were successfully non violent due to the military refusing to fire on their own people, specifically one that you didn’t mention which is the Velvet Revolution of 1989 in Czechoslovakia.
I don’t think we’re arguing a case of for or against non violent actions as much as how the non violent actions achieve success.
@ Cynthia Boaz
It’s not often I respond to an article or blog in this manner, but as I read each comment and response I found some of your comments to be contradicting, often without substance or simply condescending.
“The Egyptian people forced their leader from power nonviolently after a 30-year reign of tyranny. In what scenario is that not a victory? “ I believe someone already commented on this statement, but I would also point out that this will take time to play out. It’s presumptuous of you to claim this as a victory when it’s not clear of who will have the power over the people. Here is a link to a video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TsZ42JylR8&feature=player_embedded#at=87
Do you know who this man is? Why was he a speaker at this rally? Did you know the young man from Google was expecting to speak and he was disregarded? I pray for peace for the Egyptian people and that your vision of the outcome for these people will come to be, but in all honesty, your statements are quite naïve in your many assumptions of expertise of the Egyptian culture and current events.
“If people used the argument that things must be one way because that’s the way they’ve always been, humankind would never have progressed at all.” I believe the best argument would be the truth in History. I don’t believe the argument is that things must be one way because that’s the way they’ve always been……it is History itself telling us the outcome repeats itself. If it doesn’t and humankind has “progressed” as you say, why are there still wars, famine, murders, dictators, hate, addiction, sickness….? Why is there such a great call for world peace? Where is the progression? I don’t claim to have an education, nor do I claim to have answers to things I have no experience in, but I do know people learn from mistakes and one of the wonderful things about history is if recorded carefully and factually, we do not have to repeat mistakes of the past. Our problem is….our U.S. History taught in schools has been tampered with for decades and has been skewed by individuals who have distaste for our founding principles and documents. History will repeat it’s self if lessons are not learned. Rewriting history on a whim will not make a peaceful fair world, no matter how good the intentions are. Things are the way they are because people do not learn from the mistakes of the past or ignoring the lessons intended. People have not progressed….we are still people.
“The success of mass nonviolent action actually makes the world safer because it shows young people in the Middle East (and elsewhere) that there are other options besides violence and terrorism for getting their grievances addressed.” Does Lara Logan ring a bell? What about Katie Couric or the other reporters? There was violence, there were injured and yes…there were deaths.
One more thing….had I not used my real name or picture, would my word not have read the same? There may be a reason some may not wish to have their names or pictures on the internet, your remarks to them were not necessary.
Cynthia:
The events in Egypt were entirely Egyptian, not true. Obama and his administration couldn’t pull the rug out on Mubarak fast enough. Instead of staying out of it or telling him and the Military he had our full support we did the exact opposite and encouraged the revolt through our official statements and actions.
Allowing problems to manifest, ignoring growing threats and not protecting our self interest are traits most often associated with liberals and liberal foreign policy, not conservatives.
What I am promoting is doing what is best for the United States. I am curious since you are all about promoting Democracy are you a big George Bush supporter now that the potential for “Democracy exists” in both Iraq and Afghanistan following our pro-democracy military interventions?
With regard to your question asking “Do you realize that what you’re promoting is completely hypocritical? Would you let Egyptians pick our leaders?”
So it is ok for you to teach these radicals on ways to overthrow their government, which is a great friend of ours, but it is not ok for me to want the USA to stand by one of the only moderate Arab leaders in that area? I just want to understand the ground rules. Or perhaps you and all of the other left leaning groups that supported the coup are actually Egyptian and I just wasn’t aware of it.
And yes, I have no problem in America being involved in the affairs of other Countries when it could negatively impact us not to be involved. That is the responsibility one has when they are a Super Power and the biggest provider of aid to so many countries.
You said, “The success of mass nonviolent action actually makes the world safer because it shows young people in the Middle East (and elsewhere) that there are other options besides violence and terrorism for getting their grievances addressed.”
To this I would just say, ask the CBS and other reporters that got raped and assaulted during the celebration about how nonviolent these protesters really are. My guess is if we could go back in time you would have said the same things about the overthrow of the Shah in Iran in the 1970′s and we know how that turned out. By the way, when are you organizing protests in Iran? The reality is nobody knows how things will play out in Egypt, all we know for sure, is a stable leader has been kicked out, and something will be replacing it. And everyone knows that when the chips are down, the USA will now leave you hanging in the wind, what a great lesson to teach those in the Middle East.
You said, “Given the point above, you should be thanking the Egyptian people for doing their part to delegitimize violence as a tool of change.”
Come on, you really believe that? Let’s look a little closer to home, I don’t think the Union Thugs in Madison got that message, as they sent death threats and thugs to the Capitol to try and strong arm elected officials into doing the Union’s bidding.
You said, “If you support democracy in the United States, you must support it elsewhere. Would have allowed the Egyptians to intervene in (and dictate the outcome of) our presidential elections, even if you didn’t like the candidate(s)?”
Why, where does it say that in our constitution? What we have to do is look out for our own National Interest. Luckily for the rest of the World, what is best for us, is best for them. That is how it always has been and hopefully will continue to be.
You said, “Are you willing to tell the Egyptian people they should have continued to suffer under Mubarak because YOU think he’s better for YOU than who they MIGHT choose to succeed him?”
As a woman, I am surprised that you could even ask the question. Let’s see in six months or a year how much suffering is taking place when the majority of Egyptians vote in a Muslim based form of government that puts Egypt on course to return back to the stone age where women have no rights.
You said, “- In that same PEW poll you cited, the following stats also emerged:
- 80% of Egyptian Muslims have an unfavorable view of Al Qaeda”
So 20% have a favorable view of Al Qaeda and that was with Mubarak clamping down on dissent and Islamic extremism. What happens now when the Muslim Brotherhood takes hold and is a major player in the Government.
You said, “60% of Egyptian Muslims say that democracy is preferable to any other kind of government”
That’s great, they can democratically elect Muslim extremists and they can enact sharia law. Go democracy.
You said, “- 80% of Egyptian Muslims say violence against civilian targets in order to defend Islam is never justifiable”
Ok, last time I checked no one asked me what type of violence was justifiable to defend Catholicism. The fact that the question is even asked should set off huge alarms. In fact this is my whole point, we, or should I say you and Barack Hussein Obama, just helped to create another Islamic State with all the freedoms and joy we have come to expect from such a peaceful and freedom loving religion, that is unless you’re gay, a woman, a girl that doesn’t want to be married when they are 8, or not a Muslim.
Finally, I sleep pretty good at night for two reasons.
First, I know 2012 is just around the corner.
And Second, as George Orwell said “People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
Kevin,
What about the cases of Chile, Poland, Serbia, Ukraine, South Africa, the Philippines, the Maldives, Argentina, East Germany, and every other example of successful mass nonviolent action?
Dr Boaz, you’re painting me with a very broad stroke. I never once said that the non violent method in which the Mubarak regime overthrown was “bad” or did I mention the Muslim Brotherhood. The point I was attempting to make was that in my opinion the credit for the peaceful overthrow was due to their Armed Forces being a professional American trained force which didn’t automatically take violent action. I’ll add that I’m not convinced that peaceful non violent protests will be what’s required to overthrow the thugs who rule these countries. We already have Saudi troops moving into Bahrain with 5 dead and 40 killed in Yemen since January. It would seem that the peacefull non violent protests are more of a gesture than a tactic.
@Mike “The United States stands for freedom and peace in the world, not you left wing ideologues” Whose freedom and peace do we stand for! Last I heard it belonged to everyone even the left wing! The only ones trying to stifle freedom in the last few years were the right wing with their surveillance and so-called national security measures designed to instill fear and stifle criticism of the government not the left wing! And since when is freedom and peace only something we are entitled to in this country! Seems everyone in the world should be entitled to it and to be against those that are struggling for it, whether you like their views or not, is just plain “un-American” to coin a phrase!
@Josh, I did answer your question. I support the use of nonviolent methods, period. The ideology and objectives of movements are a totally separate issue.
@Heather, the fact that you think the outcome in Egypt is the manifestation of a “liberal foreign policy” is telling. Here are several problems with your statement, however:
- The events in Egypt were entirely Egyptian. They were not orchestrated by the United States and were not the result of a policy by the United States.
- If anything, the position I am taking (of essentially non-intervention by external parties in the process of nonviolent people power revolutions) is regarded in the foreign policy community as conservative, not liberal.
- Do you realize that what you are promoting is the opposite of democracy?
- Do you realize that what you’re promoting is completely hypocritical? Would you let Egyptians pick our leaders?
- The success of mass nonviolent action actually makes the world safer because it shows young people in the Middle East (and elsewhere) that there are other options besides violence and terrorism for getting their grievances addressed.
- Given the point above, you should be thanking the Egyptian people for doing their part to delegitimize violence as a tool of change.
- If you support democracy in the United States, you must support it elsewhere. Would have allowed the Egyptians to intervene in (and dictate the outcome of) our presidential elections, even if you didn’t like the candidate(s)?
- Are you willing to tell the Egyptian people they should have continued to suffer under Mubarak because YOU think he’s better for YOU than who they MIGHT choose to succeed him?
- In that same PEW poll you cited, the following stats also emerged:
- 80% of Egyptian Muslims have an unfavorable view of Al Qaeda
- 60% of Egyptian Muslims say that democracy is preferable to any other kind of government
- 80% of Egyptian Muslims say violence against civilian targets in order to defend Islam is never justifiable
- 70% of Egyptian Muslims are concerned about/opposed to Islamic extremism
Instead of parroting the Islamophobia talking points that are trumpeted endlessly on our 24-hour “news” networks, I suggest you get a broader perspective. Although it may challenge some core beliefs you hold, the upside is that you’ll probably sleep a little better at night knowing that as Islamist “caliphate” is not around the corner.
@ Cynthia,
Your unwillingness to answer my questions,and instead pivot to the kind of condescension that most of us have come to expect from people on the left,says a lot about you.When you use terms like “laymen” and “I will accept”,whether you understand it or not,you’re communicating to others that you see them as being…a little lower on the intellectual totem pole.
I’m not taking our disagreement personally…
I’m just very good at tweeking liberals and getting them to animate themselves.
Don’t take it personally,;)
Cynthia:
Here is something to consider, are we as Americans really better off now that Mubarak is out? I don’t think so. We took a long time ally of ours and threw him under the bus. All this does is weaken our national security in the region not to mention Israel’s. We also sent a very strong and clear message to every other country all around the world that loyalty doesn’t mean anything to us. But I guess that is nothing new as the people in charge now are the same people who pushed so hard for us to abandon our ally in South Vietnam in the 60′s and 70′s.
As for the new freedoms in Egypt and those great “peaceful” students let me just share a few results from a recent Pew Research Center Poll conducted in Egypt.
Of the Muslims in Egypt surveyed, 82% favored stoning someone to death for adultry. 77% favored whippings, or amputations for petty theft and robbery, and 84% favored the death penalty for those who leave the Muslim Religion. Ah, another liberal foriegn policy success.
Mike,
Not only are you uncivil but your interpretation of history is stunningly inaccurate.
More to the point, unless you use your real and full name here, I think we can all agree that your belligerence is mask for cowardice.
Boaz, take your non-violent rubbish to Iran and see how far you get in your revolutionary ideas. I want a refund on your state salary for the tripe you are petaling to the poor students at SSU.
Your international peace movement was very popular in the old Soviet Union and look what happened to it. Your ideals and beliefs and anti-American dogma has caused to many wars and massive deaths since 1945.
The United States stands for freedom and peace in the world, not you left wing ideologues.
I want to ask a question of Josh, Kevin, Skippy, and anyone else who is arguing that what happened in Egypt is bad because it may lead to more influence for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Do you really think you have the right to tell the Egyptian people that they should have continued to suffer under Mubarak because you- as an American- might not like who they choose to succeed him?
That position represents an open hostility to the very idea of democracy.
Generally speaking, the more a layperson (especially on/in media) speaks in generalizations about people or countries of the Middle East or Islam, the more they reveal how little they understand.
Incidentally, I never said people who posted here were unintelligent, but the fact that you felt the need to pre-emptively and defensively point that out tells us a bit about your confidence in your own views, Josh. If I held that view, I wouldn’t bother engaging discussion. Not to mention that you started out hostile and have continued to be so, as though you take our disagreement over these events personally. When something hits a nerve to that degree, perhaps you need to reexamine your perspectives.
Also, fyi, Muslim women were amongst the key leaders of the Egyptian uprising.
One more thing regarding types of movements: while theoretically any group can use these methods, I have never seen a case of a group with nefarious goals (say the KKK) take the time to learn and apply these strategies. I think it has to do with means and ends being connected. People who are intent on removing rights for others aren’t generally patient enough to do it nonviolently.
Josh,
I know many women from Iran, Afghanistan and elsewhere and I can tell you this: in hundreds of conversations with Muslim women from repressive countries, not one has ever asked that the United States please bomb her country on her behalf.
The best organized movement in the Middle East is arguably the Iranian Women’s Movement.
If you’re tired of “emotion-based platitudes” and of discussing nonviolent action, why are you still reading?
Josh,
Your question doesn’t make sense to me, because as part of this work, I don’t offer judgments about the goals of a movement (although I do, for example, prefer democracy to the alternatives). Rather, I study and then share knowledge on how nonviolent action works. In other words, I look at the phenomenon and the strategy as means to ends, but it’s up to movements to designate their own objectives. It’s about the process. Whatever emerges from a democratic and nonviolent process is likely to be more enduring and more legitimate than something that emerges through violent means.
But to answer your question another way, I would be encouraged by the application of nonviolent strategy (as opposed to the alternatives) by US-based movements, regardless of whether or not I agreed with the objectives they sought.
@ Cynthia,
Would you support groups in this country(unions,tea-party,immigrant groups)using these same tactics to say…bring a major U.S city to a screeching halt through non-violent mass protests,to force changes in government policy?
And if so,which groups would be on your “approved” list?
@ Cynthia,
Your mindless repetition of the term “non-violent” is getting old,and does little to buttress your emotion-based platitudes.
Cynthia,what are your views on the treatment of women in Islamic cultures compared to our own.
And how do you think women,in general, will fair under a new Egypt if the Muslim Brotherhood gains a majority?
Oh, my. “The Egyptian people demanded freedom and they got it . .”
Really? I thought what really happened was the army told Mubarek “time to go. We’re taking over.” That is, what occurred was an army coup.
Egypt is not free today. It may have a better chance at freedom today than before, although I note women demanding greater rights in “Freedom Square” were not well received by all those “freedom-loving” men.
Time will tell how this turns out.
Does the nonviolent transition give them a “leg up.” Maybe, maybe not. Sometimes a revolution that sweeps aside the rot is necessary. It looks to me like the same people are running Egypt today as yesterday, save for one man.
@Reality Check,
Are you suggesting that the victory of the people of Egypt was somehow less meaningful because their tyrant wasn’t quite as brutal as, say, the IRI? What an insult. The Egyptian people demanded freedom and they got it, nonviolently.
Does the fact that South Africa is having some problems today take anything away from the fact that the people forced an end to apartheid there? Does the fact that there is still structural racism in the American political system take away from the enormous accomplishments of the US Civil Rights Movement? Of course not.
Revolutions have two primary phases- what Gandhi called “Obstructive Program” (ending the old system of injustice) and “Constructive Program” (creating something new and better in its place). Ideally, full and democratic revolutions have both. The Egyptian people have completed the first phase and are now looking towards the second. Instead of reinforcing negative perceptions of Arabs/Muslims with cynical predictions, why don’t you acknowledge this victory for what it was? It was a nonviolent removal of a long-term authoritarian tyrant though an organized and disciplined (and secular) strategic campaign.
Wouldn’t you at least agree that a nonviolent transition from Mubarak’s rule is a better start to what comes next than a violent transition would have been? That it gives them a leg up as they move into the next phase?
Agreed Dr. Boaz.
However a willfully enforced denial of the dark sides of human nature cannot be our only defense.
Unilateralism in disarmament or the hope that destructive forces will be ashamed to act is literally putting your life where your mouth is.
May peace prevail on Earth is a nearly universal sentiment.
Prudence, responsibility and maturity require a Plan B with teeth.
I hope you and your associates are successful in changing basic human nature. War is all hell.
The future belongs to those who survive to greet it.
//The Egyptian people forced their leader from power nonviolently after a 30-year reign of tyranny. In what scenario is that not a victory?//
We’ll know more in a year or two. It’s early, too early, to declare victory. In the early weeks after Iran’s Shah fell similarly optimistic pronouncement were made. Alas, we know what followed.
By Middle East standards, sad to say, Murbarek was a moderate.
I do not filter comments based on my own personal political point of view. You can find ample evidence in the wide spectrum of opinions expressed on WSC.
I have responded offline to “Really Big Fish” explaining why his/her comment did not clear the bar.
Ted Appel
WSC Moderator
Skippy,
If people used the argument that things must be one way because that’s the way they’ve always been, humankind would never have progressed at all.
@Josh,
The Egyptian people forced their leader from power nonviolently after a 30-year reign of tyranny. In what scenario is that not a victory?
I agree that it’s not over and that we can’t necessarily conclude that because Mubarak is gone, the Egyptian people no longer need to think about what comes next. But again, that is their call to make, not yours. The downside of democracy is the uncertainty.
@Really Big Fish-
I know of only a handful of people who study this phenomenon at this level. There is no textbook.
Have we really come to a place in this country where education and intellectual discourse are not virtues but fodder for ridicule?
I wish people would use their real names and stand behind their comments publicly. It seems cowardly to toss out cavalier insults behind the mask of anonymity.
@ moderator Ted Appel.
Why didn’t you allow my comments on this thread. Are you so left wing that as a journalist and editor you would restrict comments with a differing perspective? Why don’t you post it and let the audience decide?
@ Ms. Boaz. There are two points that I would like to make. Concerning my comments in the first post I queried if the non-violent open discussion group could speak with the Mexican drug cartels along our Mexican border killing Americans and Mexican citizens and perhaps stop the gang banging in Santa Rosa.
The second thought is that Castro thought his people were suffering from injustice and now we have a billionaire murdering tyrant. Jimmy Carter thought it would be peaceful idea to remove the Shah of Iran and let the peace loving Iman rule Iran for his people.
Ms. Boaz, I personally deplore violence like most people I know. I don’t even own a gun. You can tell you are a professor as your answers are right out the textbook. It’s my life’s experince that liberalism in this society especially via the media that has created a cult of violence.
In your progressive academic heart you really believe that the Muslim Brotherhood had nothing to do the non-violent uprising in Egypt? Do you feel assured that these new democracy hopefuls will be our peaceful friends and perhaps allies against violence and terror?
Peace. Caio and Amen.
@ Cynthia
I did not disparage the concept of non-violence.
What I did was state the facts that you left out.
\The Revolution\ as far as we know,is not over.It will be playing itself out for months to come.Until then,I’m not so sure any of us can call this a \success\ just yet.
@ Cynthia Boaz, Point taken, my apologies.
I am more than willing to recognize and support non-violent revolution. Long have I advocated the mass non-participation in the IRS.
If this particular revolution is successful in creating a just and free society I will be applauding wildly.
That presupposes that other entities in Egypt will step aside for the brighter angels of liberty. There are many parties who may not. For that reason alone the new govt. will absolutely need the mechanisms to project force and bend/break the will of those who would hijack the revolution and the current vacuum.
Let’s be honest. Guns in the right hands are always a good idea. They allow peace to prevail. When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace.
There is a reason the US is able to be first on scene with the most at every earthquake/tsunami/hurricane/flood on the planet. That reason is the 10 Nimitz-class carrier groups we have positioned around the globe. but they are more than International ER’s.
They deter and discourage by their mere existence many real threats to our people.
Without the credible ability and the demonstrated will to use force, peace is a long-term impossibility. History, though unpleasant, is nonetheless very real, and very true.
What is happening in the Middle East and Egypt has a lot to do with Iran. Their operatives and allies are behind much of what we see happening. The problem is Obama and the American government provide no leadership for the rest of the world. Obama thinks this country has been responsible for most of the evil in the world so he will not take effective leadership to counter Iran’s aggression.
When the dust clears, these will not turn out to be democratic regimes. Extremists will be in charge just as they are in Gaza and Lebanon. Iran is the chief player in Turkey, Syria, Lebanon and Palistine. These regimes, allied with Iran now are headed in the direction or in the camp of an anti western, pro-Iran policy. We sit on the side lines just waiting for the next country to fall.
The security of the West and the United States depends on Middle East oil and on the Suez Canal. The left in this country can sit by and let it all happen or be a player and get an outcome that will prevent catastrophe for the West and yes, even for us here in little old Sonoma County and SSU.
Josh,
It’s not my narrative; it’s the narrative of the Egyptian people, which I am simply conveying.
Would you allow Egyptians to determine for Americans what was really “going on” in our country? No? Then who are you to correct their own narrative of what is happening in their country?
The views you express demonstrate that at least a handful of people bought Mubarak’s ridiculous propaganda.
Hey Skippy and Kevin,
the world feels very much like violence is the ultimate source of power at times, so your opinions are understandably widespread and, dare I say, very mainstream. But that idea, that violence is the ultimate way to engage in conflict, is also what is relentlessly filtered through our civilization’s focus on the history of warfare and military victories, of male dominated kingdoms and empires and our modern media and popular culture’s captivation with all things violent. If you remove that overwhelming filter you can start to see the hidden histories of nonviolent struggle and popular uprisings like that of Egypt and the histories of ordinary people refusing to co-operate with injustice. The fascinating dynamics of ‘non-cooperation’, when entire systems of oppression fall due to key sectors of people withdrawing their consent are very well researched these days. You may not be aware, for example, that during the Vietnam War, over 70% of US service personal were involved in some form of internal resistance activity against the war – and soldier non-cooperation was so widespread that it impacted significantly on US war fighting strategies and the eventual withdrawal. It’s just one of many hidden histories obscured by our society’s ‘violence = power’ filter. A RPG may be powerful – but it is worthless if the soldier refuses to fire it. For that refusal to occur (which takes an enormous amount of bravery in itself) – then some sort of relationship between the soldier and the people he is ordered to fire upon must exist. That dynamic is extremely interesting and is the sort of ‘power’ that our societies do not tend to emphasize.
Josh,
There was some isolated violence- that is undeniable. But we must be careful in drawing a conclusion that because some people acted violently, the movement itself was violent. History will not remember this as an armed insurrection, but as a victory for mass nonviolent action.
It was true that there was an undisciplined element in the revolution, but that is always inevitable as these things grow, because not everyone has been trained in nonviolent strategy.
But the movement itself was nonviolent and they’ve been preparing for this confrontation for a long time. They understand the necessity of strict nonviolent discipline.
Just as there was a radical flank in South Africa, in the US Civil Rights movement, in the Chilean resistance to Pinochet, and in many other nonviolent uprisings, there may have been a more radical flank here. Therefore it was the job of the movement to a) distinguish themselves from that contingent, b) make it clear that no violence will be tolerated as part of the struggle, and c) train and discipline new activists on the ground as they join. They succeeded on all counts.
It is important to see that Mubarak was doing everything he could to provoke violence (or at the least, the perception of it) by the movement. He wanted to create the notion that what the movement was doing was not nonviolent and therefore not legitimate. It was critical that the activists minimized their vulnerability to such agent provocateurs, which they did extraordinarily well, especially considering the size of this movement. When you make blanket statements belittling the power and discipline of nonviolent action, you are serving the interests of tyrants like Mubarak. That is exactly what people like him want you think.
If anything, the relative lack of violence in a revolution of this scale and in a country of this size is breathtaking. Why aren’t you acknowledging that?
@ Cynthia
The reason for the “thumbs down” has little to do with your tit-for-tat with Kevin.
The people who post on this website are not stupid.The majority of us simply do not buy your narrative on what took place in Egypt.
I would love to know why those who gave my comments to Kevin a “thumbs down” did so. I presume it’s because they agree with him, but so did I (about credit belonging to the Egyptians). So, what is the problem exactly?
I am genuinely curious and although I would appreciate real names behind the responses, I will accept anonymity.
The Int’l labor unions also have considerable “skin in the game”.As austerity movements continue in Europe and the U.S.,more members will be needed.
Like locusts,they move on to the next feast.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/02/labor-unions-lead-the-charge-in-egypt/
Never let a crisis go to waste.
The economy in the Middle East is FAR worse than what we are experiencing here.With food prices in particular reaching horrific levels.
These uprisings ARE NOT inspired by a desire for democracy.They are being planned and executed by a cadre of political entities who are capitalizing on the situation,and who will be competing against each other in the coming months to gain supremacy.
MAKE NO MISTAKE,the Muslim Brotherhood WILL have the upper hand and will take control!
“Non-Violent?” tell that to Laura Logan.
Dear Kevin,
Your comment puzzles me. I don’t take any credit for anything that happened in Egypt, nor is anyone giving me any. I do have a background in the field and connections to some of the folks in Egypt who made this revolution possible. I think the purpose of the article was to highlight some dynamics that the general media audience may not have been privy to, to dispel some common misconceptions, and to share some information about why the mass nonviolent action in Egypt worked.
I completely agree that all credit should go to the Egyptian people and have made that case repeatedly in the face of those who would take away agency by attributing it to the military, the United States, backroom deals or sheer luck.
I think too much credit is being given to Dr. Boaz. I don’t doubt that her conversations with these students were beneficial to both parties, but the credit goes out to the Egyptian armed forces for showing great restraint. Many of their top commanders trained in The United States. It’s the people with the guns that decide if there will be peace. Libya is not the exception, it’s the norm. Egypt is the exception. I think you’ll be waiting a long time before you see another Middle East country fall without bloodshed. History is on my side.
I want to add a bit more to the article, just for context. My role with the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict is as an academic advisor, so I’m compensated for travel to its educational events and for time I spend conferring with my fellow advisors and those who want to learn about civil resistance.
Also, to be more specific, ICNC did not hold, and I did not attend, a workshop for Egyptian students. Every summer it offers an Advanced Institute in the Study of Nonviolent Conflict at the Fletcher School at Tufts University, where I often teach, and this is where I met these young Egyptian professionals referenced in the article. They were two amongst dozens of us in attendance each year from various countries, all there to share knowledge about strategic nonviolent action.
Skippy,
Instead of reinforcing outdated and erroneous stereotypes on the comments section of this page, I challenge you to expose yourself to the knowledge on and empirical support for nonviolent civil resistance. I would be happy to talk with you in person, on the agreement that you are willing to keep an open mind. You are obviously missing a lot of information and as you know, education and information are critical to a healthy democratic citizenship.
Feel free to contact me via email if you want to engage in some real-world intellectual discourse.
Professor Cynthia Boaz
An undeniable truth of life:
This is a world governed by the aggressive use of force.
It would sure be nice if tyrants left when asked, but it happens so rarely as to be insignificant.
For example we in America have a First Amendment solely because we have the Second.
Both the Japanese Empire and the USSR shelved any plans to invade America solely on the basis of the gun leaning behind every kitchen door in this country.
Peace and freedom are wonderful, but they are never, ever free.
Skippy, on the basis of your statement, you’re the voice of the past and you have no idea how civil resistance produces power. Welcome to the 21st century: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/18407/why_civil_resistance_works.html
Good article, and great work, Dr. Boaz! The public needs to know that there is an international peace movement happening behind the scenes in many countries.
Despite what proof we may present, some people are only going to hear what they want to hear. To them I would say you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. If you take some time and check sites such as Twitter and Facebook, you’ll find there is a lot going on in the nonviolence community. There are many organizations, and many more individuals who are devoted to evolving our societies peacefully.
The nations of the Middle East that are in various stages of uprising are turning to nonviolence primarily because they have little choice (they are outgunned), and secondarily because they are increasingly realizing the temporary and destructive effects of violence do not match the constructive and long-lasting change brought about by nonviolence. Libya is an exception, because they have not organized and planned and worked from the inside (for a long time) as was done in Egypt, and because they have a lot of guns and RPGs instead of advocates for peaceful change.
Skippy, belittling the internet and praising weapons does not change what the facts are. You cannot deny that these conversations, these organizations, and these individuals are there in these countries and are making an increasing difference. This change is both inevitable and necessary.
My thanks to all who work for peace, and to the Egyptian people who have taught us something.
The last line is beyond hilarious in its naivite.
I’m sure the Muslim Brotherhood will be happy to be delegated to a minor role in Egypt’s new govt.
The nascent Egyptian revolution was on the rocks until they got themselves some firearms.
Mao had it right: Political power emanates from the barrel of a gun.
Twitter and Facebook have nothing on automatic weapons and RPG’s.