There is something mysterious in the affair that led to the fall of Ben Ali in Tunisia. Something about even Egypt. These are not the immediate causes of the insurgency, which are anything but obscure. What is mysterious to me has to do instead with the media representation of the story: it is the extraordinary evidence which has been treated in the media all the world.
The case is remarkable in comparison with other events far from remote, which were much more dramatic and no less pregnant with consequences. I refer in particular to one of the greatest slaughters of the twentieth century outside of the world wars that followed the 1991 insurrection in Algeria, a slaughter that lasted for most of the nineties, resulting in no less than 30,000 dead and perhaps estimates is not unrealistic, even 150,000. In comparison, the victims of today's movements, which are counted in the dozens or hundreds, really pale. Yet this huge drama
passed almost unnoticed. Just ask around who remembers. The fact is that, at least in the West, was buried by a general media silence. Massacres of hundreds of people a day were announced by sidebars on the ninth page, as if they had any importance. No images of the most tragic events was never transmitted in the international circuits. The Algerian tragedy is now eclipsed from the headlines and the Western public opinion was lost in oblivion.
The reasons for this silence were clear. The first round of elections was won by the Islamic Salvation Front, a coalition of Islamist terrorist who was once ranked by ' U.S. intelligence. The armed forces intervened militarily , took power and nullified the election. The project was strongly backed by Western governments, who judged an act of inevitable war on terrorism. The soldiers proceeded to destroy the opponents, who responded with violence, paving the way for the immense carnage.
was the first occasion on which we saw used on a large scale the principle that Frattini is repeating with categorical clarity these days: in Muslim countries, elections are only good friends if they win the West. Otherwise it's much better without it. In the name of this principle, the West was ready to tolerate, support, even encourage, a huge massacre. As long as Muslims, course.
The consequences of that choice was of epoch-making. E 'in the name of the principle that we are tolerated, supported and encouraged false democracies that are now under attack. And in so doing, it was a formidable power in the spread of Islamic extremism, which perhaps makes it easier for someone of his supposed opponents. The facts of the Algerian
'91 therefore had a huge potential for media impact, not only because they were highly dramatic, but also fraught with significance for the relationship between the West and the Muslim world.
What we managed to let them pass almost unnoticed, demonstrates unequivocally that there were centers power able to strongly influence the distribution, circulation and orientation information at the global level. I do not want to discuss here the nature of these centers of power, which is less simple than some suppose.
The question that imposes itself today, in front of the visibility afforded formidable insurrection Maghreb, is as follows: it is perhaps lost the ability of the centers of power to influence on information? Or is there someone in them who decided to encourage this battle? One of two things, tertium non datur .
The first hypothesis, at first glance, can not be excluded. If there one thing in the world of today is light years away from that of '91, this is the architecture of the communication. There is internet, there is a satellite, there are cell phones. There are three things that combine equip. Check it all became more difficult. It 'clear however that deceives those who believe that there are power centers capable of conditioning and possibly neutralize these new channels. Some people check Google, there are those who check Twitter, there are those who control Sky.
It 'obvious that there is someone who has weight in the vast network of old and new powers, which has chosen to open the tap turned on and let the screens around the world are inundated with their images. And 'this choice that has an enormous force for the movement.
Well, this choice can only come from within the American establishment. If we really understand what's happening, we should understand who is back. In the U.S., despite certain appearances, is in full swing a battle against Obama, who is played with no holds barred. It is easy to see which of the two sides should be attributed to the initiative, since they both show today instead decided to support the insurgency: just look at Fox, the Murdoch channel, the most conservative, pro-Zionist and anti-Obama that there is . Of course it seems more likely that the initiative is taken from the front obama, perhaps only one part of that front. But it is hard to say.
What is certain is that with the revolution of Tunisia has opened an entirely new chapter in the history of the Middle East and the entire Muslim world. Everyone understood that nothing will ever be. No one can predict what will be the culmination of this epochal transformation. Nobody is able to control it in full. Public opinion in Muslim countries are far more mature and wise than you think in general in the West. Certainly they are much more politically sophisticated American public opinion. What in the West commonly do not perceive is that Muslims in general know and understand the West far better than the familiar Western Muslims. What is more is at stake is also the critical relationship with the West China, which, as noted by the anthropologist Maria Paola Volpini in his commentary on the post 30.1 in this blog, seems to have all the reasons to support insurgencies.
But what is at stake in this particular moment is one thing: if at last be allowed to Arabs and all Muslims, to take charge of their own destiny. Perhaps someone more powerful than us decided it was time to do so. As for us who
believe in peace and grow brave the democratic dream, now, before the streets of Cairo in flames before the fire is going to flare up from Yemen to Jordan, Libya, Algeria and perhaps beyond, we can only feed a double wish: first, that violence will not prevail, which gives the strongest is always right, and second, to win genuine democracy. Not the democracy of Frattini, not that kind of tyranny that likes to masquerade as the elections only if they win his friends. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment