The U.S. Does Not Have a Role in the Arab Popular Movement

It is nonsensical to trace the popular movement that has coalesced in the form of revolutionary uprisings to American or Western institutions and [organizations]. Some have tried, however deliberately or naively, to portray [them in this respect]. The problem with those who do so is that they are unable to imagine that the [masses] are capable of taking the reins at decisive historical moments and [critical] turning points. [In a like manner others] make the U.S. and the West out to be two gods [when they claim that] it is not possible for a movement, or [even the] entire population of a country, to succeed on the international stage unless they do so according to the will and with the help and training of these twin deities. Yet these people neglect the laws of social movements and the lessons of history in human societies.

No one of sound mind could possibly believe that [Mohamed] Bouazizi lit himself on fire because he was encouraged to do so by the United States as part of a hidden U.S. plan to ignite a mass revolutionary uprising in Tunisia. Nobody could [possibly assert] that Egypt’s youth — after they have demonstrated such deep political awareness in building a consolidated movement that has become the axis around which the people of Egypt turn, in a revolution unlike anything that this country has seen even in its proverbially long history — are somehow manipulated by strings like puppets tied to skilled hands that control their movements, putting on a play from behind a screen. In reality, the mass movements [in these countries are the products] of diverse factors and reciprocal influences that these societies have undergone, which exploded in an [unexpected] moment of time yet broke forth at full strength to drawn their own road maps for change.

Yet, there is no doubt that there are those in the U.S. and the West who want to highlight [foreign] factors as the decisive ones in the emergence of the [protest] movements. There several distinct motives for them to do so, most of which betray a deliberately negative intention.

[In the first place] it serves to inflate [perceptions of] the political and intelligence powers of the West. This ensures that the image of the West and the U.S. is one of powerful countries that exercise hidden influence, like an octopus [whose tentacles are capable of] striking in every place. [The mere cultivation of] this image in fact serves policies of world hegemony.

In the second place, it is desirable for the West that the Arab nations lose confidence in themselves and their [creative] powers, and thereby lose confidence in their capability to make their desires heard and assert their independence.

In the third place, the U.S. wants to distort the positive impression that these Arab mass revolutions have made upon the rest of the world by making it look as though the “Arab Street” is [beholden] to the schemes and plans of foreigners.

In the fourth place, the West wants to dampen the spirits of the Arab crowds whose hearts are moved by the revolution so that they remain in a state of shame.

In the fifth place, it is desirable for the West to promote the idea that those present and future revolutions in the Arab world, regardless of their size, their leadership and the skill of their cadres could not happen without coordination with the great powers, as well as agreements and understandings with them. This attempt to blackmail the people and the revolutionary leadership has dangerous reflections upon those who do it because it could push the leadership of the uprisings to the cross the line of peace and nonviolence that these revolutions must respect in order to arrive at their ultimate goals.

Add to that the worn out and discredited organizations and their cronies who want to spoil the mass movement. These older groups stand against the newer ones by describing them as following the directions of foreign agents. This prevents others from realizing the reality of the situation and weakens the protest movements, mocking them and creating justifications for attacking them.

There might well be American and Western institutions and agencies working through prearranged plans to intervene in this string of revolutions, employing Facebook and other modern means to promote their own ends. Still, it is certain that these means alone would not have been enough to create a diverse revolution [for which] people sacrifice even their lives in pursuit of its success. Mere social networks would not produce a true movement to which the hearts of the people respond and to which they echo by making demands for a better future.

Is it possible that the U.S. and the West are undertaking certain policies to affect the course of events through their agents and allies within Arab societies? This would make it appear as though these movements are in fact managed from the outside. Their goal is to contain the expansion of these revolutions by endorsing them now, [thus discrediting them in the eyes of their supporters] and then isolating them later on. In this vision of the situation the U.S. and the West could direct affairs out of proportion to their actual power, robbing these popular movements of their authenticity and credibility.

It is fatally incorrect to praise the purposes of American and Western actions and words that that make it appear as though they support the current Arab Renaissance. The protest movements want to break the chains of humiliation and shame from the wrists of the Arabs and lead them in the direction of freedom and dignity. The idea that foreigners have any interest in promoting development, progress and social justice that would liberate the Arabs from dependence upon outsiders is laughable. It is a utopian view that deserves a sarcastic response rather than attention and acceptance. Perhaps the rapid course of revolutionary events that have been realized in our day and the American and Western attitudes in their face reveals that gross mistake, the idea that the American or Western role can change in this regard.

I believe that these mass movements in our countries have great credibility. The American and Western roles are really attempts to ride the wave and co-opt these revolutions in order to distort them from their true destiny. They want to control the mass movements and direct their perspectives into one that serves U.S. and Western interests. This could involve picking distinguished personalities, trying to tie them to the U.S. or encourage them to reach an understanding with the U.S. to seize control from the protestors. The U.S. and the West may try to create internal divisions to distort the destiny of the revolution. They may suggest intellectual or practical alternatives as though it were possible for them to constrain the revolution and drain it of its true significance and reverse [what they see as the] negative effects of these uprisings on the land and the people.

It is natural for the great powers to attempt to protect their interests and their domination in reality. From here, moving forward, we affirm the authenticity of the popular movements in our Arab societies. We warn that speaking of attempts to abort it would drain it of its significance and distort it from its true goals.

-An Islamic Religious Leader