Can we add Bahrain to this thread?

seems like you could've emotattacked obama in a different thread

Why Egypt Should Worry China

BERKELEY – A strictly economic interpretation of events in Tunisia and Egypt would be too simplistic – however tempting such an exercise is for an economist. That said, there is no question that the upheavals in both countries – and elsewhere in the Arab world – largely reflect their governments’ failure to share the wealth.

The problem is not an inability to deliver economic growth. In both Tunisia and Egypt, the authorities have strengthened macroeconomic policy and moved to open the economy. Their reforms have produced strong results. Annual growth since 1999 has averaged 5.1% in Egypt, and 4.6% in Tunisia – not Chinese-style growth rates, to be sure, but comparable nonetheless to emerging-market countries like Brazil and Indonesia, which are now widely viewed as economic successes.

Rather, the problem is that the benefits of growth have failed to trickle down to disaffected youth. The share of workers under the age of 30 is higher in North Africa and the Middle East than in any other part of the world. Their economic prospects are correspondingly more limited. University graduates find few opportunities outside of banking and finance. Anyone who has traveled to the region will have had an experience with a highly literate, overeducated tour guide.

With modern manufacturing underdeveloped, many young workers with fewer skills and less education are consigned to the informal sector. Corruption is widespread. Getting ahead depends on personal connections of the sort enjoyed by the sons of military officers and political officials, but few others.

It may stretch credulity to think that a high-growth economy like China might soon be facing similar problems. But the warning signs are there. Given the lack of political freedoms, the Chinese government’s legitimacy rests on its ability to deliver improved living standards and increased economic opportunity to the masses. So far those masses have little to complain about. But that could change, and suddenly.

First, there is the growing problem of unemployment and underemployment among university graduates. Since 1999, when the Chinese government began a push to ramp up university education, the number of graduates has risen seven-fold, but the number of high-skilled, high-paying jobs has not kept pace.

Indeed, the country is rife with reports of desperate university graduates unable to find productive employment. Newspapers and blogs speak of the “ant tribe” of recent graduates living in cramped basements in the country’s big cities while futilely searching for work.

In part, these unfortunate outcomes reflect the inflexibility of China’s education system. Students spend their entire four years at university studying a single subject, be it accounting or computer science. As a result, they have few skills that can be applied elsewhere if the job they expect fails to materialize. There has also been a tendency to push students into fields like engineering, even though the Chinese economy is now beginning to shift from manufacturing to services.

Thus, China needs to move quickly on education reform. It needs to provide its university students with more flexible skills, more general training, and more encouragement to think critically and creatively.

Moreover, there is the problem of less-skilled and less-educated migrants from the countryside, who are consigned to second-class jobs in the cities. Not possessing urban residency permits, they lack even the limited job protections and benefits of workers who do. And, because they may be here today but gone tomorrow, they receive little in the way of meaningful on-the-job training.

The migrants’ predicament underscores the need to reform hukou, China’s system of residency permits. A handful of provinces and cities have gone so far as to abolish it, without catastrophic consequences. Others could usefully follow their lead.

Finally, China needs to get serious about its corruption problem. Personal connections, or guanxi, remain critical for getting ahead. Recent migrants from the countryside and graduates with degrees from second-tier universities sorely lack such connections. If they continue to see the children of high government officials doing better, their disaffection will grow.

The ability of disaffected youth – university-educated youth in particular – to use social media to organize themselves has been on powerful display recently in Tunisia, Egypt, and elsewhere. Last month, it was still possible for the Egyptian government to halt all Internet traffic and for the Chinese authorities to block the Chinese word for “Egypt” from its Twitter-like service Sina. But in social media, as in banking, the regulated tend to stay one step ahead of the regulators. Such shutdowns will be increasingly difficult to enforce.

If Chinese officials don’t move faster to channel popular grievances and head off potential sources of disaffection, they could eventually be confronted with an uprising of their own – an uprising far broader and more determined than the student protest that they crushed in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

Barry Eichengreen is Professor of Economics and Political Science at the University of California, Berkeley. His most recent book is Exorbitant Privilege: The Rise and Fall of the Dollar.

Well, I read a car bomb was used against troops in Libya.

Ya know what puzzles me? Those arab fellows seem to dig up AK out of their arses everytime they protest against joos, America and shit like that. Nevermind they build and smugle crude missiles. But when they bitch about their government, they kinda suck gear wise.

AP a0805 ui -----
BC-AF--Libya-Protests, 10th Ld-Writethru,1644
Gadhafi's hold on Libya weakens in protest wave
Eds: Updates scene in Tripoli with pro-Gadhafi forces urging people to stay indoors. AP Video.
AP Photo CAI113, CAI117, CAI109, CAI110, CAI111, CAI112, CAI114, CAI115, CAI116, CAI118, NY109, NY110, NY111, CAI108, CAI107, CAI106, CAI104, CAI105, CAI103, CAI102, CAI101, NY121
By MAGGIE MICHAEL
Associated Press
CAIRO (AP) - Deep cracks opened in Moammar Gadhafi's regime Monday, with Libyan government officials at home and abroad resigning, air force pilots defecting and a major government building ablaze after clashes in the capital of Tripoli. Protesters called for another night of defiance against the Arab world's longest-serving leader despite a crackdown.
At sunset, pro-Gadhafi militia drove around Tripoli with loudspeakers and told people not to leave their homes, witnesses said, as security forces sought to keep the unrest that swept eastern parts of the country - leaving the second-largest city of Benghazi in protesters' control - from overwhelming the capital of 2 million people.
State TV said the military had "stormed the hideouts of saboteurs" and urged the public to back security forces. Protesters called for a new demonstration in Tripoli's central Green Square and in front of Gadhafi's residence.
Gadhafi appeared to have lost the support of at least one major tribe, several military units and his own diplomats, including the delegation to the United Nations. Deputy U.N. Ambassador Ibrahim Dabbashi accused Gadhafi of committing genocide against his own people in the current crisis.
Warplanes swooped low over Tripoli in the evening and snipers took up position on roofs, apparently to stop people outside the capital from joining protests, according to Mohammed Abdul-Malek, a London-based opposition activist in touch with residents.
Communications to the capital appeared to have been cut, and residents' mobile phones could not be reached from outside the country. State TV showed video of hundreds of Gadhafi supporters rallying in Green Square, waving palm fronds and pictures of the Libyan leader.
The first major protests to hit an OPEC country - and major supplier to Europe - have sent oil prices jumping, and the industry has begun eyeing reserves touched only after Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the first Gulf War in 1991.
Tripoli was largely shut down Monday, with schools, government offices and most stores closed, except for a few bakeries, said residents, who hunkered down in their homes. Armed members of pro-government organizations called "Revolutionary Committees" hunted for protesters in Tripoli's old city, said one protester named Fathi.
Members of the militia occupied the city center and no one was able to walk in the street, said one resident who lived near Green Square and spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation, describing a "very, very violent" situation.
"We know that the regime is reaching its end and Libyans are not retreating," the resident said. "People have a strange determination after all that happened."
Another witness in Tripoli said armed men were roaming the streets of the capital's upscale diplomatic neighborhood and firing heavily. He said they were dressed in uniforms of pro-Gadhafi militia. They opened fire on a group of protesters gathering to organize a march and people in the area were weeping over bodies on the ground.
Residents hoped that help would arrive from the other parts of the country.
The eruption of turmoil in the capital after seven days of protests and bloody clashes in Libya's eastern cities sharply escalated the challenge to Gadhafi. His security forces have unleashed the bloodiest crackdown of any Arab country against the wave of protests sweeping the region, which toppled the leaders of Egypt and Tunisia. At least 233 people have been killed so far, according to New York-based Human Rights Watch.
British Prime Minister David Cameron, visiting neighboring Egypt, called the Libyan government's crackdown "appalling."
"The regime is using the most vicious forms of repression against people who want to see that country - which is one of the most closed and one of the most autocratic - make progress," he told reporters in Cairo.
The heaviest fighting so far has been in the east. Security forces in Benghazi opened fire on Sunday on protesters storming police stations and government buildings. But in several instances, units of the military turned against them and sided with protesters.
By Monday, protesters had claimed control of the city, overrunning its main security headquarters, called the Katiba.
Celebrating protesters raised the flag of the country's old monarchy, toppled in 1969 by a Gadhafi-led military coup, over Benghazi's main courthouse and on tanks around the city.
"Gadhafi needs one more push and he is gone," said Amal Roqaqie, a lawyer at the Benghazi court, saying protesters are "imposing a new reality. ... Tripoli will be our capital. We are imposing a new order and new state, a civil constitutional and with transitional government."
Gadhafi's son, Seif al-Islam, went on state TV in the early hours Monday with a sometimes confused speech of nearly 40 minutes, vowing to fight and warning that if protests continue, a civil war will erupt in which Libya's oil wealth "will be burned."
"Moammar Gadhafi, our leader, is leading the battle in Tripoli, and we are with him," he said. "The armed forces are with him. Tens of thousands are heading here to be with him. We will fight until the last man, the last woman, the last bullet." he said.
He also promised "historic" reforms if protests stop. State TV said Monday he had formed a commission to investigate deaths during the unrest. Protesters ignored the vague gestures. Even as he spoke, the first clashes between demonstrators and security forces in the heart of Tripoli were still raging, lasting until dawn.
Fire raged Monday at the People's Hall, the main building for government gatherings where the country's equivalent of a parliament holds sessions several times a year, the pro-government news website Qureyna said.
It also reported the first major sign of discontent in Gadhafi's government, saying Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil resigned to protest the "excessive use of force" against unarmed demonstrators.
There were reports of ambassadors abroad defecting. Libya's former ambassador to the Arab League in Cairo, Abdel-Moneim al-Houni, who resigned his post Sunday to side with protesters, demanded Gadhafi and his commanders and aides be put on trial for "the mass killings in Libya."
"Gadhafi's regime is now in the trash of history because he betrayed his nation and his people," al-Houni said in a statement.
A Libyan diplomat in China, Hussein el-Sadek el-Mesrati, told Al-Jazeera, "I resigned from representing the government of Mussolini and Hitler."
Two Mirage warplanes from the Libyan air force fled a Tripoli air base and landed on the nearby island of Malta, and their pilots - two colonels - asked for political asylum, Maltese military officials said.
A protest march Sunday night sparked scenes of mayhem in the heavily secured capital. Protesters had streamed into Green Square, all but taking over the plaza and surrounding streets in the area between Tripoli's Ottoman-era old city and its Italian-style downtown.
That was when the backlash began, with snipers firing from rooftops and militiamen attacking the crowds, shooting and chasing people down side streets, according to witnesses and protesters.
Gadhafi supporters in pickup trucks and cars raced through the square, shooting automatic weapons. "They were driving like madmen searching for someone to kill. ... It was total chaos, shooting and shouting," said a 28-year-old protester.
The witnesses reported seeing casualties, but the number could not be confirmed. The witness named Fathi said he saw at least two he believed were dead and many more wounded. After midnight, protesters took over the main Tripoli offices of state-run satellite stations Al-Jamahiriya-1 and Al-Shebabiya, a witness said.
Fragmentation is a real danger in Libya, a country of deep tribal divisions and a historic rivalry between Tripoli and Benghazi. The system of rule created by Gadhafi - the "Jamahiriya," or "rule by masses" - is highly decentralized, run by "popular committees" in a complicated hierarchy that effectively means there is no real center of decision-making except Gadhafi, his sons and their top aides.
Seif has often been put forward as the regime's face of reform and is often cited as a likely successor to his father. Seif's younger brother, Mutassim, is the national security adviser, with a strong role in the military and security forces. Another brother, Khamis, heads the army's 32nd Brigade, which according to U.S. diplomats is the best-trained and best-equipped force in the military.
The revolt in Benghazi and other cities in the east illustrated the possibility of the country rumbling.
In Benghazi, cars honked their horns in celebration and protesters in the streets chanted "Long live Libya" on Monday, a day after bloody clashes that killed at least 60 people.
Benghazi's airport was closed, according to an airport official in Cairo. A Turkish Airlines flight trying to land in Benghazi to evacuate Turkish citizens was turned away Monday, told by ground control to circle over the airport, then to return to Istanbul.
There were fears of chaos as young men - including regime supporters - seized weapons from the Katiba and other captured security buildings. "The youths now have arms and that's worrying," said Iman, a doctor at the main hospital. "We are appealing to the wise men of every neighborhood to rein in the youths."
Youth volunteers directed traffic and guarded homes and public facilities, said Najla, a lawyer and university lecturer in Benghazi. She and other residents said police had disappeared from the streets.
After seizing the Katiba, protesters found the bodies of 13 uniformed security officers inside who had been handcuffed and shot in the head, then set on fire, said a doctor named Hassan, who asked not to be identified further for fear of reprisals. He said protesters believed the 13 had been executed by fellow security forces for refusing to attack protesters.
----
AP correspondents Sarah El Deeb and Hamza Hendawi in Cairo contributed to this report.

Ya know what puzzles me? Those arab fellows seem to dig up AK out of their arses everytime they protest against joos, America and shit like that. Nevermind they build and smugle crude missiles. But when they bitch about their government, they kinda suck gear wise.

As the violence in Syria grinds on with no resolution in sight, a chorus of voices is predictably rising demanding that the Obama administration do more to hasten the exit of Bashar al-Assad. Their impatience is understandable, as is the outrage which I share about the indiscriminate use of violence by an ugly regime. But Syria will not be solved by Obama deciding to finally use the magic democracy words that he has inexplicably refused to deploy: "Expellus Assadum!"

The administration is right about the limits of Washington's influence over events in Syria and correct to resist pressure to indulge in symbolic gestures such as withdrawing the Ambassador or calling on Assad to leave. Prudence is not weakness. It is the only rational response to the turbulence and uncertainty surrounding Syria today. That does not mean doing nothing. The Obama administration should continue to ratchet up its rhetorical condemnation of Syrian violence. It might use the threat of International Criminal Court referral and targeted sanctions to encourage regime defections. But increasing pressure is not enough. Instead, it should continue to focus on a regional and international approach, in cooperation with regional partners such as Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the Arab League, designed to create a real alternative to the seemingly unstoppable descent into brutality and rebellion.


Most arguments for more forceful U.S. action begin with the demand the withdrawal of Ambassador Robert Ford. This, they argue, will signal to Assad, to Syrians, and to the world that there will be no future relationship with the U.S. In fact, it would be a symbolic gesture which wouldn't make much of a difference on the ground and would blind the U.S. inside of Syria at a critical time. The signal to Damascus would be a drop in the ocean, and would quickly fade by the next day's news cycle. The cost would be losing the hard won presence of an able diplomat on the ground at a time of turmoil, which could prove extremely valuable should conditions continue to deteriorate. There is virtually no international media on the ground in Syria, which puts a premium on even the limited ability of the Embassy to collect information and to engage. At this point, this is still just a bad idea.

And then, there's "Expellus Assadum": the magic words by which Obama might declare that Asad must go and somehow make it so. While there's every reason for the U.S. to ratchet up its rhetorical criticism of an increasingly violent and brutal regime, tougher rhetoric isn't going to change the game. The entire course of the Arab upheavals this year demonstrates the limits of American influence and control over events or other regional actors. It most certainly proves that firm Presidential rhetoric is not enough to tip either the internal or the international diplomatic balance.

Libya should be enough to demonstrate this hard reality. I'm actually optimistic about Libya -- the diplomatic and military trends all clearly favor the rebels, the NTC has come together into an impressive government-in-waiting, and international consensus has remained reasonably strong. But even if Libya ends well, the reality is that it has taken months under nearly the best possible conditions. It isn't just that the President used his magic words. The Libya operation had widespread regional and international support, UN authorization, direct military involvement in a favorable environment for airpower, and an organized and effective opposition on the ground with a viable political leadership. And it has ground on for months.

The idea that invoking "Expellus Assadum" would quickly lead to an endgame in Syria just doesn't make sense. Demanding that Obama say "Assad must go" seems less about Assad and more about either moral posturing or about creating a rhetorical lever for pressuring Washington -- not Damascus -- to do more to deliver on that new commitment. By putting the President's -- and America's -- credibility on the line, however, it might force unwanted escalation into more concrete actions in order to deliver on the demand. So tougher and sharper rhetoric, with constant condemnations of violence, is not just appropriate but essential... but escalating to "Assad must go" at this point is not.

Some have suggested ratcheting up the Special Tribunal's investigation of the Hariri assassination in order to increase pressure on Assad. It's almost enough for me to be nostalgic for my days of being thoroughly lambasted for suggesting that the STL had lost credibility in Lebanon through its perceived politicization. I'm sure that ratcheting up the STL's pressure on Syria for overtly strategic reasons would do wonders for its reputation. At any rate, there is little reason to think that this would have any more impact on Assad's calculations than it has over the last six years. The same applies, by the way, to the sudden enthusiasm for an IAEA referral to the Security Council over Syria's nuclear programs... it's just never a good thing when putatively independent international institutions are seen to be serving an overt political agenda. The ICC, which would directly focus on the human rights abuses and killings in question, is a far better vehicle for international institutional pressure.

The case for prudence is strengthened by recalling how little we actually know. It may not be fashionable to admit the limits to our knowledge but it's important. I am troubled by the incomplete and often unreliable information available to us about what's happening inside of Syria, with very limited international media and an aggressive activist campaign shaping the narrative. I am not confident about any assessments of Syrian public opinion, which may be tipping against Assad in response to the rolling violence but may not be. I am skeptical of the Syrian opposition coalition which has been slowly emerging. I am highly sensitive to the ratcheting effect of rhetorical commitments, which might please activists for a day but then simply create new and more extreme demands. And despite the horrible bloodshed and brutality, the conditions which made intervention appropriate in Libya simply do not exist in Syria --- and any hint of even the possibility of an American intervention should be avoided scrupulously.

The most thorough and careful list of policy options which I've seen for increasing pressure on Assad comes from Andrew Tabler and David Schenker: energy sanctions, targeted sanctions designed to split the regime, coordinated unilateral sanctions, an ICC referral for Assad, enhanced relations with the Syrian opposition, and so forth. This is a thoughtful and useful policy menu for increased U.S. pressure on Damascus, but the reality is that there are limitations to all of these policy instruments. What is more, pressure alone is not enough. Too often, U.S. policy in the region, whether towards Iran or Syria or other adversaries, has been reduced to the mechanisms of escalating pressure for its own sake. This is not the time to fall back into such old habits.

The administration should continue working carefully with regional partners to shape a broad regional response to the crisis -- an approach which is paying off with Turkey, much of the Gulf, and now even the Arab League. Attempting to lure Assad away from Tehran made sense even a few months ago, but by this point his brutality has rendered it virtually inconceivable that he would find an open door even if he wished to switch sides. The policies it adopts should be consistently designed to shape an environment in which parts of the Syrian ruling coalition see the benefit in abandoning the regime, and to shape an environment in which a post-Assad regime would find an interest in finding a pathway into the emerging regional arena.

The administration should also continue to escalate its rhetorical condemnation of the violence and human rights violations of the Assad regime, and use its public diplomacy to highlight those depredations for regional and international audiences. The threat of an International Criminal Court referral for Assad and those in his regime complicit in the violence would be consistent with emerging regional norms, and could push regime fence-sitters to abandon the regime. Tabler and Schenker's suggestion of targeted sanctions could also encourage the fragmentation of the regime coalition, at least on the margins. But unilateral sanctions should not come at the expense of a UN resolution, no matter how difficult the process of achieving one.

Such impact at the margins, through careful international diplomatic work, may not be satisfying, but it may be the best which the U.S. can hope to accomplish right now. I would much rather be able to wave a magic wand and run off for a good Quidditch match, but that's just not in the cards.