Arab spring. The uprising of the Arab street has been provoked by desperation. It source has been the theft, the corruption and the inadequate allotments left for the rest of the population by the greedy “Thiefs-In-Chiefs”. The old regimes are gone but the final tally is not yet in. Nevertheless, from the outset, some of the world’s relieved optimism required that the euphoria be examined with calm rationalism. The high hopes universally expressed stood in danger of reflecting a dream rather than the potentials embedded in the actual situation on the ground.

When events unfold in cultures that lack a common denominator with the observer’s, it is natural to attempt to fit the undigested news into an explanatory framework. That context for evaluating developments brought home by TV comes from the historical experience of the viewer. In that context the resulting evaluation might be logical. Nevertheless, as countless examples suggest, at the place where the events are created, such interpretations can turn out to be disconnected from reality.

Essentially, the complaint expressed by the uprising has been bitterness that those on top stole too much. The masses did not benefit from the politically aspired division of wealth that those that held power controlled. Two criticisms can be formulated. One is that the political system that allocated economic and social rights has failed and that, therefore, it must be reorganized under new management. That should guarantee a fairer distribution so that all get their share. A competing alternative will fault the system of politicized allotment by the governors. Such a conclusion will proceed from the premise that government’s role is to guarantee an order rooted in laws that have society’s approval. Distributing and redistributing wealth –or crumbs- is not a responsibility of good government. Putting those that hold power in charge of systems of material distribution will make power dictatorial, corrupt and the allocations will be economically and socially iniquitous and unreasonable.

Therefore, the danger is that in its practical application, the new democracy, if really implemented will mean that those once neglected will get more and the bosses will keep less. The embedded danger is that the method of allocation has not changed. Not societal contribution and merit, but rather connections and belonging to a supportive “tribe” will determine who gets what. Injustice reversed is no justice because two wrongs do not make a right.

What could put Muslim inspired societies back on the road of modernization? The undertaking is not impossible if we remember that these have once played a globally leading role in that process. It was after a long period of outstanding performance that Muslims withdrew their participation around the end of the first millennium.

The first item on the “To Do List” is to follow the recipe of successful cultures and the outstanding societies within those cultures. This assignment is to learn to learn from the successful. Perhaps the sentence should be „Dare to learn from excellence". Since the invention of the wheel, learning to improve on the lesson provided by others has been the key to well-being and success.

Second, rejecting what works because it has been invented elsewhere is a natural and therefore typical reaction. It is also the key to staying mired in your own comfy-to-wallow-in puddle on the road to where the rainbow meets the ground.

Third, realize that failure has two possible consequences. One scenario is to react to it as a challenge to improve and to surpass the champions. The other, and it is the more common reaction of groups and persons, is to explain away their lack of success. It is easy to pretend that we did not want what we have failed to get. The famous story about the fox and the sour grapes deals with this. Beyond the classical tale, there is a further soothing explanation available for those that indulge in self sedation. In that case, the explanation for not making it is that a sinister force has conspired to deprive the deserving of their rightful share. Such a force can be the “Japanese,” the “Jews”, the “Russians and the Germans” or, for instance in Southern Europe, the “Turks”. In some cases, the evildoer who is used to excuse failings might have indeed been a curse in the past. In Europe, Ottoman rule, respectively its duration, correlates with the extent of backwardness and the bad habits that sustain it.

 

Crime and consequences. Habré of Chad, now in exile in Senegal and Bashir lording over Sudan are related cases. Both are mentioned in an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court. Their case gains significance as another by now more famous person might join the “trinity of evil”. The “Brother Leader” Gaddafi is meant.

In the case of these villains, the African Union has taken a position. The AU is known to emit of moral admonitions directed at donors that are plagued by guilt over the colonial past. Recently the AU has declared that it will not act on the IC arrest warrants. Ignoring the victims, the justification is that the indictment is a politically motivated act that condemns the racist accusers. Indeed, there are “bosses” outside of Africa that deserve to be on the Honor Roll of those “Wanted, Dead or Alive”. It is the (abused) power, (stolen) money, (misused) resources and (equally compromised) clones that hinder justice.

The case made tells much about what ails that continent. It also explains why generations after independence, conditions have improved for the leaders only.

The argument about racism causing the human rights violation warrants express a dilemma with numbing consequences. There is a self-defeating contradiction inherent in ethnically based pleas –whether in Africa or, for that matter in Europe.

We all like to support whoever we care to define as being of our own kind. That is why couch potatoes root for their team in sports that they have never engaged in. Counting your nation’s Nobel Prizes –small countries keep score on a per capita basis that makes the likes of Hungary and Switzerland lead- is a way to define oneself. Naturally, this extrapolates from the outstanding and not by the group’s despicable members. Some get lucky regarding their villains. That is when evildoers can be assigned to another nation. An example is Hungary’s “Führer” Szálasy. The ashamed will tell you that he is really called “Szalostyán”and as such, he is an Armenian.

Our ability to act humanly diminishes when we think that we are first members of one of the many subdivisions of mankind. Nationality, race, class or religion is favored categories. These concepts endow us with a glorifying identity that supports the claim that we earned separate rules on decency. Mostly, these standards of convenience justify crimes against others. The victims are inferior and so, purging them advances the cause of mankind. The trials of Karadzic and Mladic will illustrate this reasoning.

Africa’s rulers excuse the slaughter and exploitation of other Africans by resorting to similar justifications. Invoking “dignity”, African crimes against Africans are claimed to be an internal matter. Discussing these by “colonialists” are expressions of “racism”. If as the term implies, crimes against humanity have no color then Africa’s donors should react to the protection of Africa’s criminals by the governments there.

A measure with leverage against those that shield criminals is available. Suspend government-to-government aid. Terminate support if its distribution is handled by the government and not by independent institutions. Given the skimming of the milk by local elites, the message will be registered. There is also a bonus. Aid will be effective, as the pipeline that now runs from the donor through local government to the intended destination will absorb less of it. (N.B. Senegal is extraditing Habré to Chad.)