Reflection

After doing the structured response this week, I was looking for an article to reflect on and found one about Twitter and what is being said about the battle between Hamas and Israel. On both sides, military operations are being tweeted in almost real time. The Israeli military began ‘live-tweeting’ and blogging about its military operations and Hamas has responded with its own tweets. On Wednesday, Israeli’s posted video footage of the air strike that killed Ahmed al-Jabari. Rather than hosting a press conference following this event, Israel formally announced the launch of Gaza operation on Twitter. Instead of distributing leaflets warning Palestinian civilians to stay away from areas where militants are firing, the military issued its warning via twitter, stating “We recommend no Hamas operatives, whether low level or senior leaders, show their faces above ground in the days ahead." Just as our readings for this week discussed, the world of social media is changing operations in the Middle East. The presence of social media is not only effecting revolutions, it is also working its way into how the military operates.  

Structured Response

I think that while the revolts would have occurred with or without social media outlets, the existence of these outlets shaped the Arab revolts of 2011 and made them more successful. I think Khondker’s idea of “cyber-civil society” is one of the best examples of how social media influenced the revolts. Since creating strong civil society groups is one of the main factors we’ve explored in creating a successful revolution, it is important to note that social media cites make organization and the spread of information much easier and more widely accessible. It has the ability to take unstructured grassroots organizations and give them a means of operation. They can explicitly state their goal and spread their message to a wider range of people, which, in the end, is the main goal of any organization: to reach and gain the support of as many people as possible.  Just the ability to spread information quickly and to many people has changed the way revolts occur. The images of Khaled Said being beaten to death in Egypt sparked angry and shock which resulted in more organization. Events that spark widespread shock or anger can now be used to organize a more structured uprising. The want and need for revolution is present, but the use of Facebook and Twitter to further these goals makes the revolts much more powerful and successful. 

Reflection # 9

There has been news recently that a leader for the Syrian Rebel Coalition has been chosen named Moaz Khatib. The new leader seemed to be a "flowery type" (according to various news sites)- sharing visions of peace and love, and one who believes strongly in his faith while not condemning other sects or religions. Hopefully this leader will turn the coalition into one that can eventually be aided more by the international community- states around the globe supporting the ousting of Assad have been wary to give the rebels any arms because they are worried they may end up in the wrong hands. Khatib gives me some hope that Syria can have a stable non-sectarian government after the fall of Assad. The fact that Khatib, who was protesting for a peaceful Democracy even before the Arab Spring, has been elected as the leader may be a good omen.
I am wondering though, knowing that the coalition is already starting to get much international support (namely by Hollande in France and by Obama's Administration) and Domestic support (now even by many of Assad's own sect, the Alawites), possibly they can overthrow Assad without the force of military, but by the force of legitimacy?
Maybe there is not even a need for the ousting or death of President Assad, once there is a well established transitional government. If the coalition becomes or even looks powerful enough (due to the bolstering of their image by the global state society or domestic civil society), that may be a tempting reason for Assad to go in exile to a friendly country like Iran or Russia. Yes, Assad has already lost plenty of legitimacy for causing the death of around 40,000 Syrians, but the rebel coalition also does not have much legitimacy still due to a lack of organization and possible radical Islamic fundamentalists within their military ranks. This battle, as of now, is indeed a battle over the image of strength- if the Rebels appear to have gotten their mess of an anti-government force cleaned up, much of the international community may send military aid to them in bundles. However, as long as the rebels look flimsy and divided, Russia and Iran will continue to arm Assad, giving them somewhat of an upper hand.

Structured Response- Jared

Social networks such as Twitter and Facebook, or "new media", as Habibul Haque Khondker calls it,  played a crucial role in the Arab Spring- they allowed for a quick spread of word about uprisings against Sultan authoritarians like Hosni Mubarak and Ben Ali.  As more and more people started to log on to social networks, the faster the idea of revolution jumped from country to country. A large factor in this spread of ideas was that "the images of Bouazizi", the man who lit himself on fire to protest the government,  "were put on Facebook and everyone saw it" (Khondker). In response to these outrageous photos, as Khondker stated, there were about "2 million users of Facebook" were logged on before the revolution in Tunisia. Furthermore, new media in Egypt was used to the advantage of citizens, who "[told] stories of police brutality, violence, and blatant injustice" (Khondker).

However, I do not believe that new media was necessary in starting the revolution. Rather I have concluded that the internet and other new forms of communication were helpful tools in speeding up the revolution process. In the Serbian revolutions against Slobodan Milosevic, "Otpor!" protestors against the government did not have the same access to new media as the Arab Springers did. Yet, Serbian citizens still managed to bring down their dictator and succeed in a change of government. Instead of using the internet or cell phones, Otpor relied on traditional protests, satirization of the government, dress, mobilization of both dissatisfied rural and city Serbian folk, the handing out of flyers, peaceful protest (until they burned a few government buildings down), and attempts at convincing the military to back down. Egypt and Tunisia, if new media were not present, would have still had the revolutions, but they would have been slower and possibly more violent. A key perk of new media was rapid global intelligence on the revolutions; the international community seemed to know right away about the massive protests, allowing for eventual global support of the revolutionaries. If relying on old media (newspapers, cable television, radio etc.), the news of revolution would have travelled to the global stage more gradually, allowing for possible violence by the Tunisian/Egyptian militaries without immediate condemnation by the international community. 

 

Structured Response #9- Hanna

Before Twitter had really taken off, the media and television shows kept mentioning it. They would refer to Twitter as if it was something that everyone was already on, which then forced us to ask our self ,"Are we out of the loop?"
I've always wondered why our media forced Twitter on us in this way.

This raises the question for me as to which is right: Did Social Media make a big of an impact on the Arab Spring? or Do we give Social Media sites too much credit?

I'll be the first person to say that I love Social Media. I believe very strongly that Social Media is a powerful globalizing force. It brings people across the world together and connects people in urban areas that would not meet otherwise. It connects us with professionals and amateurs seeking guidance. It does plenty of good in our modern world.

However, I do believe that it has been given far too much credit for the Arab Revolts. The temperature was right for revolution and it would have occurred with or without Social Media. Social Media was simply one of many mobilizing forces. It helped to organize meet up point and to publicize the revolution, but further than that it did not do more than sparking an interest among the population that it was concerned with.

Structured Response 6

            Social media is an increasingly popular way of spreading news. In the 2011 revolts, social media was used as a medium of spreading images, slogans, and events that had to do with the revolution. People were weakly tied to each other through social media because they all believed in a bigger purpose – democracy.

            However, people who call the Arab revolts of 2011 the “Twitter Revolution” seem to not have a grasp of the larger scale of the revolution. Rather, I believe that social media such as Facebook and Twitter were mediums that allowed social movements to take place, but were not the reasons themselves for the social movements. Though peoples weak ties to each other over social media sources certainly sped up the revolution process, these people were not the reason that revolution began in the first place. I think that the catalyst for revolutions, even in the Arab revolts, began with grass roots non-governmental organizations that worked towards the goal of democratization for years before the revolts actually occurred.

            Furthermore, I think that social media was not a factor necessary for revolution. Rather, I think that it helped to speed up the process of the revolts because of its widespread accessibility and its ability to spread news on a minute-to-minute basis. In this way, governments were unable to react as strongly or effectively as they could have because they were essentially taken by surprise. If social media had not been utilized as a method of spreading the word regarding specific protests, these protests would have taken more time to develop and may have been squashed by the governments. Even so, I still maintain that these revolts would have happened with or without social media, even if they had occurred more gradually if social media had not been a medium for communication among citizens. 

Reflection #9- Hanna

In my world politics class, many of the articles that we are reading are mentioning the belief that empowering women is the key to development. I agree with this. As a woman, I can say that there is an understanding that women are the key to furthering this world. It is something that I think that everyone knows without having to read any world politics article.
From here I wanted to shift to the western misunderstanding that the Chadri prohibits women empowerment. This is false.
The Chadri only has as much power as it is given.
Of course, if a woman is forced to wear this and does not want to then this is prohibiting her quest to further the woman's position in life. What about those who choose to wear the Chadri? A woman who wears the Chadri by choice among the western culture told me that she sees the Chadri as a blessing. She says, "Covered Body, Open Mind." For her, the Chadri is a source of empowerment. She does not have to abide by the constant female scrutiny that comes between women and their drive for just equality. For her, it helps her to see her true potential as a mind.
The same way the Chadri is used, clothing is used everywhere.
 Short skits and Low cut shirts are another example of clothing that prohibits female empowerment. Once again, it only has the power that we give it. It is just as likely that a woman will say that she wears short skirts because she likes to feel the breeze! By changing the way that women in the world dress, we will NOT change our positions in society. The sooner that we get off of the idea that the Chadri, Burqa, and all other head coverings are holding back MENA and Islamic women, then the sooner we will be able to address the real needs and concerns of these women.
Asking them where they want to see change is the only real source of female empowerment in the region and the best source of development for the world.