4 ms·
Not to be too pedantic, but the Eastern European "refolutions" were made possible because a) the Soviet Union and b) local Communist governments simultaneously
by drags 16y ago
Not to be too pedantic, but the Eastern European "refolutions" were made possible because a) the Soviet Union and b) local Communist governments simultaneously made the decision not to use force.
Those decisions (and their publicity) were a necessary condition; it's what made the difference between 1956, 1968 and 1980 on the one hand, and 1989 on the other.
It will be a long and dark road for Egypt if Mubarak can successfully order the military to slaughter the protesting masses. The revolution will fail, both the government and the opposition will lose credibility in the eyes of the people and it will be years or decades of strict martial law.
- btilly 16y agoMilitary might does not prevent the possibility of democratic revolution. However many pre-conditions are necessary before democratic revolution can happen. For instance the military response to 1980's events in Poland were much less nasty than the earlier examples because of the economic trouble Poland was in, and its dependence on loans from Western banks. The economic fallout from the regime's attempts to navigate their way through conflicting demands helped set the stage for the events of 1989. Without that backdrop, 1989 would have turned out very differently. No matter how much the people wanted otherwise. As for Mubarak, I'd be willing to bet money that it is too late for him. Yes, the army can crack down. But the public images from any attempt to do so will make it unpalatable for Western companies to do business with Egypt for a long enough period of time to recreate his problems.