While Yemen has become a haven for al-Qaida, it is also a quiet U.S. ally in the fight against terrorism. Now its ruler of more than 30 years is under pressure from demonstrators, his generals, and diplomats to step aside.
As the international community pursues a range of activities to help end the violence in Libya, analysts and politicians should avoid creating a false dichotomy between imposing a no-fly zone on the country and doing nothing to prevent the deaths of Libyan civilians.
Egypt’s growing middle class, large civil society, and well-developed state institutions may enable it to achieve a successful democratic transition.
As international pressure grows for the imposition of a no-fly zone in Libya, it is crucial to consider how foreign military intervention might affect the narrative of Arab independence and what long-term consequences such an intervention might have, both regionally and globally.
If the current unrest and protests in Yemen bring about the fall of the country’s regime, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula will be able to operate with fewer constraints and present an even greater threat to the United States.
As unrest continues throughout the Middle East, members of the Iranian parliament have called for the execution of leading opposition figures and concerns are growing that Iranian regime will impose a brutal crackdown on protesters.
The resignation of President Hosni Mubarak is only the first step in Egypt’s fight for meaningful democratic change. It remains to be seen whether structural change and real democracy will be implemented in the country.
As protests continue to grow in the Middle East, Yemen, Jordan, Syria, and Bahrain are now threatened by the wave of discontent.
As Arab populations angered by social injustice take to the streets, their governments are trying to buy their way out of trouble with promises of reform and wage rises.
With international media effectively prevented from covering the protests in Iran, the regime is using repressive techniques to try to bring an end to opposition demonstrations in the county.
With no clear leadership emerging from among the Egyptian demonstrators and opposition, the Egyptian military remains the only institution capable of shepherding the country’s political transition.
While the Egyptian opposition wants an inclusive and fundamental reform and a transition to a more pluralist and democratic system, it remains to be seen whether their demands will be met by the military.
As protests and youth movements continue across the Middle East, U.S. policy will be reacting to, not shaping, the changes occurring throughout the region.
There is little doubt that Hosni Mubarak's legacy in Egypt will primarily be seen as economic stagnation and lost regional influence.
The protest movement in Jordan is fundamentally about opening the political system in Jordan, not economic grievances.
A fundamental difference remains between what Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and even Vice President Suleiman have been offering and what the demonstrators are looking for.
The United States has attempted to maintain a careful balance between pressuring the Mubarak regime to accede to the demonstrators' demands and working to provide stability in Egypt.
Regardless of who takes over after Egyptian President Mubarak's resignation, the United States should do what it can to support a transition to genuine democracy and free and fair elections.
President Mubarak’s speech on February 10 disappointed Egyptian protesters and was out of touch with the situation facing Egypt.
The protesters in Egypt must look beyond the issue of whether and when President Mubarak will step down and begin to consider what it will take to engage in an orderly transition to democracy in Egypt.