James Gelvin, a historian captures what unfolded in the Arab uprising and the aftermath. He takes a conservative approach about the uprising as a spring of freedom and democracy. He extensively covers what could have caused the uprising and why some regimes fell so quickly. He incorporates the roles institutions like the military played in their respective countries and what made some uprisings to be peaceful why pothers chaotic, long and catastrophic in terms of deaths and other social economic impacts.
Buy Arab Uprising essay paper online
* Final order price might be slightly different depending on the current exchange rate of chosen payment system.
Gelvin extensively covers the uprising in Egypt and why the military defied the orders of the commander in chief. He claims that the country had a long hstory of institution building which made them to work independently to some extent (Cook 22). This means the country's military was created to cater for the interests of the public rather than political elites. He also claims the uprising generally succeeded due to the role of social media. This helps people to communicate even under tight control of the state which in the past was able to suppress uprisings before they took any significant steps (Seeberg 165). He also downplays the significance of the uprising stating what the west thought about it in terms of democracy and human rights remains a distant dream.
What he gets Right
He correctly gets it right about the role of the youths in the uprising. Most of the young people in the country were lacking employment and other isssues which they blamed entirely on the government. Those in the workforce wee also suffering from high cost of living which resulted to most families struggling (Ramadan 26).
What he Gets Wrong
He completely fails when he dismisses the impact of the uprising in democracy and human rights issues. In the country the people are more aware of their rights and they demonstrate time to time if a government violates their rights (Seigneurie 496).
In summary, we can conclude that Gelvin helps to bring critical view of the uprising and the impacts. Although he does not entirely get all the facts right he creates room for debate among scholars and other stakeholders.