Many revolutions, with but one result: the fall of tyrannical regimes that continued to “press down” on their people for decades, without realizing that patience has its limits and that Truth is more worthy to be followed. There are five examples in the Arab World: Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali fled his country and lost power, but won his life and some of his money; Hosni Mubarak was forced to step down, disgraced his historical legacy, had his sons sent to jail, with he himself detained in hospital, and had the world watching him and the leaders of his regime at the utmost degree of humiliation inside the defendant's cage; as for Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who had for six months continued to arouse tears, laughter, grief and mockery at the same time, he has lost his throne and has lost his dreams, which had been “nightmares” for his people, he has left his palace and his fort, and has turned into a fugitive being hunted down in trails, alleyways, tunnels and sewers; there is also Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who is undergoing treatment for his burns, while no one knows whether he will return to his country or whether he fears that his people will kill him, and he still has the ability to maneuver and be evasive in order to avoid the fate of his three colleagues (Ben Ali, Mubarak and Gaddafi), as well as to weave scenarios that would allow him to leave power without being hunted down by his people; finally, standing at the forefront now is Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, who is mocking those who speak of him stepping down, making concessions or fleeing, and is promoting theories that signify that after all this killing and destruction, the “President” will remain on his throne! Other regimes are perhaps on the way, with signs of still incomplete revolutions against them having begun to appear. Yet the five “effective” examples on the scene have some features in common, as well as different characteristics. They share a lengthy period of rule; high rates of poverty among their peoples; widespread corruption among the ruling elite; rising murder rates as a result of oppression, injustice and tyranny; and rampant idiocy among major figures of the ruling regime, to such a degree that is has made the leaders of regimes who remain in their seats of power not suspect for a moment that their boldness could result in reactions and that those who are being ruled will one day explode as result of such pressures. With the exception of the ruling elites in Yemen and Syria, many believe that the regimes of the two countries “will collapse”, regardless of the details or the repercussions, that it is “just a matter of time”, and that countries and parties in the world and in the region are now studying how to manage their interests after Assad is gone and without Saleh in power. In Egypt, the people's happiness at the triumph of the Libyan Revolution clearly appeared. Indeed, Egyptians had often felt that the Libyan Colonel was a burden on them, that Mubarak had dragged them into a friendship with a mentally deranged individual, and that the harm suffered by Egypt from the Colonel's rule by far exceeded the benefits. They wished that the Libyan Revolution would not face the same challenges which the Egyptian Revolution is suffering from: acts of “baltaga” (bullying by paid thugs); security unrest; a meaningless political battle over whether the constitution or the elections should come first; the use of the “Salafists” and the “Brotherhood” as a bogeyman; reckless behavior by the Islamists increasing people's fears of their ruling the country; threats of sectarian strife every now and again; a deteriorating economic situation and high unemployment rates; the absence of government services; every political side hunting for mistakes by any other; and a media that has added a new kind of corruption to its already existing corruption. Egyptians realize for example that one of the reasons for their crisis is the fact that their revolution did not have a leadership. The army thus took charge of the country's affairs without being prepared for such a task, which has led to clashes between it and revolutionary forces taking place every now and again. On the other hand, the length of time of the revolution in Libya has caused the death of thousands of martyrs, but their lives were the price of freedom. At the same time, the Libyan people now have a leadership that they agree upon, one which, during the six months of fighting, continued to acquire skills in dealing with parties connected to the rebels. The Libyan Revolution thus produced its leadership in the form of the National Transitional Council (NTC), which will take charge of managing the transitional period. It seems that the fall of the Mubarak regime in Egypt in less than three weeks was one of the reasons for no leadership of the revolution taking shape that would moderate the political process during the transitional period and prevent political forces from struggling over the most trivial issues. And despite the exorbitant price being paid by the peoples as a result of regimes clinging to their “seats”, as took place in Libya and as is taking place in Yemen and in Syria, the emergence of a leadership for the revolution spares the country, after the fall of the regime, the outbreak of chaos. It is true that the army in Egypt is running matters, but the Egyptian Revolution is still looking for a leadership that would rid it of the conspiracies of the “remnants” of the former regime… or of the problems of managing the transitional period… or of the abuse of those who exploit the revolution…
