Foreign Policy is getting far too excited. There is precious little evidence that things are going to get better in Tunisia so far, and the idea of revolution in most of these other countries is frankly alarming. Americans assume all too easily that other revolution will turn out like theirs did. Gradual evolution is usually preferable.

Dictatorial regimes rarely face revolutions so long as they keep their repressive boots planted firmly on the necks of the citizenry.

It is when a dictator panics in response to some crisis and offers up concessions from a position of weakness that trouble begins to spiral out of control. When the opposition smells blood, the revolution is on.

I would look for three or four things: the first is in Egypt. Mubarak is old and his death will lead to a power struggle. I think anything can happened from there.

Another concern is an explosion of food and fuel prices following some worldwide economic collapse. When people are hungry they have a lot less to lose.

Of course there's always Israel and that special 'Will to Power' that drives their behaviour. An attack on Iran (less likely now) could cause major headaches for several Gulf states, especially those with large Shi'a minorities or in some cases, majorities.

Another war with Lebanon could also cause big problems for regimes thought to be too friendly to Israel.

Israel wants to retain its freedom of action. Their short history has demonstrated an unparalelled mastery of the tools of modern war but that must be measured against growing arrogance of leaders and the fact that conventional wars seem to be losing their utility as a means of accomplishing political goals. I think the humiliation of 2006 still weighs heavily upon the Israeli psyche and many are girding for another crack at Hezbollah. Will Israel be able to pull another rabbit out of the hat? I don't know. One consideration is the possibility of an extended struggle that somehow draws in other players. Israeli leaders are prone to overreaction and if things spin out of control, anything can happened. Even a nuclear strike is possible and that is should frighten everyone.

As always, not all crisis are forseeable. Something could come out of nowhere and change everything in an instant. There are some mighty powerful forces engaged in a struggle for control of the non Chinese world. Think of it as a power struggle at the top of the food chain. The players are ruthless and may have an interest in triggering some kind of massive upheaval. In that case, anything is possible.

One doesn't have to go back to the French Revolution to see that revolutions rarely produce real change, they usually just substitute one no-so-stong-anymore man with a strong-enough-yet man. Democratic change is usually the fruit of an evolution-like series of minor changes. Why? Because that gradual change creates the institutions, customs, the very shell every democracy needs. Tunisia (or the others) doesn't have that kind of establishment, therefore the new leaders can only use the one available to them - best suited for dictatorship.

Describing Col. Muammar Qaddafi as "the world's longest-serving head of state" is a bit rich. Elizabeth II was crowned in 1953. Having the head of state and the head of government in one person is rare in the world, though true in the US.

what is with these optimistic pundits who think overthrow of tunisian tyrant will result in democracy in tunisia and lead to new democracies in other arab states? history shows that usually when one dictator is overthrown by mobs, he is replaced not by democracy, but another autocratic ruler.
look at Iraq- one dictator was kicked out about 40 yrs ago, and what came next? not democracy, but Saddam Hussein.
the same is true for most of those arab states.

so wake up, pundits, and get real. there ain't gonna be no arab democracies after tunisia, just more autocratic rule. that's life on that part of the planet.

There is no way anyone could possibly have predicted that an economically disenfranchised merchant would spark a widespread popular reaction by setting himself alight. I strongly believe that the merchant himself was neither expecting nor intending to cause such a sequence of events.

This "list" over-simplifies the state of affairs in Tunisia by suggesting some sort of positive causal relationship between the protests and demonstrations over the last week, the escape of Ben Ali and the subsequent formation of a "government of national unity" which has proven to be anything but, with numerous opposition party members resigning in protest to the continued dominance of the ruling party. And thus, the status quo is preserved by the legacy Ben Ali has left behind.

What many fail to realize is that the systemic problems inherent in the regimes throughout the region are so entrenched that the fall of a ruler, monarch or political or religious leader does not equate to a step forward. Substituting one form of authoritarianism for another is hardly something to be desired by the countries on this list.

I dont know about the others but I lived in Libya for a while, and I dont think Tunisia uprising could happen in Libya. Libya has very strong tribal system and this system what supports the regime because Qaddafi keeps a balance of power between the major tribes, the change can happen only if Qaddafi died or one of the major tribes is not happy with its share anymore, also any change would be very violent. Libyans ppl in general are very kind and generous and I hope they have a better future.

Present Day (whole) so called Muslim World [MW] is ripe to be another Tunisia. I am a Muslim but of the firm belief that what all is happening to the present day MW is for its GOOD. Present chain of events is the only way to bring some sanity amongst the RULERS of present MW.
West (though inflaming it with ulterior motives) is creating more and more instability in the MW is actually doing a wonderful job to help bring the masses back to real ISLAM. In this process West too will embrace real Islam.
SEE HOW ALMIGHTY ALLAH OPERATES ???????
AMERICA is requested to help making the entire MW another Tunisia but SooooooooooooooooN.

That's the right question to be asked, as mentioned above Who's in charge: Abdelaziz Bouteflika has been president of Algeria since 1999. In 2009, he amended the constitution to allow himself to run for a third term and was overwhelmingly reelected in a contest that was boycotted by the opposition. Concerns have recently been raised about the 73-year-old president's health -- the state of which is a carefully guarded state secret -- and there are rumors that his brother is looking to succeed him. special day gifts. Bouteflika oversaw the end of the decade-long Algerian civil war and has worked to improve relations with European and African powers, but he has also been criticized for his failure to contain an Islamist insurgency associated with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the steady erosion of Algeria's democratic institutions under his rule.

That's the right question to be asked, as mentioned above Who's in charge: Abdelaziz Bouteflika has been president of Algeria since 1999. In 2009, he amended the constitution to allow himself to run for a third term and was overwhelmingly reelected in a contest that was boycotted by the opposition. Concerns have recently been raised about the 73-year-old president's health -- the state of which is a carefully guarded state secret -- and there are rumors that his brother is looking to succeed him. Bouteflika oversaw the end of the decade-long Algerian civil war and has worked to improve relations with European and African powers, but he has also been criticized for his failure to contain an Islamist insurgency associated with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the steady erosion of Algeria's democratic institutions under his rule.

the biggest joke of these comments is that so many think "democracy" is the panacea and the best way. Take a good look around folks: America is the world's global empire. It claims democracy at home but enforces oppression and tyranny abroad to serve America's interests.

France was a 'democratic republic' for liberty and fraternity at home, but a ruthless empire abroad. In fact fraternity and liberty were only for people of French heritage while Africans and Asians and Muslims were forced to serve the 'republic'.

American democracy and its agenda of spreading democracy is really about spreading the interests of America worldwide and having others cater to them, by hook or by crook. You liars ignore that America has used the entire Western hemisphere as its American empire for over 200 years where rich powerful Americans and their companies have been 'masters' and 'imperial overlords' throughout Latin America. Most American corporations over 100 years old have been close friends to tyrants and 'slave masters' in Latin America long after the abolition of slavery (Dole, Goodyear Tire, etc). Now they are friendly household names.

Muslim people are being ruled by authoritarian regimes who's primary job it is to repress them on behalf of America and the West. Its the continuation of the colonial era. One needs only to survey the trade relations of North African countries and one will find that all the North African nations trade primary with Europe, followed by America. None of them trade with any notable degree with each other. Imagine if all the American states on the Eastern shore traded only with other nations but not with each other? You would have NO development and foreign powers would find ways to pit them against each other. In fact its funny that no foreign power chose to arm and support the American Confederacy for it truly would have been successful. America has armed and supported rebellious factions in south Sudan precisely for its own interests.

BTW, this sophmoric reporting of Muslim countries ignores the enormous reality of which the Muslim people are growing aware: that Western imperial power created, continues to advise, support, and in many instances prop up these regimes.

Qaddafi was trained in a British military academy was brought to power through a coup designed by the British MI6 at a time when the British were adversaries of America in the Arab and Muslim world.

FLN were supported by socialists with America's blessing in order to oust French imperial control. This was part of America's anti European colonial empire strategy post WWII. America sided with the USSR against European empires. FLN have since been cohorts with both America and France and its military got the American green light to repress the 1991 elections which sparked the civil war. the FLN led military also got the green light to use any means necessary to repress Algerian liberation, including massacring its own people in false flag operations.

France was forced to give Tunisia its 'freedom', but it was always created as a mirror image of France. Its form of republicanism was always more French than France's.

Morocco has served the West for centuries, being an agent of Western imperial designs going back to the colonial era. It was a colony of Spain until America forced Spain to give it up. Its previous monarch was called the 'butcher' for how he killed 100s of 1000s of his own people to repress Muslim uprisings for America and the West.

And the most famous of America's CIA accomplishments was bringing into power through coup the Free Officers Movement in Egypt and Nasser. Nasser knew that he came to power through American and Soviet efforts to oust colonial imperialism and he incited Arab nationalist secular republicanism throughout the region, defying the European colonists.

Thanks for sharing the truth with your knowledge starved readers, Foreign Policy.

BTW, its being reported in a recent 'Islamic conference" in the Arab region that more efforts will go towards 'unifying' and cohesion.

This is because Muslim people know that all the potential of the Arab and Muslim world resides in unified and cohesive work.

Already the manpower of Egypt serves many countries in the Gulf. The mineral resource of various nations could be shared with resource deprived nations like Jordan and Morocco, if they had common leadership, like America's 50 states.

But we Muslims know that the West don't want a unified Muslim world working to develop itself on its own. We know that the West relies on us be divided and repressed by ruthless tyrants.

North Africa has had a union called the Maghreb Union started in 2000 by America which has very little to 'unite'.

Since then, the most unified North Africa has been in serving America in its Pan Sahel Initiative (or whatever its new nomenclature is). The PSI granted American JSOC free range over all its territory and access to their elite squads to gain assets and 'train' them how to hunt terrorists.

Most of the Muslim countries are either ruled by monarchs or "so called" democratic elites aloof of popular sentiments and proxies of the west. This has led them to economic malpractices and corruption resulting in deprivation of masses even from basic amenities. The Tunis phenomenon, therefor might not only remain restricted to these five countries only and other state might also provide the ripe conditions to repeat the events happened there. Pakistan also falls under the same category. Although fully ripe for the showdown, it might not be precisely possible to predict that when this might happen. The problem with the west is its myopic vision of Islam, prejudices against Muslims and its racial supremacy. Western model of liberal democracy considered as to be ideal model of governance might not be considered so by other nations or civilizations. They must have the free choice to adopt other systems considered as sacred or best by them. Muslims consider Islam as a divine form of governance which must be adopted by all Muslims and west must respect these sentiments rather than trying to impose Liberal imperialism universally. A peaceful co-existence is only possible if we respect each other's right to live according to own choice otherwise such revolutions and turmoils would keep rocking the foundations of the global economy resulting in the eventual demise of global capitalism.
Shams Zaman Pakistan smszmn72@yahoo.com

Tunisia is in some ways the most European country of North Africa. It boasts a relatively large middle class, liberal social norms, broad gender stavkovanie equality and welcoming Mediterranean beaches. United States officials have given it high marks for its aggressive prosecution of terrorism suspects.