BY TINA ROSENBERG | FEBRUARY 16, 2011

CANVAS has worked with activists from 50 countries. It cannot point to 50 revolutions.

The most prosaic reason is that often the people it trains aren't the ones in charge of a movement. Some groups, like Georgia's and Ukraine's dissidents, choose to model themselves on Otpor. In Iran, by contrast, though small groups of CANVAS trainees held successful actions, the leaders of the Green Revolution have not adopted Otpor's tactics.

The more profound reason, however, is that context matters. A very closed society, the kind that most desperately needs a strong democracy movement, is the place least able to grow one. By the end of the Burma workshop, Popovic and Djinovic were content; the students had understood the lessons. But what they could do with them was not clear. On the workshop's last day, I asked the members of the Barefoot Campaign group whether they would try to start one in Burma. The strategies were wonderful, valuable, fresh, they said -- but better for someone else. "I am not sure it's practical for me," Pink Shirt said.

The Serbs argue that a country's level of repression is not dispositive. Popovic told the Burmese that far more important than the government's brutality is their own level of skill and commitment; a well-organized and committed democracy movement can gradually win enough freedom to work. "Political space is never granted. It is always conquered," he said. It was easier to work in Serbia in 2000 than it had been in 1991 because the opposition had won important concessions over that time. "Serbia built those advantages," he said. For example, it forced Milosevic to respect local election results in 1996 that left municipal television stations in opposition hands. But could this apply to Burma? Winning political space there could take decades and there was no guarantee that the country would even move in the right direction.

Burma, however, is the extreme. Most authoritarian countries are closer to Milosevic's Serbia, or Mubarak's Egypt: autocratic governments that do permit some opposition media and political activity. Algeria, Angola, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Nicaragua, Russia, and Venezuela, to name a few, follow this model. And though the Serbs cannot carry revolution in their suitcases, their strategies can greatly increase the chance that when there is a moment that shakes a dictatorship, the opposition will be able to take advantage of it.

The Egyptian example shows how. The April 6 movement knew about Otpor and adopted the fist as its logo even before Mohamed Adel went to Belgrade. The course he took there was the same one the Burmese took. Last April, Serbian newspapers carried a front page photo of a protest in Egypt, with demonstrators waving the April 6 flag, complete with a familiar fist logo. "The Otpor fist threatening Mubarak?" the headline read. As images of demonstrators in Tahrir Square hoisting their children onto Egyptian Army tanks filtered out to the rest of the world last week, Popovic recalled that on Adel's power graph, the military loomed particularly large; it was crucial, he had realized, to pull out that pillar.

The Serbs never met Adel again, but their young Egyptian student kept emailing, occasionally pointing out mistakes in Arabic translations of CANVAS materials. He had gone home with copies of Bringing Down a Dictator subtitled in Arabic and continued to download books. He conducted miniature versions of the CANVAS workshop in Egypt, stressing unity, nonviolent discipline, the importance of clear goals, and keeping members engaged.

Just after the Jan. 25 protests began a 26-page pamphlet called "How to Protest Intelligently" -- authored anonymously, but widely attributed to the April 6 group -- began circulating in Cairo. It laid out the goals of the protests: taking over government buildings, winning over the police and Army, and protecting fellow protesters. It instructed people to carry roses, chant positive slogans, gather in their own neighborhoods, and persuade policemen to change sides by reminding them their own families could be among the protesters. It also gave practical advice on what demonstrators should wear and carry to protect themselves from tear gas and police batons. It suggested that they carry signs reading "Police and People Together Against the Regime."

The protests were a model of unity, tolerance, and nonviolent discipline. The different groups put aside their individual flags and symbols to show only the Egyptian flag and to speak, as much as possible, with one voice. Protesters swept the square clean and protected shops, detaining looters and making them give back the stolen goods. Coptic Christians in Tahrir Square formed ranks to protect the Muslims while they prayed; when the Christians celebrated Mass, the Muslims formed a ring around them. Together they embraced soldiers and faced the police with roses. They sang songs and wore silly hats. It had an authenticity that was uniquely Egyptian, but it was also textbook CANVAS.

CANVAS has worked with dissidents from almost every country in the Middle East; the region contains one of CANVAS's biggest successes, Lebanon, and one of its most disappointing failures, Iran. Popovic wonders whether Iran could turn out differently next time: What would happen if the Green Movement were to organize not around election fraud, but staged a Salt March instead, focusing on unemployment, low wages, and corruption? Iran is like Tunisia and Egypt were: a young, relatively well-educated population and a corrupt authoritarian government dependent on fear to keep people in line. "Governments that rely for decades on fear become very inflexible," said Popovic. "The pillars of the regime support it out of fear. The moment the fear factor disappears and people are fearless with the police and hugging the military, you have lost your main pillars." Hosni Mubarak no doubt would have ruefully observed the same thing.

In Burma, it is hard to imagine what can vanquish that fear -- what can turn people from passive victims into daring heroes -- unless people like Pink Shirt do it themselves. In the Middle East, however, the fear is already crumbling, and the heroism is infecting country after country. This is a huge advantage. But for dictatorship to fall throughout the region, the protesters must catch more from Egypt than audacity.

Philip Blenkinsop

 SUBJECTS:
 

Tina Rosenberg is the author of the forthcoming Join the Club: How Peer Pressure Can Transform the World.

WESTERNSKEPTIC

11:36 AM ET

February 17, 2011

Hugo Chavez

Contrary to the misleading remarks in this otherwise well-written article, Hugo Chavez is not an autocrat. He is a populist, democratically elected leader who commands the support of a huge majority of the Venezuelan population. CANVAS, a USAID and NED-funded organization tried to advance US interests in the region and that is why they were chastised. The irony of a pro-democracy group trying to overthrow a leader who has been re-elected many times in fair elections leaves me to believe that CANVAS' definition of democracy really means "free-market neoliberalism". To even mention Chavez, a man who has saved Venezuela from the crippling economic policies of his US-supported predecessor, in the same breath as Aleksandr Lukashenko is reckless journalistic dishonesty.

I recommend this article for an alternate view of CANVAS: http://www.swans.com/library/art16/barker47.html

 

HASS

5:58 PM ET

February 17, 2011

Iran is different

Problem is, the government of Iran does NOT rely on "fear" to rule, and it is about time you stopped bunching so many different countries together. There is a large percentage of Iranians who DO support their regime, and who do regularly show up to vote in the elections (over 86%) that outsiders sneer at.

In fact Iranians are very sensitive to the idea of foreigners pushing to topple regimes in their country, and would resent any such training provided by Otpor or others to their people who will be labelled as agents of a foreign power.

 

CHOPSTIK

10:53 AM ET

February 18, 2011

Iranian elections?

If you wish to argue that Iranian elections have 86% voter participation (I would like your source for that), then I would point out that Saddam Hussein obtained 100% of the vote in his last election (which also saw 100% participation). You can argue that elections occur but there are also elections in China, Burma and any number of other countries that are tyrannical dictatorships. When Iran does not automatically disqualify half the candidates because they are "reformers" or "liberal", then it would be better to use them as a reference for your point.

And yes, Iranians are sensitive to the idea of foreigners pushing to interfere in their internal politics (even toppling their corrupt and bankrupt regime) - much the same as citizens in any other country in the world. That does not mean, however, that they don't want to see regime change in their own nation and are willing to seek outside help sometimes to accomplish it. While there are certainly supporters of the regime in the country, it seems unlikely that they number among the majority. And if you wish to argue that there are pro-government rallies and supporters - bear in mind how many of them are paid, bused-in and given signs and slogans at the rally by government operatives. Besides, there were pro-government supporters in Egypt and some more in Yemen, Jordan, Libya and Bahrain (among others) - do you view them as benignly as you seem to view those in Iran? Or is the basis for your argument more anti-US (which would place you in the pro-Iran by ideological default)?

To the article as a whole - a very interesting group and one that may be viewed through two very different lenses depending upon your given ideological bent. A case could be made to compare them against Wikileaks (under the operation of Julian Assange). It is not so black and white as it may seem in the open.

 

HASS

3:32 PM ET

February 25, 2011

Reality intrudes

Well Chopsix, hate to burst your bubble, but Iranians DO support their government and DO turn out to vote, and Iran is NOT comparable to Burma or Saddams' Iraq.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j01lWEft-nSRiSucCk-EB-Y9lUPg?docId=CNG.5ecbda1132f2622b919e251d461cca6c.201

 

PROJEKTOGRADNJA

1:56 PM ET

February 18, 2011

We Serbs over through Milosevic

We Serbs over through Milosevic

Because he was wimp, un-nationalist, who was scared to fight for our people in Krajina Republic, and Serbian Republic of Bosnia. Wimp who was scared to fight for Kosovo, and was only concerned how to stay in power himself. That is the main reason why at the end we over through him. And not because of what Western regimes and media are saying.

 

ESHA

2:30 AM ET

February 19, 2011

Website for CANVAS

The website for CANVAS is down. I've been trying it since a few days..

Waiting for revolution in Africa..

 

MARKOB

11:55 PM ET

February 19, 2011

CANVAS Is For Everybody But The Serbs

I noticed that the article does not tell us what CANVAS is doing in Serbia itself, a country racked by poverty with people killing themselves out of despair, tycoons who control political life and who did not exist as a class prior to October 5 2000, where to get a job you need to join a political party, the media is controlled by the regime and the tycoons, where people are taking to the streets to protest the devastating effects of more than a decade of neoliberal reforms, where the labour movement is organizing strikes against IMF mandated government budgets and so on. Notice these are all the same affects that REALLY brought people to the streets in Egypt and Tunisia seeking a SOCIAL revolution. Lukashenko might be a thug but if you're a Belorussian you're probably better off than being a Serb. I predict that we will never, ever, see an article at FP going into great detail describing how the Egyptian labour movement and striking workers helped to oust Mubarak.

 

PKOULIEV

12:55 PM ET

February 20, 2011

Youth Revlution

Fist of all, thank you Tina Rosenberg for such informative feature analyzing and providing references for further reading. I think this article is more about the concept than comparing all details to accuracy. There is no written formula for any revolutions. They could be as bloody and chaotic as French Revolution, and as planned and organized with support of alternative institutions as American Revolution. There is message about using non-conventional methods and increasing interactivity instead of just reaction to tyranny suppression. Revolution in minds start any other creativity like using virtual world to put in use for more progress.

 

FRANTZ_LUBIN@HOTMAIL.COM

3:51 AM ET

February 21, 2011

A New Haitian Revolution, perhaps?

Well done Tina! This is a very informative piece. This sort of organizing is needed in Haiti right now. As we're experiencing a fraud-ridden election, the people need a new comprehensive strategy to obtain a real and credible democracy. CANVAS obviously provides some applicable techniques for community building, which as a result, can create a genuine solidarity at the bottom of the pyramid. Minus the political rhetoric, these ideas are intriguing. I’m surprised I never heard of this group.

Good stuff Rosenberg.

 

JULIO NUñEZ

8:12 AM ET

February 21, 2011

Pinochet and Allende

An excellent article containing much valuable information. However, I must tell you that Chile's cacerolazos sessions were held very effectively against Salvador Allende, not Pinochet. Pinochet held democratic elections, was defeated, accepted the verdict and went home. Unusual, is it not?

However, congratulations on the excellent article.