It was obvious the USA did not support the Egyptian Revolution while failing to keep Mubarak in power upon the huge public uprising led by the youth. As the American interests required maintaining the status quos in the region, the US hesitated as to the future of the Mubarak regime. It finally gave in to the demands of change and said farewell to Mubarak. It is not surprising to see why the American government did not want a change in the region but what about Russian and Chinese opposition to the Egypt’s youth revolution and the Turkish and Indian support for it?

 

Before Mubarak left office, the President Medvedev called him (Feb. 2nd) and a Russian envoy visited him (Feb 9) to express the Russian support to his regime. Russian and Chinese officials criticized the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon that called Husni Mubarak to step down, threatened not to support Ki-moon’s bid for a second term. The Russian officials even blamed Google for inciting Egyptian people against their regime. These reactions showed that the rising powers, Russia and China, expressed a bolder pro-Mubarak stance than the USA.

 

The Russian stance is probably based on three main fears: (a) democratic pressure within the Russian Federation, (b) Central Asian republics and (c) the power of internet. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the earlier moves for economic and democratic liberalization were reversed by the charismatic rule of Vladimir Putin during the last decade. He managed to combine powers in his hand by sidelining his opponents and taming the big-bourgeoisie through carrot and stick. The Putin leadership might feel that a democratic wave might shake the authoritarian rule in Russia, too.

 

Moreover, Russia maintains close relations with Central Asian Turkic republics, comparable to US relations with oil-rich Arab regimes. These republics export oil and natural gas to the world mostly through Russian pipelines. The republics are ruled by authoritarian former Soviet elites closely tied to Russia. Therefore, Russia maintains the same worries the US feels for oil-rich Arab countries: a tide of democratization might reach the Central Asia and topple Russia’s allies in the region. In addition, Russia’s blaming Google for inciting Egyptian people points to Russian worries about the power of the Internet in spreading grievances.

 

During the last days of the Mubarak rule, the Chinese government called for the return of order in Egypt and for not intervening in Egypt’s domestic affairs. This was interpreted as a support for Mubarak rule. During the protests, it was reported that the Chinese government even blocked “Egypt” from internet search engines. Under a prolonged Communist Party rule, China opened its economy to global markets, falling short of political liberalization. The authoritarian Cummunist rule in China already faced about public uproars such as the Tinannenmen protests, social unrests in Tibet and Xinjiang during recent years. A global wave of democracy might challenge the Chinese regime and might inspire ethnic and religious unrest in the country. China, too, seemed to be worried about the power of internet as we witnessed a controversy over Google censorship on politically sensitive materials last year. China also barred popular social network sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Therefore, any serious democratic wave might reach even China and cause troubles.

 

With its public opinion and government, Turkey supported the Youth Revolution and demands for democracy in Egypt. Turkey began to solve its social and economic problems through democracy and its good neighborhood policy helped to improve relations with its environs. Therefore, it is natural for Turkey to wish the same democratic reforms in Arab societies that is currently witnessing protests from the Gulf to the Atlantic. Turkey does not seek to export a model to the region but its economic and democratic success clearly inspires the Arab public. Moreover, its historical and social ties with Arab societies helped the Turkish government and public opinion to sympathize with the popular demands in the Middle East.

 

India, too, said “it backed democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people for reforms” in a reserved manner. India’s functioning democracy and its historical ties with Egypt seemed to have played a role in shaping a more positive stance to the Egyptian revolution. Despite the close relations during the Nasser era, India and Egypt remained aloof during the last decade on issues such as the nuclear deal and UN Security Council reform. India might feel it could work better with a democratic Egypt.

 

In brief, major global powers such as the USA, Russia and China opposed the Egyptian revolution while the emerging powers such as Turkey and India supported the Egyptian aspirations for democracy. These discrepant reactions to the Egyptian revolution prove that it was a change of global significance.