Jake DellaPasqua
October 27, 2016
Writing 5
Professor Meghan
WikiLeaks’ Role in the Arab Spring
On December 17, 2010, a man set himself on fire. His name was Mohammed Bouazizi,
and he was a street vendor from Tunisia who was tired of his government’s oppressive regime.
In response to his self-immolation, the Tunisian people took to the streets to protest. According
to Rania Abouzeid of Time, although there were already citizens rioting against their
government, Bouazizi's actions spurred a full-on revolution. This revolution extended past
Tunisia, and began a string of Middle Eastern countries rising up against their dictators. This
trend was known as the Arab Spring, and included countries such as Egypt and Libya
(Abouzeid). Also, around this time, a website called WikiLeaks came to prominence in the
context of the Middle East. According to WikiLeaks own website, since its launch in 2007,
WikiLeaks has made it its mission to fight for tangible, positive social change by releasing
private and classified data to the public. In late 2010, the group began releasing cables that
revealed truly how corrupt Middle Eastern dictators were. This was the first time that an online
organization, especially one as morally and legally dubious as WikiLeaks, has had such a
significant position on the world stage. However, in order to look into WikiLeaks' role in the
Arab Spring, we must first uncover how countries in the Middle East came to be in the positions
of political turmoil that they were in. When speaking about Tunisia, it begins with their corrupt
president, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.
A BBC News profile detailed Ali’s rise and fall from power. Ali was Tunisia’s second ruler after
the country fought France for its independence in 1956. The first, Ben Bourguiba, served as
president of Tunisia for nearly thirty years. However, according to the BBC News profile, in
1987 Bourguiba was deemed “mentally unfit to rule,” and a coup d’état took place. After the
palace coup, Ali assumed power. At first, Ali seemed to be improving social conditions in
Tunisia. He promoted transitioning toward democracy, with elections occurring every 5 years.
Tunisia also saw gradual economic growth, as well as taking an incredibly progressive stance on
both women’s rights and economic reform. Tunisia became an attraction for many European
tourists, most notably for its beaches. However, behind this gilded perception of Tunisia was
corruption and nepotism. Ali’s first two elections were completely unopposed, and even when a
second party was introduced in 1999, Ali won the vast majority of votes. Ali’s last election was
in 2011, and despite the country’s general discontent, he won around 90% of votes. While the
country’s economy continued to grow, unemployment skyrocketed. However, these clear
shortcomings did not matter to Ali. Like many other Middle-Eastern dictators, Ali made his own
image larger than life. Posters of Ali’s face appeared in many public places around Tunisia, as
well as on the front cover of Tunisian newspapers. Ali adamantly fought political discontent,
arresting and mistreating those who opposed him (News, BBC).
However, despite Ali’s attempts to mask it, Tunisia had descended into turmoil. An article by
CNN’s Maha Azzam said that food had become a scarcity, unemployment had risen to 30%, and
Ali continued to crack down on the freedom of press. A ForiegnPolicy.com article by Emily
Dickinson quotes the International Federation of Journalists as having said that May 2009 to
May 2010 was “one of [Tunisia’s] worst years since independence.” One of Ali’s most effective
forms of censorship was through the use of nepotism. He used the royal family (also called “The
Family,” a name which insinuates a mafia-like structure) to control the highly-censored media
(Freeman). According to New Republic’s Eric Andrew-Gee, in 2009, Ben Ali’s son-in-law,
Fahed Sahkr al-Matri, bought a publishing house that printed four of the major Tunisian
newspapers. A large number of the television stations were state run, and the internet was
heavily monitored. Clothilde le Coz, Washington director of Reporters Without Borders,
reported that the Tunisian government blocked websites, went after individual users, and tracked
IP addresses (Andrew-Gee). This degree of corruption and censorship created significant public
discontent, which some began to act on.
The person who many credit with catalyzing the Arab Spring was Mohammed Bouazizi, whose
story and public form of rebellion resonated with a large number of people. According to an
article written by the CNN Arabic Staff, as an unemployed, 26-year-old college graduate,
Bouazizi resented the idea of joining the “army of unemployed youth.” In order to avoid this
fate, Bouazizi opened a fruit stand, selling fruits and vegetables on the street in order to support
his family. However, according to Adeel Hassan of the New York Times, on December 17, 2010,
Bouazizi was publicly harassed by a police officer who claimed that he didn’t have a proper
permit. This confrontation resulted in the police officer slapping and mocking Bouazizi. After he
attempted to file a complaint at a center for unemployed graduates, Bouazizi was turned away by
a series of laughs and insults. In retaliation, he covered himself in paint thinner and set himself
on fire in front of the governor’s office (Hassan). Bouazizi’s self-immolation resonated with
many unemployed young people living in Tunisia. Khadija Cherif, an employee for a Paris-based
group called the Federation of Human Rights Leagues, was quoted in the CNN article as having
said Bouazizi was a "symbol for all the young college graduates who were unemployed, and . . .
was a sort of catalyst for the violent demonstrations which followed in the Sidi Bouzid region."
The rioting in Sidi Bouzid soon caused an explosion of uprisings throughout the entirety of
Tunisia, primarily among young, unemployed Tunisians (CNN Arabic Staff). Bouazizi died on
January 4, 2011, just 10 days before Ben Ali fled Tunisia.
The political unrest created in Tunisia spread to other Middle Eastern countries, one of
which was Egypt, whose people were inspired by Bouazizi’s actions. According to Jack Shenker,
The Guardian's Cairo correspondent, a number of people began setting themselves on fire in the
days following Bouazizi’s protest. Former United Nations nuclear weapons chief and Egyptian
dissident, Mohamed ElBaradei, warned of a “Tunisia-style explosion” if the government did not
begin to radically reform their policies (Shenker). However, many grassroots activists believed
that it was too late for Mubarak’s government, and that ElBaradei was not radical enough. One
grassroots activist and prominent journalist, Hossam El-Hamalawy, believed that ElBaradei was
not a “man of the street,” but rather someone from a diplomatic background whose ideals were
not radical enough for Egypt (Shenker). According to Shadi Hamid, director of research at the
Brookings Doha Centre, the Egyptian protests had received an increase in energy and optimism
after the revolution in Tunisia began (Shenker). In an interview with The Guardian, Hamid said,
“Before Tunisia, no one thought it would be possible to unseat Arab leaders any time soon. But
now many Egyptians are asking, if the Tunisians can do it, why can't we? After all, conditions in
Egypt are worse (Shenker).” The protests continued, and eventually Mubarak, who had ruled
Egypt for 30 years, resigned, and just two months later was arrested.
Four days after Mubarak resigned in Egypt, uprising began in Libya, which created what
would eventually become one of the most war-like revolutions during the Arab Spring.
According to an in World Affairs Journal by esteemed investigative journalist Judy Bachrach, in
addition to the successes of revolutionaries in Tunisia and Egypt, what sparked the Libyan
Revolution was the arrest of Fathi Tarbal, a Libyan human rights lawyer and activist. Similar to
the Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions, the Libyan Revolution began by people taking to the
street to protest their government’s dictatorial ruler, Muammar Gaddafi, who had been in charge
for 42 years. However, according to Aljazeera.com, a website run by the Qatar government, the
makeup of the demonstrations changed when Gaddafi’s troops met the dissidents with live fire.
This caused the rebels to take up arms, and in the process assume control over Benghazi. The
rebels used the eastern city as a location from where to launch their attacks on the rest of the
country. Over time, the rebels, who were primarily untrained office-workers, transformed into an
effective military force. These dissidents, along with defectors of Gaddafi’s regime, became
known as the National Transitional Council (NTC). The NTC was recognized by a number of
Western and Middle Eastern states, alike. On March 19, 2011, NATO and its Qatari partners
began a coordinated bombing attack on Libya, while also deploying ground troops (Arsenault).
Finally, in October, 2011, Gaddafi was killed by rebel fire, and his 42 years of dictatorship were
over.
However, it should also be noted that as revolution was beginning, WikiLeaks was rising to
prominence in the Middle East as well. For a group that staunchly opposes secrecy and
corruption, the Middle East was a hotbed for potential acts of social justice. In late 2011,
WikiLeaks released 10 diplomatic cables written by the U.S. embassy in Tunisia, dating between
January 2006 and June 2009, through a Lebanese newspaper called Al-Akhbar. According to
PBS, the cables went viral over social media, and people throughout the world, including
Tunisians, saw them. The cables further confirmed what many already knew: Tunisia was a
corrupt state. In addition to describing Tunisia as a police state, the cables emphasized the vast
disparity between the quality of life of the elite and the everyday person (Sanina). In an interview
with PBS, Mary-Jane Deep, an expert in North Africa and the Middle East said: “The WikiLeaks
revelations confirmed that people surrounding president Ben Ali were corrupt and spent a lot of
money. . . at a time when ordinary Tunisians were struggling to find jobs and feed their
families.” The WikiLeaks cables further confirmed the suspicion that many Tunisian people had;
that Ali and his family put their own interests and wealth ahead of those of the country.
In addition to the disparity in wealth, the cables also spoke about the gross corruption that
plagued Ali’s regime. Amy Davidson is a staff writer for The New Yorker who focuses primarily
on politics and international affairs. She wrote about the disgusting degree of corruption that was
present in the regime, and which the leaks revealed, saying:
There are also accounts of shady bank dealings, a stolen yacht, land handed over to [Ben Ali’s
wife] Leila, her brother berating an official who actually checked that the amusement park he
owned had insurance (what kind of amusement park is that?), a comedian thrown in jail on
trumped-up charges after making some jokes about the family. Also, there’s a pet tiger named
Pasha.
The information released by the cables showed the world just how self-serving the Ali family
really was.
In response to the cables, the Tunisian government became even more restrictive in terms of
access to the internet. According to Ahmad F Al-Shagra of The Next Web, in early December,
2011, the Tunisian government blocked, not just WikiLeaks, but all news sources posting or
referencing the cables. This included Tunileaks, a Tunisian specific spin-off of WikiLeaks,
which was created by Nawaat, a Tunisian blog that was built as a place for political dissident to
discuss the corruption in their government. Tunileaks was specifically created to discuss and
debate the WikiLeaks cables (Al-Shagra). However, the information block only had a negative
impact. According to The Arab Network for Human Rights Information, “After having been
criticized by many, the Tunisian government will be mocked by more for that blocking. They
failed in concealing their human rights violations and they are sure to fail in barring those
documents.” According to the same article, Tunisians were still able to access the information
revealed by WikiLeaks via proxies and alternative routes.
As the Arab Spring spread to other countries in the Middle East, WikiLeaks followed the
uprisings, leaking information about other regimes as well. The unmasking of corruption
continued with Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak. Bachrach’s article outlined the content of the
cable. In the article, she wrote that American Ambassador to Egypt, Margaret Scobey, said that
“Mubarak now makes scant public pretense of advancing a vision for democratic change,”
adding that “if Mubarak is still alive it is likely he will run again and, inevitably, win.”
Bachrach’s article also outlined the cables were released about the Libyan government, which
described Gaddafi’s sons’ reckless behavior. One son, Mutassim, solicited 1.2 billion dollars
from the chairman of Libya's National Oil Corporation. The other, Hannibal, was sent to jail for
beating up his servants. According to the cable, which was written by U.S. Ambassador to Libya,
Gene Cretz, “The family has provided local observers with enough dirt for a Libyan soap opera
(Bachrach).”
The WikiLeaks cables provided substantial information in terms of giving dissidents additional
fuel to ignite the flame of revolution.
However, although there are people, such as journalist Judy Bachrach and Syrian dictator
Muammar Gaddafi, who believe that the Arab Spring was primarily caused by the WikiLeaks
cables, that is not the case. Although WikiLeaks played an important role in the creation of the
Arab Spring, it was simply a tool. The true energizers of the revolution were the political
dissidents who took to the street to overthrow their dictators.
Although the Arab Spring was a revolution by and for the people, not the internet; WikiLeaks
was an effective and prominent tool in the creation of the revolution, which is why it is
understandable that there are people who believe WikiLeaks to be the driving force behind the
Arab Spring. The WikiLeaks cables were important because they released specific information
about the corruption occurring throughout Middle Eastern dictatorships. Due to the attitude about
information in the Middle East, it makes sense that there are those who believe that the cables
were crucial for the creation of the Arab Spring. In Judy Bachrach’s article for the World Affairs
Journal, she said “In the Muslim world. . . it is not just women who often, traditionally, go about
veiled. It is—or rather it used to be—information. In Yemen, Egypt, and Syria, in Bahrain and
Libya, that veil has now been lifted, for better or for worse. . . by WikiLeaks.” Bachrach added
that the United States Government credits WikiLeaks with “an almost unparalleled global shift in
power and stability in the Muslim world.” Bachrach believes that the information WikiLeaks
provided created an eruption anger which let to political uprisings. She even went as far as to call
Private Bradley Manning, the whistleblower who gave WikiLeaks a majority of the information
in the cables, the catalyst for the Tunisian Revolution. Although Bachrach is right that
WikiLeaks helped to further enrage dissidents, she underestimates the amount of political
discontent that was present before WikiLeaks entered Tunisia. Many Middle Easterners were
already aware of the corruption within their government, and WikiLeaks only helped to
accelerate the process of revolution.
The Arab Spring was a reaction by the people to the poor leadership within their countries,
however it makes sense that after Tunisia many prominent Middle Eastern dictators blamed
WikiLeaks for the creation of the revolution, because it places the blame on a third party rather
than the dictators, themselves, having to accept responsibility. An example of this is Syrian
dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, who publicly asserted that WikiLeaks was the primary culprit
behind the revolution. According to New York Times writer Robert Mackey, immediately after
the Tunisian Revolution began, Gaddafi addressed the Syrian and Tunisian people on state run
television. In this address, Gaddafi condemned WikiLeaks, calling it an “evil organization” that
was attempting to upset public order and Arab self-rule. He also warned the viewers that
WikiLeaks “publishes information written by lying ambassadors in order to create chaos.” In
Judy Bachrach’s article for World Affairs Journal, she quotes Egyptian-American journalist,
Mona Eltahawy, as having described the thought processes behind Gaddafi’s statement. She
wrote “His speech to Tunisians could be summarized thus: I am scared witless by what happened
in your country.” It is clear that Gaddafi was afraid of losing power, and in this state of panic, it
was easier for him to blame a third party than it was to admit his own shortcomings as a leader
and attempt to change the way he governed.
Regardless of what Gaddafi believed, the true catalysts of the Arab Spring were the political
dissidents who were upset with their governments’ rule, and took to the streets to fight the status
quo. One protestors who risked her life to fight for a free Tunisian is named Rim Nour. In an
interview with Colin Delany of the Huffington Post, Nour said that she believes “it was a
Tunisian Revolution, not a Twitter/Facebook/WikiLeaks revolution.” In her mind, there was
already enough political unrest to create a revolution, and that an uprising was inevitable. Nour
believes that WikiLeaks expedited the process of revolution by adding fuel to the proverbial fire.
She also believed that the popularity surrounding the leaks helped to promote the revolution,
however they by no means created it (Delany). Elizabeth Dickinson agrees with Nour. In one of
her pieces, she writes “Of course, Tunisians didn’t need anyone to tell them [about the excesses
of the first family]. But the details noted in the cables. . .stirred things up.” Dickinson and Nour
both agree that WikiLeaks was simply a tool in further energizing an already indignant group of
political dissidents.
Nour’s opinion that the revolution belonged to the Tunisian people is substantiated by the
reaction to Mohamed Bouazizi’s self-immolation. When talking about the creation of a
revolution, one must look at cause and effect. A full two weeks before Bouazizi’s very public
protest, WikiLeaks released its cables outlining the corruption in Tunisia. According to
Bacharach’s article in World Affairs Journal, the cables were thoroughly circulated, however the
immediate reaction to them was not significant. Although people were enraged at the corruption
within Ali’s regime, this anger did not manifest itself in a significant increase of protests. It
wasn’t until Bouazizi’s death that Tunisian streets were filled with protests and violence
(Bachrach). Only after videos of Bouazizi burning alive outside of the governor’s office went
viral on Twitter and Facebook did the political unrest in Tunisia receive international notoriety.
Although the cables revealed the corruption in Tunisia at an intellectual level, Bouazizi's
martyrdom struck an emotional chord throughout the world. Describing the corruption of Ali’s
regime was important, but it took a man who was willing to burn himself to death to convince
the world that Ali must no longer rule Tunisia.
Even the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, believes that WikiLeaks was not the primary
cause of the Arab Spring. In an interview with Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman, Assange
credited Bouazizi with truly inspiring the Tunisian people, saying “that taking a sort of
intellectual frustration and irritation and hunger for change and undeniability to an emotional,
physical act on the street is then what changed the equation.” Assange believes that although the
WikiLeaks cable added to the frustration in Tunisia, it took a significant, physical act to truly
inspire revolution. In the same interview, Assange outlines what he believes WikiLeaks’ true
role in Tunisia to be. He stated that in his opinion the most important part of the WikiLeaks cable
was revealing the international ties between Western powers, including the United States and
France, and the Ali regime. In the interview, Assange said “the United States knows, and the
United States can’t deny what was going on inside Tunisia. . .So, a situation developed where it
was not possible for the United States to support the Ben Ali regime and intervene in a
revolution in Tunisia in the way that it might have.” Assange believes WikiLeaks played an
important role in the Tunisian Revolution, however he knows that WikiLeaks did not start the
revolution. Instead, it simply provided information that made it impossible for western nations to
assist Ali’s regime in stopping the riots.
Another reason people believed Tunisia to be an “internet revolution” is that dissidents had never
before used the internet as a tool to revolt; however, their using the web is simply a product of
having a revolution in the age of the internet. Evgeny Morozov is an academic and a writer who
specifically studies political and social implications of technology. Nancy Scola, a senior
technology reporter for Politico, wrote an article in The American Prospect, in which she quotes
Morozov. Morozov says that he believes in order to accurately assess the internet's role in the
Arab Spring, one must first ask themselves an important question, which is: “Would this
revolution have happened if there were no Facebook and Twitter? I think this is the key question
to ask. If the answer is 'yes,' then the contribution that the Internet has made was minor; there is
no way around it.” To this question Scola has an answer. She believes that the internet and
revolution go hand-in-hand, and trying to separate the two is an oversimplification of the Arab
Spring. She says “Clearly, the Internet doesn't make the dissident. Rather, the dissident makes
use of the Internet. What's happening in Tunisia isn't a Twitter or a WikiLeaks revolution. It's
just what revolution looks like these days.” Scola argues that in the 21st century, the internet will
of course be used in revolution, as it is a tool which can be used to expose abuse and corruption
to billions of people. To try to separate the two, in Scola’s opinion, is to not fully understanding
contemporary revolution, which involves the internet, but in no way lessens the role of the
revolutionaries.
Although WikiLeaks was not the driving force behind the Arab Spring, it did help to further
create unrest in the Middle East by providing substantial proof for the corruption and abuse of
power of which dissidents had accused their leaders. To try to say whether or not the Arab
Spring would have occurred without WikiLeaks is to not fully understand the interconnectedness
between the internet and revolutions in the contemporary world. However, it is safe to say that
there was significant political unrest before WikiLeaks became involved, but also that
WikiLeaks did its best to fight censorship and repressive leaders. Although WikiLeaks provided
political dissidents with substantial information that helped to further their cause, the Arab
Spring was truly created by people like Bouazizi and Nour protesting in the streets.
Bibliography
Abouzeid, Rania. "Bouazizi: The Man Who Set Himself and Tunisia on Fire." Time. Time Inc.,
21 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Andrew-Gee, Eric. "Making Sense of Tunisia." New Republic. New Republic, 17 Jan. 2011.
Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Anhri. "After Publishing WikiLeaks Documents Tunisia Blocks Al-akhbar Newspaper Website."
The Arab Network for Human Rights Information. N.p., 6 Dec. 2010. Web.
Al-Shagra, Ahmad F. "Tunisia Blocks WikiLeaks & Everyone Referencing It." The Next Web.
The Next Web B.V., 7 Dec. 2010. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Arsenault, Chris. "Libya: The Revolt That Brought down Gaddafi." Al Jazeera English. Al
Jazeera Media Network, 27 Dec. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Azzam, Maha. "Opinion: How WikiLeaks Helped Fuel Tunisian Revolution." CNN. Cable News
Network, 18 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
CNN Arabic Staff. "How a Fruit Seller Caused Revolution in Tunisia." CNN. Cable News
Network, 16 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Davidson, Amy. "Tunisia and WikiLeaks." The New Yorker. Condé Nast, 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 27
Oct. 2016.
Delany, Colin. "How Social Media Accelerated Tunisia's Revolution: An Inside View." The
Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 25 May 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Dickinson, Elizabeth. "The First WikiLeaks Revolution?" Foreign Policy The First WikiLeaks
Revolution Comments. N.p., 13 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Freeman, Colin. "Tunisian President Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali and His Family's 'Mafia Rule'"
The Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 16 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Goodman, Amy. "WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange on Role of U.S. Cables in Helping Stir
Arab Spring." Democracy Now! Democracy Now!, 06 July 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Hassan, Adeel. "A Fruit Vendor Whose Death Led to a Revolution." New York Times. The New
York Times Company, 17 Dec. 2014. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Mackey, Robert. "Qaddafi Sees WikiLeaks Plot in Tunisia." The New York Times. The New
York Times Company, 17 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
News, BBC. "Profile: Zine Al-Abidine Ben Ali." BBC News. BBC, 20 June 2011. Web. 27 Oct.
2016
Sanina, Mila. "WikiLeaks Cables Help Uncover What Made Tunisians Revolt." PBS. PBS, 25
Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Scola, By Nancy. "Why Tunisia Is Not a Social-Media Revolution." The American Prospect.
N.p., 21 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Shenker, Jack. "Mohamed ElBaradei Warns of 'Tunisia-style Explosion' in Egypt." The
Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 18 Jan. 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
WikiLeaks. "Submit Documents to WikiLeaks." About. N.p., 7 May 2011. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.