Zambia celebrates their first Africa Cup of Nations title. (BBC Sport)

It’s been nearly a week and I still have not quite absorbed Zambia’s epic shootout victory over Côte d’Ivoire in the African Cup of Nations final in Libreville last Sunday.

First there is the way that Zambia won, which is to say, the game itself. Perhaps for many people the prospect of a 0-0 game is simply not all that exciting. But in a finals a scoreless tie is excruciatingly enthralling because the consequences of any given goal are so great. When Les Elephants’ and Chelsea’s superstar Didier Drogba geeked a penalty in regulation time, it seemed that the football gods were continuing to smile on Chipolopolo. Zambia’s “Copper Bullets” had made a magical run through the CAF when almost literally no one outside of Zambia had them advancing as far as the quarterfinals. Then there were the two halves of extra time. Still no scoring. And so the teams headed for penalties. 18 penalty shots and only one Zambian miss later and one of the greatest upsets, indeed one of the greatest stories, in recent sports history was complete. Zambia had won. And they had defeated a Côte d’Ivoire team swarming with global superstars. They were, and are, the African champions.

A week later it still baffles the imagination.

Football is the world’s most popular sport. And there is a case to be made that no continent more fully embraces soccer as its favorite sport than Africa. With scant exceptions — distance running in Ethiopia and Kenya, rugby among whites in South Africa– soccer is far and away the most popular sport from the Maghreb to the Cape. There are swaths of Europe where other sports — rugby in parts of Italy, England, Scotland, France and so forth, skiing throughout Alpine nations, hurling and Gaelic football in Ireland, and so forth — are incredibly popular. There are parts of Latin America where baseball reigns supreme or at least vies for supremacy with futbol. Not so in Africa.

And of course on the whole Africa is the poorest continent with some of the greatest political and socio-economic difficulties on earth. And so something like winning CAF is huge both from a sporting vantage point and in terms of what it means for a society. So when a  team like Zambia finishes an underdog run as they just did? Well, it is no exaggeration to say that if I could have been anywhere on earth a week ago, I wish I could have been in Lusaka.

And of course Zambia’s story is made all the more special, not to mention poignant, by the ironies and coincidences inherent in tragedy. On April 27, 1993 the national team was en route to Senegal  for a qualifying match for the 1994 World Cup. Soon after taking off from a refueling stop in, of all places, Libreville, the scene of last Sunday’s heroics, the plane crashed, killing all aboard. Kalusha Bwalya, the 1993 team’s captain, arguably the greatest player in Zambian history, and the president of the Zambian football association today, was not aboard that plane as he was returning from the Netherlands where he played for PSV. That Bwalya was there and played such a prominent role in overseeing this year’s team must have been a moment of profound pride but of equally profound grief.

There will be another tournament in just a year. South Africa will host. While the tournament happens biennially, officials have chosen to change the tournament to an odd-numbers year format, so Zambia will only have a year, rather than two, to celebrate. But future tournaments will be hard pressed to surpass the events of this past month and the improbable Zambian triumph stands as the reason why. For Zambians, anyway, this year’s squad will be champions forever.

Larry Diamond (Stanford University)

I recently spoke with Stanford University professor and founding co-editor of the renowned Journal of Democracy Larry Diamond about U.S. democracy promotion. Mr. Diamond authored this year’s Great Decisions article, Promoting Democracy, in which he analyses the evolving significance and use of an American foreign policy mantra.  In an update to the article, Mr. Diamond elucidates the meaning of crackdowns on U.S.-backed NGOs in Egypt, developments in Russia, upcoming elections in emerging democracies, and the waning influence of the American constitutional model.

Read his expert opinion on what democracy promotion means in practice and theory, and how the U.S. should respond to democratic uprisings around the world.

Theodore Roosevelt (Library of Congress Image)

“It turns out societal fault lines, interpersonal rivalries, and long suppressed power centers do not move at Internet speeds,” Sarwar Kashmeri observes in a new article in the Huffington Post commemorating the first anniversary of Egypt’s uprisings. Americans and local revolutionaries must be patient about the revolution’s transition to governance in Egypt. In fact, Kashmeri implores, Egyptians must follow President Theodore Roosevelt’s advice, delivered almost exactly 100 years ago in Cairo at a similar moment of radical transition. The former president warned that it takes generations for a nation to successfully self-govern. Americans should also head these words, when impatience about the pace and nature of reforms influences decisions on aid and diplomacy, Kashmeri advises.

Read “In Egypt Follow the Advice of President Theodore Roosevelt,” here.

Zambia's Davies Nkausu runs with his national flag after the 1-0 vicotry over Ghana 1-0 in the Africa Cup of Nations semi-final. Photograph: Rebecca Blackwell/AP

Zambian football is possibly best known for a horrific tragedy in 1993 when a plane carrying the national football team exploded, killing all aboard. The crash took place as the team was departing Libreville, where their plane had stopped to refuel. As if on cue, Libreville is the setting for Sunday’s championship game. Chipolopolo (“The Copper Bullets”) are clearly riding a wave of emotion and feel like they are something of a team of destiny.

Still, emotion only takes a team so far and destiny only carries a team to the next game’s kickoff. I, like millions of fans of African football, cannot help but root for Chipolopolo (though I have been supporting Cote d’Ivoire throughout this tournament). But I suspect that Didier Drogba and company, who advanced by defeating Mali 1-0, will not be denied, talent will out, and Les Elephants will emerge victorious.

In an interesting (but probably passing) change of direction, China is putting pressure on Sudan “to seek urgently the release of 29 Chinese workers held by rebels in the border state of South Kordofan.” China traditionally sees national sovereignty as sacrosanct. But now it is their ox being gored and suddenly a fixed position on questions of national sovereignty seems foolish. Hopefully they keep this incident in mind the next time one of their client states commits brutality against its own people.

African Heads of State meet in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (EPA/Jacoline Prinsloo)

The African Union was supposed to decide on its leadership this week. Instead gridlock has set in. South Africa had hoped that its Home Affairs Minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, would emerge victorious, but she has been unable to garner enough votes. As this story has developed I have been skeptical of whether or not Dlamini-Zuma could muster enough supports. Not because she is not qualified. But rather because South Africa occupies an interesting position on the continent. By virtually every measure it is the most powerful country on the continent, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. But that means that many Africans are wary of South Africa and want to push back against its pretensions to continental leadership. Or at least its pretensions to official positions of leadership. Culturally, economically, politically, and militarily the country is the de facto regional superpower.

Meanwhile Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe has denounced the AU for recognizing Libya’s National Transitional Council at a recent summit. At the Harare airport, Mugabe levied accusations toward his African colleagues for being: “‘fronts’ for Western powers whose ‘criminal’ NATO bombardment of Libya helped lead to the killing of Col. Moammar Gadhafi, a former Mugabe ally.” Of course he did.

Finally, if you’re going to be anywhere near the Research Triangle in North Carolina this weekend, I’d encourage you to swing by the South East Regional Seminar in African Studies (SERSAS) and the South East Africanist Network (SEAN) Conference. The main program will take place on Saturday at the University of North Carolina’s Fedex Global Education Center. The conference theme is “Border Crossings, Migrations, and Interventions,” but panels will deviate from those themes. I’m on the panel and would love to meet any readers who might be in the area.

Ethopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi (Credit: Reuters)

Last week as I was scanning the paper, I came across the tragic news coming out of Ethiopia, a country I deeply indebted to. In the Afar region, gunmen have killed five foreign tourists for unknown reasons. The Ethiopian government’s quick and inaccurate placement of blame is cause for concern.

It is, of course, bad news for Afar’s fledgling tourist industry, though it is not the first time that armed groups in the region have targeted foreigners. As in previous cases, the Ethiopian government immediately blamed the attack on militant groups from Eritrea, despite an absence of clear or convincing supporting evidence. It appears Addis Ababa is using Eritrea to build its case against global terrorism, and in so doing, is disregarding the genuine grievances of its people. As the old saying goes, “The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is working.”

In a press release, the Afar Revolutionary Democratic Unity Front (ARDUF), a rebel group fighting for greater autonomy for their region, claimed responsibility for the attack. ARDUF said 16 Ethiopian soldiers were killed, about a dozen others were wounded, and an unspecified number were taken captive. ARDUF also said the German nationals and Ethiopian soldiers, who they said were in safe hands, would be released once peaceful mediation is conducted by Afar elders. ARDUF categorically denied Eritrean government involvement. The press release proves Ethiopia’s accusation of Eritrea is baseless.

After the 1998 Ethiopia-Eritrea border war, ARDUF sided with Ethiopia and declared a cease-fire in operations against their national forces. In 2002, one faction of the ARDUF took reconciliation with Addis Ababa one step further by offering to permanently abandon armed struggle in exchange for peaceful involvement in Ethiopian politics. However, in March 2011, the armed ARDUF faction claimed to have killed 49 government soldiers in the area. Recent reports indicate that ARDUF still dominates life in the desert region.

Following the attack, the Ethiopian Foreign Ministry was busy formulating strategies to provoke Asmara. The Ministry noted that, “the government cannot and should not sit idly by while the regime in Asmara continues to sponsor acts of terror within Ethiopia’s territory with impunity.” However this statement overlooks two important facts: first, Prime Minister Zenawi has consistently employed a “blame game” of foreign actors in order to avert attention from mounting internal problems; and second, he wants to send a clear message to the international community that he is their one and only partner in the global fight against terrorism.

Continuing along his stated political line, Zenawi has proved he’s unstoppable by cracking down on the media, opposition groups, and human right groups inside and outside the country, charging them with unfounded heinous crimes. This however, has only sparked increased opposition to his regime and invites concern over his genuine intentions as an international partner.

Whatever the roots and ideological aims of ARDUF’s attack, the priority should be clear: the killings must be stopped, hostages must be released, and the Afar problem needs to be addressed in a broad and comprehensive manner. Such initiatives must take into account human security, economic and political development, and participation in decision-making in Addis Ababa. It is equally clear that these manifestations against those in power derive from a clear root cause – a persistent trajectory of underdevelopment and mis-governance in the region of the country.

This week, a first-of-its-kind study, “How Africa Tweets” was published by Portland Communications and Tweetminster which examined more than 11.5 million geo-located tweets during the last three months of 2011 and surveyed 500 of Africa’s “Top Tweeters.” For the first time, we have numbers to back up what many of us have assumed anecdotally (with a few surprises), such as:

How much is Twitter used in Africa?

The African country with this highest volume of tweets during the research period was South Africa (5,030,226 tweets) which was more than double the number of tweets of the second and third highest, Kenya (2,476,800 tweets) and Nigeria (1,646,212 tweets). To put these numbers in perspective, there are about 150,000,000 tweets sent every day worldwide.

Who’s using Twitter in Africa?

Those who tweet in Africa tend to be younger—60% between the ages of 21-29, compared with the worldwide average age of 39 years. The study made an interesting observation that Africa’s business and political leaders are largely absent from the continent’s twitterverse. This is a stark contrast to the US where virtually everyone in public political life communicates via Twitter, from political parties, local officials, presidents and presidential candidates (except for Ron Paul.)

Even terrorist networks are taking advantage of social media in Africa, check out my earlier post here.

How is Twitter being used by Africans?

57% of tweets were sent by mobile phones, which is only slightly higher than the 55% worldwide while only 37% of those in the US primarily tweet by mobile phone. (The explosion in mobile penetration in Africa made social media tools much more accessible.) More than 70% of Africans surveyed use Twitter as a source for national and international news. Not surprisingly, nearly 95% of those who use Twitter also use Facebook.

What does this mean?

First, it means that an increasing number of Africans are being exposed to news and information on subjects and from sources they may not have had access to previously. Secondly, we in the US now have a direct means of communication with those in Africa to share ideas, policies and to advocate for peace, change and reform. Thirdly, and I find this really interesting, Africans can talk BACK and share their ideas, concerns and issues. Social Media is a great “equalizer” because it provides a platform to reach millions and millions to those who might not otherwise have the means to communicate on a large scale. Fourthly, and this is what I found MOST interesting, the study revealed that 60% of those on Twitter in Africa “mainly follow African Tweeters.” This means that Africans are not just using new tools to reach “outside”, but they are establishing and strengthening the channels of communications amongst themselves. Now, they can follow world events with commentary from other Africans and gain a perspective that has been virtually absent. Also, strengthening these African-African ties will allow activists across nations to mobilize and coordinate in unprecedented ways.

The study also found that use of Twitter still pales in comparison with the US and other regions of the world. Twitter users in the Middle East and North Africa combined only make up about 5% of the Twitterverse. This disparity is not solely due to economics or access to technology. As the study points out, there are significant security and privacy barriers (particularly for the use of social media tools which incorporate geo-location services.) And how does Twitter’s policy shift this week to allow tweets and accounts to be selectively blocked, depending on the country of access weigh on these trends? Given the clear role that social media played in the Arab Spring, is this a step backwards?

You can download the complete study findings here.

The ANC has marked up some notable achievements. It enshrined civil and social rights in the constitution. It abolished the death penalty. It has built more than 3m free or subsidised houses, and has brought clean water, sanitation and electricity to millions more. Every child now has a right to at least 12 years of education. More than 15m people, almost a third of the population, get some form of welfare. Severe malnutrition among children under five has been almost eradicated. Some 6m pupils get free school meals. Having at last accepted the link between HIV and AIDS, the ANC now has a grip on the epidemic, one of the world’s worst. Crime is coming down; the murder rate has fallen by half from its peak in 1994. The ANC has set up anti-corruption agencies in a proclaimed effort to bring corrupt people to book.

But for most South Africans, the stench of graft, patronage and greed surrounding the ruling party itself is now too strong. The romance, solidarity and heroism of the days of struggle have gone. In the popular mind, ANC people, from the president down, seem keener on power, status and ostentatious wealth than on improving the lot of the poor. Always a broad church, the ANC is riven with factionalism and in-fighting. Lip service is paid to the old ideals, but the party seems increasingly rudderless. It has lost its way.

It seems that the first of these paragraphs is hard to dismiss and the second does not hold up on the evidence. No one I know of in South Africa supports graft, patronage, or greed. But how can one possibly assert that the stench of those things “surrounding the party is now too strong” when the ANC will win the next national elections overwhelmingly and with a 60%+ tally? This is a peculiar and arithmetically-challenged definition of “most.” In fact, the first paragraph is empirically right and the second is empirically wrong.

Senegal's Demba Ba. Credit: Alexander Klein/AFP/Getty Images

Jonathan Wilson might be the greatest football writer working today. If nothing else, he’s in the conversation. So it was with great interest that I read his recent lengthy post for the Guardian Sports Blog on the state of football in Africa. The title of the post poses the question: “Is African Football Progressing?”

His answer leans toward the negative. Yet I’m not sure his evidence leads to that conclusion. First, I’m not sure what his baseline of quality is — he seems to be putting forward an idealized view of what African football should look like, perhaps fueled by African football boosters or his own liberal projections of what he’d like African football to be (an ideological leaning that I share) and thus is posing: African football could be Y, instead it is X, and X falls short of Y, so this is disappointing. That is perhaps fair, but I’m not certain it is the only frame of reference.

By Wilson’s own estimation there are more great African players in the world’s elite football leagues than ever. There are more stars among those players (just look at the Barclay’s Premier League sides taking a hit from losing Africans who are from countries competing in the upcoming African League of Nations Tournament).

And while Wilson seems bent (albeit reluctantly and from a place of sadness and not schadenfreude) on disparaging the (perhaps slower than desired) accomplishments of African teams in the World Cup, one need only look back to the not-so-distant 1970s to recognize that even as the world’s game has improved, African teams are competing within that world far better than ever. As recently as 1978 an African team had never won so much as a World Cup game. We are a long way from those benighted days. To be sure, 2010 saw its share of disappointment for African sides, but even then Ghana came within the dastardly reach of the Hand of Fraud of advancing to the Semifinals and for the second World Cup in a row Cotê d’Ivoire found itself trapped in the Pool of Death and even then only failed to advance on goal differential.

His points about the Cup of Nations — that the quality of play has been dreadful — may or may not be true. I’ve heard enough people say as much that I suppose I must believe it (finding television coverage of the CAF is nearly impossible in the US — suggestions welcome) but it is hard to know exactly what that means since in the Cup of Nations African teams play one another and so it tells us little about the relative level of the African game. Teams tend to adapt to playing circumstances. Bad football does not necessarily equate to bad footballers or even to bad teams. Teams play the game in front of them, not some idealized game in the mind’s eye of a sportswriter or fan.

I am not here to assert that Wilson is wrong so much as to wonder whether or not we need to define the terms of the debate far more clearly than he has done. Has African football fallen short of some ideal that we have built for it? Perhaps. But has it actually fallen short relative to the performance of players and teams that exist in the real football playing world? I’m not so certain that is the case and I think a strong argument can be made that the opposite is true.

Photo: Reuters

Call it the O-effect. Passing with flying colors, seventy-two South African girls from disadvantaged backgrounds graduated from the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls (the academy’s first graduates) in South Africa this past Saturday. True to the old adage that to educate a woman is to educate a nation, the queen of talk shows Oprah Winfrey spent US$40 million of her own fortune to build a girls-only school in South Africa.

The importance of education for girls in South Africa, and sub-Saharan Africa in general, cannot be overstated. Due to colonial policies and patriarchal traditional systems/beliefs (such as early marriage, teen pregnancies, and preferences for educating boys over girls), Africa’s women, especially those from poor backgrounds, lag behind in education and socio-economic mobility. Consequently, education for girls has proliferated (with good intention) in post-colonial Africa, largely as a result of UNICEF’s worldwide effort to invest in girls’ education. The notion, however, that boys from disadvantaged backgrounds somehow have better opportunities than their female counterparts is masking the staggering reality that many boys in South Africa (and other countries in Africa) are in prisons or streets (making a living from the streets) instead of graduating from colleges and universities. Is the preferred choice for educating and prioritizing girls endangering boys’ chance for education, especially those in rural areas who face the same hurdles as girls?

Nonetheless, this “O-Model” of education for success—which pumps a lot of resources into schools, equips them with state of the art facilities, and invests in qualified staff, hands-on management, and strong mentorship—indeed presents an historic opportunity for South Africa. So, there are good and obvious reasons for South Africa and other African governments to applaud, listen, and pay attention to OWLA’s achievement. It is a rare phenomenon for African schools for all Grade 12 students to pass and be accepted to universities in South Africa and abroad all at the same time. Oprah herself, in her celebratory comments, has hinted at working with the South African government and other African governments to promote education for the underprivileged.

But can this “O-Model” of education for success be replicated and emulated to address South Africa or any other sub-Saharan country’s educational crisis? The answer is both yes and no.

Yes because depilated schools, haphazard learning environments, and laissez-faire leadership and management style are what is failing kids from disadvantaged communities because they are trapped in these failing schools.

No because the O-Model focuses too much on the top performing students-those students who are academically talented; therefore, a struggling child from the same underprivileged background stands no chance to be admitted in the Oprah-like leadership academy/school.

This approach of pitting the top against the bottom is what is at the heart of the education crisis in South Africa and Africa in general. To be a struggling child (boy or girl) in the African education system is to be condemned to a life without opportunities or support. Instead of helping a struggling child by raising him/her to the level of an academically gifted student, for the most part resources (such as scholarships, bursaries, recognition, and other incentives) are spent on the top performing students or top performing schools.

What is the plight of a struggling child, an underachiever, in the African education system? Is he/she teachable or not? The answer is an affirmative yes. Every child is teachable and I believe that underachievers from poor communities, if provided opportunities at the same ferocity as what the O-Academy does, would turn out to be top achievers too.

If reports coming out of South Sudan are true the United Nations may be facing its biggest embarrassment since its missteps in the Democratic of Congo. The New York Times reports that UN Peacekeepers stood by idly while Nuer tribesman massacred fleeing Murles. Unconfirmed reports suggest that over a thousand men, women and children were brutally murdered while a well armed UN force did nothing.

What is disturbing about this story is that UN officials were tracking this development for weeks, even after a group calling itself the Nuer Youth White Army told the media that they were going to wipe out the Murle.

There seems to be an inability on the part of New York to effectively operate a remote operation with essentialy an all volunteer force and a rather dodgy chain of command. The Security Council is always an issue in these kinds of affairs as well. Voices calling for the scrapping of the current system will likely gain a hearing after yet another episode of ‘failure to protect.’

The very existence of the UN Peacekeeping operation may be a real obstacle for getting things accomplished. Since the creation of South Sudan was largely a project of various groups in the U.S. it should perhaps be the U.S. Marines who are protecting the Murle instead of a force of poorly trained and unmotivated peacekeepers with no dog in the fight.

If we can send some troops to Uganda why not to South Sudan as well? The U.S. has just as much skin in this game as the U.N. and as the blue helmets have failed to do their job then others more willing to engage should be given the responsibility before more people needlessly die.

Historically, there has been tension between the two groups. Both are pastoralists living in South Sudan and Ethiopia, highly dependent on pastoral farming and large numbers of cattle. Extensive movement crossing each others’ boarders put the two groups in conflict, and there have been clashes with the Dinka, Anuak and other local host communities over land and grazing rights.

For the minority Murle, the small size of their homeland and the near absence of police protection makes them especially vulnerable in conflicts. During the North-South civil war, many Murle sought protection with the majority Nuer against North-Sudanese militia and slave raiders. After the formation of the new republic, the Murle felt threatened by the Nuer, who are relatively educated, outspoken, well connected and well represented in the new government of Salva Kiir.

The Nuer are considered to be amongst the most skilled fighters in Africa. They managed to appease the British Colonial masters and allied themselves with the Southern People Liberation Army (SPLA). Members of the community went on to enjoy sharing power with the current government of Ethiopia, weakening the strength of the majority Anuaks in the Gambella region. They continued to have strong political and military support both in Ethiopia and in the new state.

Currently, a large proportion of the population in Jonglei engage in cyclical migration and are thus affected by resources and a lack of institutional support. An increasing number of young Murle and Nuar are forced to seek alternative source of income- namely cattle raids- to supplement their loses. This instigated the ongoing violence.

Retribution continues to be a common practice, making mending the relationship between the two groups difficult for the new government. The young state has yet to put forth initiatives to promote peaceful resolution to the clashes, or efforts to diversify local sources of income. The new government of Salva Kiir must adopt a developmental approach to stabilizing the population and give vulnerable populations a viable alternative livelihood.

The potential that the accumulation of wealth in this particular area may spread towards populations in neighboring areas must also be considered in understanding the dynamics of the current situation. Ethnically unbalanced development will inevitably lead to further conflict, migration and displacement as external populations try to gain access to new services and resources. This in turn will lead to further deterioration of the security situation.

The new government must look to new ways to partner with diverse groups in order to utilize the enormous agricultural potential of the young state. This may include initiatives to connect Jonglei to regional and world markets, to promote an economy based on agriculture and cattle breeding, not continual theft based on “tit for tat”. Government intervention engaging local leaders in the Nuer, Dinka and Murle societies is needed.

A society’s well being depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they have a stake in it and do not feel excluded from the mainstream. In democratic societies all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to improve or maintain their well being. When governments fail or are unable to keep with the common good, it’s a matter of time until we will see them going down. This reminds me Martin Luther King Jr’s statement that . “Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.”

Thanks to TIME Magazine, 2011 person of the year special edition, the liberal magazine honored to the protestors. There were indeed many to choose from. It’s a great recognition of the sacrifices paid by those who stand for freedom and justice. No one could have known that when a Tunisian fruit vendor set himself on fire in a public square in a town barely on a map, he would spark protests that would bring down dictators in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and rattle regimes in Syria, Yemen and Bahrain. Or that spirit of dissent would spur Mexicans to rise up against the terror of drug cartels, Greeks to march against unaccountable leaders, Americans to occupy public spaces to protest income inequality, and Russians to marshal themselves against a corrupt autocracy.

TIME’s nomination was not free from questions. There are philosophical differences in mapping who is protesting for fairness, who is fighting for freedom and who is terrorizing humanity. As Larbi Sadiki noted in his view “Veiling luminance”. He questioned the meanings of protest, dissidence, and objection apply to Osama bin Laden? Was he a protester? We all know he was a terrorist. He questioned the social construction of the protestors and challange the perseption of who is a protestor, what constitute a protest and if it is always a postie phenomena. Are terrorist’s protesters? Is it the medium of protest, its reach, geography or end that defines the properties or identity of a “protester”? Do Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Mandela epitomize “the protester”. Would Ché? Castro? ANC? Hamas? The Afghan Mujahedeen (once allies of Bin Laden)? The Tunisian Federation of Trade Unions? All had something to do with “redefining people power”!

Despite such critics, the protestors of 2011 were disproportionately young, middle class and educated. Almost all the protests last year began as independent affairs, without much encouragement from, or endorsement by, existing political parties or opposition bigwigs. All over the world, the protesters of 2011 share a belief that their countries’ political systems and economies have grown dysfunctional and corrupt — sham democracies rigged to favor the rich and powerful and prevent significant change. They are fervent small democrats.

While there are universal values which are the common denominators of all the 2011 protestors, there are no ready-made recipes for bringing an end to their plights. Their quest requires a broad and long-term perspective analysis on what caused the protests and how institutions respond to their plights. Time will tell the historical, cultural, and social factors in a given society or country that shape the protest. I hope 2012 will be time to act on our global peace and development challenges on the baseis of respect, tolerance, and mending our long standing political deference.