***A considerable part of the developing world still remains under the dilemma of choosing the right path for future development due to the lack of organised politicalforces to fill in the vacuum created by the fall of authoritarian regimes.****

The 50s and 60s of last century earmarked massive retreat of colonial forces in Asia, Africa and South America, although the decay of colonialism started earlier in the century. Most countries achieved independence under nationalist banners, and in most of those countries authoritarian regimes were established following end of colonialism. Many of the regimes continue to remain till now. According to the Economist Intelligent Unit's (EIU) estimates, in 2010 all 55 countries with authoritarian regimes belonged to the Third World countries — former colonies — while only 12.3% of the world's population enjoyed full democracy.

The democracy indices in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Jordan and Iran, some of the countries currently experiencing protests against authoritarian regimes, ranged between 1.84 and 3.74, while the same indices ranged between 9.5 and 9.8 in Sweden, Denmark, Iceland and Norway. The EIU democracy indices are based on five broad categories of 60 indicators: i) electoral process and pluralism; ii) civil liberties; iii) functioning of the government; iv) political participation; and v) political culture.

Power handover to authoritarian regimes instead of democratic political forces appeared to be a much better option for the colonial powers from the point of view of continuation of their political and economic interests in former colonies. The authoritarian regimes thus emerged or planted in most of the Third World countries invariably prevented development of democratic and civil society institutions or destroyed the existing ones to ensure sustainability of captured or obtained power.

Opposed to the mid-twentieth cen-

tury, the modern world is character-ised by more humanitarian approaches built on the existence of numerous human rights and civil society organisations, free media and improved ICT. These have changed the

political philosophy of the West as well as of the East.

However, a considerable part of the developing world still remains under the dilemma of choosing the right path for future development due to the lack of organised political forces to fill in the vacuum created by the fall of authoritarian regimes. The lack of civil society organisations, and inadequately developed media and information and communication system are an added annoyance for those countries.

Following the fall of authoritarian regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, the peoples' movement for democracy spread all over the Middle East and Northern Africa, covering among others, Libya, Algeria, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Bahrain. Long lasting non-democratic and non-

accountable systems in most of the developing countries deprived and continue to deprive an overwhelming majority of their populations of their fundamental rights, leaving them in poverty, bad governance, corruption and slow growth rate.

Currently, over 92 million people in the rich Arab world live in poverty, while the lion's share of the national wealth is concentrated in the hands of the coterie of rulers and their allies. Disagreement of the people with the prevailing situation instigated the protests, the mass, scale and intensity of which must reach culminating points leading to the expulsion of the rulers and their allies. The unrest indices in 2010 ranged between 53 and 87, while those of corruption ranged between 50 and 146, in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, Libya and Yemen.

The fall of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt has demonstrated that the lack, or weaknesses, of political forces to play leading role in the people's democratic movement result in replacement of one authoritarian regime by another, making the people's sacrifice null and void. Egypt's development, if another authoritarian regime takes over, will be delayed for long until competent political leadership emerges.

The situation in Tunisia after the fall of Ben Ali's 23-year authoritarian rule seems to be better due to the existence of some sort of democratic institutions: parliament, political parties, etc. Despite the above, All declared a state of emergency prior to his departure that prompted the army to take over control of security from the police. Public gatherings were banned and the security forces were authorised to kill people in case of non-compliance of any type. The implication is that the fate of democracy in Tunisia will largely depend on the ability of the

existing political leadership to consolidate their strength before any authoritarian force gets a chance to intervene in state affairs or dictate the course of the country's future socio-political development.

Libya has been undergoing a mass anti-authoritarian movement since February 15. Muammar Gaddafi captured power in 1969 following a military coup, and has been ruling Libya for 42 years; more than half of the average life expectancy of Libyans at birth. Since the political philosophy of "Gaddafism" rejects parliamentary democracy and political parties, Gaddafi has banned or destroyed all political parties and civil society organisations in Libya following his power capture.

The country was run by the Revolutionary Command Council for seven years following power capture by Gaddafi. In 1977, Gaddafi convened a General People's Congress (GPC), which is the only de facto political entity in Libya, while the country's real political leadership remains with Gaddafi himself. Thus, against the backdrop of absence of credible and competent opposition political leadership and strong civil society, the popular anti-government movement in Libya, which has left hundreds of people dead, is being tackled strongly by Gaddafi and his followers.

The ultimate fall of the Gaddafi regime is unambiguous. Ironically Gaddafi, similar to all other autocrats, has failed to understand the obsolescence of his regime and hence has preferred the policy of coercion instead of compromise, which will only prolong the miseries of the Libyans.

The writer is President, Governance and Rights

Centre (GRC)

E-mail: zalamlll@yahoo.com