They did not constitute political framework

Dictatorships are strange constructions. Views from the outside, they seem to be indestructible. Between cowardice, fatigue and need, their neighbors, their customers, their suppliers come to deal with these concrete blockhouse. And yet... they rot still from within, as the fish always rots from the head. One day spring or winter, they collapse, in a more or less spread domino effect in time. The fall then causes stupor. Taking partners on its head. Causes semantic doubts - as head of State seems then to discover "authoritarian", such as journalist speaks of "liberated"towns while he had never mentioned previously of cities "imprisoned" or "occupied". And above all, the fall opens a huge period of uncertainty. This is what could begin today on all Muslim arc centered on the Middle East.

This is not the first time that fall archivistic dictatorships. It happened the same thing in Latin America in the 1980s with the Argentina (1983), the Uruguay (1984), the Brazil (1985) and then the Chile (1989). Then in the East of Europe with the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 and the implosion of the USSR in 1991. Each of these events was poorly assessed at the outset, as he arrived by surprise. It was considered impossible by Western experts in the regions concerned. There are few who had the relevance and the impertinence of an Emmanuel Todd, predicting the breakup of the Soviet Union as early as 1976 from disturbing demographic curves on life expectancy (population also presents current events: the number of young people aged from twenty to thirty years has thus increased by 140 in Egypt in 30 years against 100 for the total population). The leaders of the PS today accusing Nicolas Sarkozy did anything come in North Africa should remember the stubbornness of François Mitterrand early 1990, asking the Germany the solemn undertaking to respect the border with the Poland (the Oder-Neisse line). He also watched an event of the present with the glasses of the past.

The fall of dictatorships which begins in the Middle East, with the Tunisia and Egypt yesterday, the Libya today and of the thrill of the Morocco to the Yemen, played in a different three times world - these are the three "i" of Arab spring. The first two were widely reviewed. It is the "i" of the Internet, which has played a role of Accelerator and amplifier. And the "i" of islam, point common to the affected countries. Question mark also, both the scope of the possible seems wide between the Turkish secularism and the Iranian theocracy.

The third specificity, the third "i", are the institutions. Because unlike the countries of Eastern Europe or Latin America, the Muslim countries of the Middle East have little democratic tradition. The colonizers had preferred to rely on Kings of junk rather than to risk organising elections. Their heirs continued, as the showed the excellent relations of Paris with the Ben Ali in Tunisia scheme or those of Rome with Gaddafi in Libya. The peoples who have reversed these regimes with incredible courage will have to create their models, their institutions. Many of them have an asset... who is also a ball: the ground is filled with gas or oil.

Economists have analyzed for half a century the "Dutch disease" which struck countries rich in natural resources. The increase in exports causes a revaluation of their currencies impeding their industrial development. This disease is not only economic, it is also political. In the Middle East as elsewhere, countries filled with oil have managed problems by money - what is again trying to Muammar Libya or King Abdullah in Saudi Arabia. They did not constitute political framework. They all have fragile institutions, Saudi Arabia (20 of world reserves, according to BP) to Libya (3) through Venezuela (13), Iraq (9), Kuwait (8), the United Emirates (7) and Russia (6). One of the greatest challenges of Arab spring will be to develop a vaccine against the "dutch disease".