“YEMENIS prepare to vote Saleh out of office” was The Guardian’s slightly disconcerting headline over a news report about yesterday’s somewhat fake election in a country that has experienced one of the least fruitful versions of the so-called Arab Spring.

After all, Ali Abdullah Saleh, now presumably under treatment in the United States for internal — or internalised — wounds that Saudi medical experts failed to heal, wasn’t on the ballot. Nor, for that matter, were any of his rivals. In fact, there was only one person that voters could vote for: Saleh’s vice-president and designated successor, Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi.

What’s more, his ‘popular endorsement’ bore no relation to the turnout — even one vote would have sufficed to confirm him as Saleh’s successor. And the upholder of a status quo that may well prove untenable.

The story is different, but not entirely unrelated, in other supposed beneficiaries of the Arab Spring. Tunisians arguably had some cause to celebrate the first anniversary of an uprising that established a regional trend. Although liberals are justifiably concerned about the Islamist revival and the threat it poses to one of the few redeeming features of the ancien régime — its broad adherence to secularism — the transition to democratic beginnings has at least been peaceful.

Egypt is another story. There, the authoritarian structure of the Hosni Mubarak regime remains intact, despite the former president’s relegation to the infirmary and the defendant’s dock, much to the relief of neighbours such as Israel and ex-sponsors of the status quo ante from Washington to Riyadh.

The much-feared Islamists, held up as a bogey by Mubarak over the decades, haven’t been reticent in seeking accommodation with the military hierarchy that is reluctant to let go of its political supremacy. But those who crowded Tahrir Square wanted something more, and they indicated last month that they are reluctant to let go.

The same goes for Washington and Riyadh. A presidential election cannot indefinitely be postponed, however. Egypt’s course in the months ahead will prove both crucial and fascinating. Not surprisingly, it has been compared with Pakistan, whose military is famed for its proclivity to maintain control of the reins of power.

It will, in all probability, continue to be a far cry from Libya, where Nato’s intervention brought forth a change that has left some people scratching their heads, given that the replacement regime seems almost as prone to human rights abuses as the Qadhafi regime, with elections still a promise rather than a definite prospect.

The fact that regime change in Libya was preceded by a United Nations resolution that prompted Nato to intervene in the name of protecting civilians inevitably played a role in the recent Russian and Chinese vetoes that pre-empted a Security Council condemnation of the Bashar al-Assad administration.

The votes were, not surprisingly, much criticised — not least because the tally of deaths in Syria runs into the thousands, with much of the damage concentrated in Homs. The targeted city isn’t all that far from Hama, were Assad’s father, Hafez, perpetrated a notorious massacre some three decades ago, aimed chiefly at the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates.At the beginning of the Libyan intervention a year ago, a moderately publicised comment from American military sources cited the apprehension that Muammar Qadhafi’s opponents may include elements associated with Al Qaeda. That particular scenario has been replicated in the case of Syria, with reports suggesting Al Qaeda in Iraq is keen on a fresh battlefield.

It is therefore hardly a revelation that neighbouring Israel has resisted calls for regime change in Syria; it was also as upset as Saudi Arabia by its ally Mubarak’s removal from the helm of affairs in Cairo.

Israel has also been wrong-footed by the welcome agreement between Fatah and Hamas, but the last thing it wants on its border with Syria is a regime devoted to its destruction for religio-ideological reasons, rather than in terms of the Arab nationalist cause — despite its stupendous animosity towards Iran, one of the Assad regime’s only allies in the Middle East, not to mention Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

By the same token, the US and Nato seem to abhor Assad partially because of his association with Tehran and the Lebanese Shia party that survived an Israeli assault. Yet Washington at least appears to be aware of the kinds of forces that would be let loose in Syria in the wake of a western intervention.

By no means, however, are all Islamists hostile to the US; after all, they are well aware that foreign support based on conservative American proclivities pretty much kept them going through the 1950s to the 1980s. They therefore find it hard to understand why the US now feels obliged to support apparent democratisation. Yet they must be pleased to note that it doesn’t make much of a fuss over Bahrain.

It’s harder to understand, though, why despotic Arab regimes are able to get away with demands for the overthrow of dictatorships elsewhere in the region. Surely, like charity, democracy begins at home.

The Arab League’s foray into Syria was welcome — such organisations ought to be able to sort out regional issues as and when they arise — but faltered in terms of achievements, thereby damaging its credibility. Yet the Gulf Cooperation Council can hardly cry foul when Assad refuses to budge, given the political arrangement in member-states.

An international agreement on suspending arms supplies to Syria would undoubtedly be a step forward, provided it applies to all parties. Beyond that, if Assad refuses to come to his senses, some kind of intervention may indeed be of some assistance, providing it does not involve any of the powers that once controlled that part of the world.One can only hope that Tunisia will take a turn for the better, that the Egyptian military will agree to its own relegation, that Libya will turn out all right, that Yemen will fall apart peacefully, if at all. As for Syria, its fate should ultimately be determined by Syrians, and them alone.

mahir.dawn@gmail.com