When the flames of revolution rose in the Tunisia, many countries, both regional and global ones, were too cautious and too reluctant to hold a clear and transparent position. No one was sure with whom to side in order to save current and future interests of these Arab-Muslim countries as well as changing will of the people. The source of the confusion was of course a long-lasting authoritarian political system and governments which had not allowed people to raise their voice and explain sufferings and miseries in a reasonable way. Opposing voices were suffocated in fetus, and there were an oppressive environment under which only flatterers were rewarded. The most negative impact of the ruling environment was that the people, particularly youngsters, were unable to communicate with their fellows in politically democratic and economically prosperous countries across the globe. Though a spectrum of people were likely aware about changes rapidly occurring in the rest of the world, but they were not large enough to build a relationship with common people and lead a fundamental change in these countries. Instead, because of fear of prosecution, they used to roll back and shut their mouths up.

This very lack of communication ended with ever increasing gab between societies. Here people remained unaware of modern global changes and growing demands for dignity and human rights, which have gone far beyond their primary fountain -Europe- and have become global and trans-national values. And the international community, particularly western countries, was watching the situation with closed eyes. They viewed Arab-Muslim People as Muslim-Arab or Pan Nationalist Arab Muslims, which complied with people of old times not with new, active and challenging, facebook and twitter using, young Arab generation, who do not compare themselves with their forefathers but with very fellows living miles away from them.

In other words, western countries, which obviously have played vital role in the global spheres, viewed Arab-Islamic countries as nations of the past not that of present. They used to put cotton in ears and obviously tried to ignore even the people's voices which seemed so friendly, because they had not a clear picture of people here. They were looking into situation from the same obsolete and freak glasses of the past. The time when, indeed, Arab Socialism and Marxism attracted large attention, later on, Pan Arabism came ahead, and, finally, revival of fundamentalism and emergence of Political Islam which held overwhelming supporters among both elites of the society as well as common people in Qahera Tunisia, Sana, Damascus, Tripoli, and Bahrain. These three subsequent uprisings occurred in the region were all unfavorable to ideals of capitalism and democracy of the west.

The situation got far grimmer when the notion of political Islam as solution for political miseries came ahead and claimed to relieve suffering people. The prevalence of this notion distanced Muslim countries even more. Thereafter, potentially dangerous organized uprisings were held in many countries by extremists as that of Syria and Egypt, where the largest group of Muslim Brotherhood (Ekhawan-ul-Muslemin) existed. These groups have been mostly anti-US and European countries and viewed them as colonizers and occupiers. The differences became visible when the United States and its western allies constantly sided with Israel, which is considered the only democratic country in the region by them; and stood against its regional foes strictly, which helped groups like Ekhwan further to build a strong foothold among common people.

The process was indubitably terrible and terrifying, because Islamic fundamentalists were largely circling around a peg - resisting against Israel and its western supporters. When the parties like Egypt Muslim Brotherhood and its followers in various countries violently suppressed, many other networks emerged targeting both western countries and Arab regimes having cordial and cooperative relationship with them, like Al-Qaeda terror network.

The situation actually created politically a prolific state for rulers or for authoritarian regimes. During long-lasting time, what made several Arab regimes to build up a strong tie with western countries, on top US, was actually playing game with strong means in hand. They indifferently offered an option for their western fellows: living with them or living with extremists! What can be the choice if the situation was that terrible? What would you have chosen if similar offers made to you? Indubitably, the answer was "You" and offer was accepted and the deal was signed.

The context of contract was like this: "If you do not accept our authoritarian and undemocratic regimes, then you should be ready for tolerating Islamic extremists' government and establishment of theocratic regimes". And, moreover, those regimes would have been led by people like Osama bin Laden whose name was evil in the streets of Washington, DC, Paris, London and etc. The picture of past situation and along with the propaganda of Arab regimes, no choice left for international community without even helping the regimes to oppress people with no possible concern and pressure from international community.

Those regimes were quite successful in tricking the international community in the case of extremism. Because, however necessitated to be noticed, extremism was somehow an illusionary fear. Extremism-phobia was much zoomed. It is not clear what would have happened if people were left free to elect their government. Would extremists find enough supporters to capture power and then start fighting against countries as like that of Taliban regime in Afghanistan? Anyhow, international community preferred to live with a known enemy instead of living with unknown people. And they during past several decades made no hesitation to cooperate with authoritarian regimes which were against their very basic and essential notion of democracy, human rights and human dignity.

The consequence of such political adultery was decades of miseries and deprivation from basic and essential rights. Thanks God, now international community has reached to an agreement and understanding, and is standing against regional regimes and calling for peaceful transition of power to civilians. However, many are still frightful of the consequence of current spontaneous movement, but majority had made their mind and push for open society here.