Cameron Riley’s focus on the inordinately high proportion of children under 15 in selected Middle Eastern countries is a useful perspective – and a worry. His correlation of youthfulness (and unemployment) with violence over the centuries is apt.

Unemployment in the Middle East is one reason why it is so easy for Western cameramen to draw a crowd of chanting/waving youth and young men – seemingly at a moments notice – women are out of sight of course.

“Oil, monarchy, oligarchy, theocracy and inequality will ensure Middle Eastern youth have no outlet for their fears, angers and frustrations other than the violent religious-backed demonstrations.” seems accurate. Oil wealth has postponed the need for elites to create a broader based (higher employment) economy in oil rich countries.

When Riley attempts to implicate the West he gets a bit lost. “The riots, which targeted people of Middle Eastern appearance” makes it appear that there was some sort of pogrom against defenceless Muslims. But video footage suggests that Muslims launched there own retaliatory riots – beating up people and destroying property.

It seems that Riley, after convincingly pointing out failings in Middle Eastern (Muslim) countries is trying to bring in some anti-Western “balance”. “My money is still on Iran's youth redefining the global dialogue on freedom, despite the United States clumsily parking its military next door.”

Cameron, its not the US that is stopping Iranian youth from having a democratic voice – it’s the people you mention in your next breath “Iran has recently witnessed the naked, undemocratic entrenchment of the theocracy”…

“Iran recently got a new prime minister who is opposed to change, unfortunately making the task much harder for the youthful Iranian democrats.” Right-on Cameron!

But he ends the article with a massively unsupported leap “It’s likely their [Iranian youths'] success, or failure, will define the world's next 50 years”.

All in all the article is useful on Muslim population trends but less so on Iran’s democratic future.

In Australia we have to come to terms with Aboriginal youth and where they are going in a culture that is at odds with western culture.
We have a problem with youths from a western culture who appear to be entangled with alcohol and/or drugs.
We do not need a problem with Middle East youths but because of a too lenient, blind immigration scheme, we have that problem.
The Middle East may have problems with unemployment but their solution to unchecked fertility and high birthrate is to ship their problems to western countries.
Let them look after their own in their own countries. We have enough problems without importing them.

plantegenat, <i>When Riley attempts to implicate the West he gets a bit lost.</i>

Feh. That comment is pathetic.

The theocracy wasnt so blatantly making grabs for power, such as striking off 3,000 moderates from the balllots, prior to the Iraq invasion. The moderates were able to make inroads in the Iranian parliamentary system until recently.

It is a fact that the Iranian theocracy got scared when the US parked its military next door and clamped down on dissent. Iran was the country most likely to break out and over-throw their theocrats/despots in that region. Not anymore. We should have been supporting the efforts of the Iranian people to change their system into genuine a democratic system.

Even with our clumsy efforts in the region, Iran remains the best hope for the region ot transform itself, not Iraq

Thank you for helping us think outside the square on these issues.