As I followed the events on February 11, 2011 in Egypt, a day that no doubt will be considered Egyptian Independence Day, I heard an Egyptian say: “This is ours. We own it.” That observation crystallized much of what I had been thinking about the character of this regime change in contrast to the regime change that the United States brought to Iraq at the point of a gun. This was a just peace revolution.

Security, truth and respect are three important values of my interpretation of just peace theory. Just peace theory, the middle way between pacifism and just war theory holds that while nonviolent means bring nonviolent ends, the hard power of military force is sometimes needed for the sake of security. Former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak had used the argument of security and stability to justify his brutal and kleptocratic governance of Egypt. The United States, including the Obama administration, had used this logic to justify the money this government sent to Egypt over the years. The United States trained the Egyptian military, and significant personal relationships developed over the years between individuals in the Egyptian military and individuals in the United States military. It seems that those relationships may have made an important difference in bringing about the end of Hosni Mubarak’s rule.

The Egyptian military provided security for the protesters during most of the 18 days of revolution. There was a moment when the military stood by and watched while so called pro-Mubarak demonstrators engaged in violent conflict with the anti-Mubarak protesters. But the cries of outrage from the international community brought the end of that kind of intimidation. God only knows what kind of person-to-person communication was happening military to military. God only knows what subtle effects time spent in classrooms in the United States had on the Egyptian military to help them see the advantages of civilian control of a democratic government.

Reports from Egypt tell us that because of compulsive military service, every family in Egypt has or has had a son in the military. Thus, the military was not going to shoot their own kin. The protesters could chant with assurance: “The people and the military are one.” And, during the celebrations after the announcement came that Mubarak would step down we saw little children standing on the tanks waving the Egyptian flag. The security that comes from a military that is unwilling to shoot its own compatriots was a necessary ingredient of this revolution. Time will tell how the military leaders handle the responsibility of transition to a democratically elected civilian government.

Nonviolent demonstrations, the freedom of communication and the freedom of the media to report the events are also elements of just peace theory that played an important role in the success of this revolution. These come from the value placed upon truth-telling. The truth is a necessary component to justice. Just peace holds that where there is no justice, there can be no peace. Gandhi taught that the power of nonviolent demonstrations is the power to reveal the truth. In this revolution we see the truth of the character of people, their hopes, fears, and tenacious commitment to bring about change. We see the ruthlessness, desperation, and finally ambiguous confusion of a proud but worn-out ruler and a dying regime trying to cling onto a shadow of power that has already slipped away. We see the fears of other dictators and the cheers of a world standing in spirit with the people in the streets.

We see a new generation rising, using new technologies to organize toward freedom that they hope will bring a measurable material difference in their lives. We see a new world coming. We see a new, young, courageous zeitgeist determined to breathe free.

And then there is the value of respect. The reason that a just peace revolution is necessarily a grass-roots, bottom- up revolution is because the various groups in a country necessarily have to work together to overcome the power of the dictator. At end of 2010, we witnessed violence between Muslims and Coptic Christians in Egypt. This week in Liberation Square, they were holding the cross and the Qur’an together in solidarity to achieve their goals. When workers, lawyers, doctors, families, sectarian groups and nonsectarian groups, intellectuals and people with little education all came together in the streets, the former president knew that his time was over. These groups gained a new respect for each other, and because they shared this struggle, they understand themselves as Egyptians all working for one cause.

In contrast, various groups in Iraq are still killing each other. The middle class who could have been and would have been the core of a civil society necessary for a functioning democracy has abandoned Iraq because of the continuing violence. An outside power came into Iraq and killed its tyrant. Thus, the Iraqis cannot say that they accomplished the thing. They cannot say that they own it. As New York Times columnist Tom Friedman and Secretary of State Colin Powell said at the time of the invasion of Iraq that if we break it we own it. We broke Iraq and now we are handing the Iraqis the blood-soaked pieces.

There was little blood-shed in this just peace revolution. The leaders of the military are paying due respect to those who did lose their lives in this struggle. The nation is jubilant and proud of its achievement. This is a good place to start the Egyptian experiment and experience of democracy.