[News] The danger to Egypt's revolution comes from Washington

Anti-Imperialist News news at freedomarchives.org
Mon Feb 7 17:01:25 EST 2011


The danger to Egypt's revolution comes from Washington
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 6 February 2011

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11781.shtml

The greatest danger to the Egyptian revolution and the prospects for 
a free and independent Egypt emanates not from the "baltagiyya" -- 
the mercenaries and thugs the regime sent to beat, stone, stab, shoot 
and kill protestors in Cairo, Alexandria and other cities last week 
-- but from Washington.

Ever since the Egyptian uprising began on 25 January, the United 
States government and the Washington establishment that rationalizes 
its policies have been scared to death of "losing Egypt." What they 
fear losing is a regime that has consistently ignored the rights and 
well-being of its people in order to plunder the country and enrich 
the few who control it, and that has done America's bidding, 
especially supporting Israel in its oppression and wars against the 
Palestinians and other Arabs.

The Obama Administration quickly dissociated itself from its envoy to 
Egypt, Frank Wisner, after the latter candidly told the BBC on 5 
February that he thought President Hosni Mubarak "must stay in office 
in order to steer" any transition to a post-Mubarak order 
("<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12374687>US special envoy: 
'Mubarak must stay for now'," 5 February 2011).

But one suspects that Wisner was inadvertently speaking in his 
master's voice. US President Barack Obama and his national security 
establishment may be willing to give up Mubarak the person, but they 
are not willing to give up Mubarak's regime. It is notable that the 
US has never supported the Egyptian protestors' demand that Mubarak 
must go now. Nor has the United States suspended its $1.5 billion 
annual aid package to Egypt, much of which goes to the state security 
forces that are oppressing protestors and beating up and arresting journalists.

As The New York Times -- always a reliable barometer of official 
thinking -- reported, "The United States and leading European nations 
on Saturday threw their weight behind Egypt's vice president, Omar 
Suleiman, backing his attempt to defuse a popular uprising without 
immediately removing President Hosni Mubarak from power." Obama 
administration officials, the newspaper added, "said Mr. Suleiman had 
promised them an 'orderly transition' that would include 
constitutional reform and outreach to opposition groups" 
("<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/world/middleeast/06egypt.html>West 
Backs Gradual Egyptian Transition," 5 February 2011).

Moreoever, the Times reported, the United States has already managed 
to persuade two of its major European clients -- the United Kingdom 
and Germany -- to back continuing the existing regime with only a 
change of figurehead.

Suleiman, long the powerful chief of Egypt's intelligence services, 
has served -- perhaps even more so than Mubarak -- as the guarantor 
of Egypt's regional role in maintaining the American- and 
Israeli-dominated order. As author Jane Mayer has documented, 
Suleiman played a key role in the US "rendition" program, working 
closely with the CIA which kidnapped "terror suspects" from around 
the world and delivered them into Suleiman's hands for interrogation, 
and almost certainly torture 
("<http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/01/who-is-omar-suleiman.html>Who 
is Omar Suleiman?," The New Yorker, 29 January 2011).

High praise for Suleiman's work has also come from top Israeli 
military brass. "I always believed in the abilities of the Egyptian 
Intelligence service [GIS]," Israeli General Amos Gilad told 
American, Palestinian Authority and Egyptian officials during 
<http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11756.shtml>a secret April 
2007 meeting whose leaked minutes were recently released by Al 
Jazeera as part of the Palestine Papers. "It keeps order and security 
among 70 millions -- 20 millions in one city [a reference to the 
population of Egypt, actually closer to 83 million, and to Cairo] -- 
this is a great achievement, for which you deserve a medal. It is the 
best asset for the Middle East," Gilad said.

The notion that anyone, let alone US officials, could believe that 
Suleiman would lead an "orderly transition" to democracy would be 
laughable if it were not so sinister. Much more likely, the strategy 
is to try to ride out the protests and wear out and split the 
opposition, consolidate the regime under Suleiman's ruthless grip 
with the backing of the Egyptian army, and then enact cosmetic 
"reforms" to keep the Egyptian people politically divided and busy 
while business carries on as usual. Under any Suleiman "transition" 
political activists, journalists and anyone suspected of being part 
of the current uprising would be in grave danger.

 From the American perspective, the strategy can be likened to what 
happened in the summer of 2008 when the house-of-cards international 
financial system started to collapse. Think of the Tunisian regime of 
deposed dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali as the investment bank 
Lehman Brothers. When a run on the bank began, the United States 
government refused to provide it with financial guarantees to bail it 
out, and it quickly went bankrupt.

But when the panic spread and even larger "too big to fail" financial 
firms including massive insurance company AIG began to see their 
positions suddenly deteriorate, the United States government stepped 
in to bail them out with hundreds of billions of dollars.

The Egyptian regime is the AIG of the region and what we are seeing 
now is an American attempt to bail it out. If Egypt goes under, the 
United States fears that the contagion would spread as Arab publics 
realize that the US-backed despots who rule them can be replaced, and 
that the toppling of these regimes whose only promise to their people 
has been "security" is not the end of the world but the start of renewal.

Of course, no analogy is exact. Whereas, allowing Lehman Brothers to 
collapse was a calculated decision, the United States did not see the 
revolution in Tunisia, or the uprising in Egypt coming. "Our 
assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking 
for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the 
Egyptian people," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton infamously 
declared on 25 January, the day the anti-regime protests broke out 
("<http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE70O0KF20110125>US 
urges restraint in Egypt, says government stable," Reuters, 25 January 2011).

Clinton's cluelessness is reminiscent of her predecessor Condoleezza 
Rice's famous words ("didn't see it coming") in relation to Hamas' 
victory in Palestinian legislative council elections in 2006.

According to The New York Times, Obama himself is unhappy with US 
intelligence failures in the Arab world 
("<http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/world/middleeast/05cia.html?hp>Obama 
Faults Spy Agencies' Performance in Gauging Mideast Unrest, Officials 
Say," 4 February 2011). For close watchers of the United States, this 
obliviousness is no mystery.

As Helena Cobban has observed, the Israel Lobby, "AIPAC and its 
attack dogs," have conducted such a thorough "witch-hunt" over the 
past quarter century "against anyone with real Middle East expertise 
that the US government now contains no-one at the higher (or even 
mid-career) levels of policymaking who has any in-depth understanding 
of the region or of the aspirations of its people" 
("<http://justworldnews.org/archives/004137.html>Obama's 
know-nothings discuss Egypt," 28 January 2011).

But it is even worse than that. The US "policy" establishment seems 
only capable of viewing the region through Israeli eyes. This is why 
for so many officials and commentators the concerns of Israel to 
maintain a brutal hegemony trump the aspirations of 83 million 
Egyptians to determine their own future free from the shackles of the 
regime that has oppressed them for so long.

And different futures are possible. On the minds of many observers is 
the "Turkish model" of constitutional democracy, economic resurgence 
and foreign policy independence, all under the rule of a "moderate" 
Islamist party. Turkey, once closely in the orbit of the United 
States, started to break out with its refusal to allow the US to use 
the country's bases for the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

In recent years, Turkey has developed a deliberate "360 degree" 
foreign policy doctrine which includes maintaining relations with 
Europe and the United States, while restoring close ties with all its 
neighbors among them Iran and Arab countries, and assuming a greater 
regional mediating role. Since 2009, Turkey's once close alliance 
with Israel has deteriorated sharply, even though ties have not been 
cut. These shifts, along with its ubiquitous consumer and cultural 
products have given Turkey enormous regional influence and appeal.

Turkey has its own specific history and is no more perfect than any 
other country. But the bigger point is that subservience to the 
United States and Israel is not Egypt's only option. The worst case 
scenario from the American viewpoint is to have three major regional 
powers, Iran, Turkey and Egypt, that are not under Washington's control.

Of course Turkey is carving out its own path and Egyptians are 
struggling to go their own way which may be very different. There's 
no reason either to believe that Egypt would become "another Iran" as 
ceaseless Israeli propaganda suggests. But given a free choice, Egypt 
is not likely serve the "interests" of the United States and Israel 
the way the Mubarak regime has.

One example is that Egypt might dispense with US aid and still come 
out ahead by simply selling its natural gas on international markets 
<http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10710.shtml>rather than to 
Israel at what is reported to be a deep discount. Another is that a 
truly independent Egypt would eschew serving as Israel's proxy in 
enforcing the criminal siege of Gaza and stoking intra-Palestinian divisions.

By coming to the streets in their millions, by sacrifing the lives of 
some of their very finest, the Egyptian people have said that they 
and they alone want to decide their nation's future. Mubarak as a 
person is already irrelevant. The confrontation is now between the 
Egyptian people's desire for democracy and self-determination on the 
one hand, and, on the other, US insistence (along with its clients in 
Egypt and the region) on continuing the old regime. Let us offer 
whatever solidarity we can from wherever we are to help the Egyptian 
people to win.

Ali Abunimah is co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, author of 
<http://electronicintifada.net/bytopic/store/548.shtml>One Country: A 
Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse and is a 
contributor to 
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1568586418/theelectronic-20>The 
Goldstone Report: The Legacy of the Landmark Investigation of the 
Gaza Conflict (Nation Books).



Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110

415 863-9977

www.Freedomarchives.org  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20110207/02bde8cd/attachment.htm>


More information about the News mailing list