[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