<html>
<body>
<font size=4><b>The danger to Egypt's revolution comes from Washington
<br>
</b></font><font size=3>Ali Abunimah, <i>The Electronic Intifada,</i> 6
February 2011 <br><br>
<a href="http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11781.shtml" eudora="autourl">
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11781.shtml<br><br>
</a>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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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
("<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12374687">US
special envoy: 'Mubarak must stay for now'</a>," 5 February
2011).<br><br>
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.<br><br>
As <i>The New York Times</i> -- 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"
("<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/world/middleeast/06egypt.html">
West Backs Gradual Egyptian Transition</a>," 5 February
2011).<br><br>
Moreoever, the <i>Times</i> 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.<br><br>
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
("<a href="http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2011/01/who-is-omar-suleiman.html">
Who is Omar Suleiman?</a>," <i>The New Yorker,</i> 29 January
2011).<br><br>
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
<a href="http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11756.shtml">a secret
April 2007 meeting</a> 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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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
("<a href="http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE70O0KF20110125">
US urges restraint in Egypt, says government stable</a>," Reuters,
25 January 2011).<br><br>
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.<br><br>
According to <i>The New York Times</i>, Obama himself is unhappy with US
intelligence failures in the Arab world
("<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/world/middleeast/05cia.html?hp">
Obama Faults Spy Agencies' Performance in Gauging Mideast Unrest,
Officials Say</a>," 4 February 2011). For close watchers of the
United States, this obliviousness is no mystery.<br><br>
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"
("<a href="http://justworldnews.org/archives/004137.html">Obama's
know-nothings discuss Egypt</a>," 28 January 2011).<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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. <br><br>
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. <br><br>
One example is that Egypt might dispense with US aid and still come out
ahead by simply selling its natural gas on international markets
<a href="http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article10710.shtml">rather than
to Israel at what is reported to be a deep discount</a>. 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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
<i>Ali Abunimah is co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, author of
<a href="http://electronicintifada.net/bytopic/store/548.shtml">One
Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse</a> and
is a contributor to
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1568586418/theelectronic-20">
The Goldstone Report: The Legacy of the Landmark Investigation of the
Gaza Conflict</a> (Nation Books).</i> <br><br>
<br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>