Egypt demonstrations

[Bob Kohm]

We know far to little to reach either McCotter's conclusion or yours just yet, eld. Bob's point was that we don't know whether this is a grassroots democratic movement or an orchestrated top-down power play by the military, the Brotherhood, or someone else. I would hope that the members of both major political parties could hold their tongues on this long enough to hear what the Administration, through our allies and/or our intelligence apparatus, is able to learn and convey about the parties and mechanisms at play in all of this.

Actually, I've just about ruled out the first possibility as being the catalyst for this, although it is the vehicle by which this is being delivered.

[B-Fly]

Actually, I've just about ruled out the first possibility as being the catalyst for this, although it is the vehicle by which this is being delivered.

OK, then. Well I'm still waiting for more information before deciding whether there's a horse we should be backing, here.

[Boone]

As we peer into the future and guess which way this Egypt situation is headed, one way of framing this issue is:

Which does Egypt today resemble more -- The Phillippines (1986) or Iran (1979)

I say the latter, and it worries me quite a bit.

[B-Fly]

Uh, what was my conclusion and in what manner is it antithetical to McCotter's?

I've interpreted your posts as saying we should clearly be supporting the uprising, whomever may be behind it, because it's the will of the Egyptian people. If I misinterpreted, my apologies. I just think we don't know enough to reach that conclusion, any more than we know enough to reach McCotter's conclusion that this is a replay of Iran's 1979 Islamic Revolution.

[B-Fly]

the obvious will of the people

How is "the will" of 79 million people so obvious to you at this point?

Would this be any different from concluding that the Tea Party's agenda is the will of the American people?

[B-Fly]

The similarities in news reports are striking, regardless of "slant" of the source --- the will of the Egyptian people is obviously to get Mumbarek out of office and change the administration.

I was editing my post while you were responding, so I'll rephrase. Would a conclusion that these anti-Mubarak rallies are the will of the Egyptian people be any different from watching videos of the size and passion of the Tea Party rallies in the US and concluding that getting Obama out of office and returning America to a pseudo-originalist view of the constitution is the obvious will of the American people?

[B-Fly]

On a different note, are those of you that are overly concerned with Muslim Brotherhood influence equally concerned about the proposition that Mohamed ElBaradei, the guy the Brotherhood has endorsed, lead the transitional government, if there were to be one?

I don't have any particular problem with El Baradei, if there's a call for a transitional government while a constitution is drafted in anticipation of internationally-monitored democratic elections. On the other hand, I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of Mubarak establishing a reasonable time frame within which to accomplish the same result.

[nullnor]

it's hard to be tribal holding a cell phone.

[Bob Kohm]

Of course I don't desire Sharia law for the Egyptian people. I don't think that it's clear what the goals of the Brotherhood are at this point beyond acting as participants in the protests. I trust them just as much as I trust the Christian Coalition (or any similar whackjob religious group).

I think that the goals of the Brotherhood are manifestly clear-- we have 63 years of evidence to go on here. What exactly is it that makes you think that they want anything other than what they have made clear that they have wanted since 1948 and have demonstrated through 60+ years of terrorism towards that single goal? To say they might not be driving this uprising is one thing (and you could well be correct about that as I suspect they're being enabled and used by the Army to get the people in the streets), but I'm confused as to the logic of saying that we we don't know their goals.

There are a lot of points to consider. First is that more than half of Egypt's population lives below the poverty line ($2 per day). Second, this is a 30 year US-sponsored dictatorship that is at the root of the Egyptian society's ills.

Agreed on the first, but it is informed by the second in my view. The Egyptian people have lived under these conditions not just for the past 30 years but really for the past 60 or so years that the Egyptian leadership has been a US or Soviet (and under the brilliant Nasser a US & Soviet...) empowered entity and they have never moved as they are moving this week, even in periods of clear national turmoil (witness the week Sadat was killed). In the past year we've seen Hosni Mubarak start to look seriously towards his succession and indicate that his son Gamal would continue his regime, much to the displeasure of the military, and in particular the Army.

Third, there is still good evidence that the US is trying to maintain that dictatorship despite the obvious will of the people. Fourth, with all the uncertainty surrounding the future of Egypt, people are concerned that hard-liners may take power and change the political atmosphere in the region for the worse.

On your third point I doubt that we have anything near the information required to make a valid judgement in that direction, especially given the concept of continuing the regime through Gamal Mubarak. The Egyptian succession, if I were to guess, has probably been the hottest topic that Jeff Feltman's Near Eastern Affairs Desk at State and his counterpart at Central Intelligence have dealt with and dedicated resources and analysts to over the past two years, especially with Hosni Mubarak over 80 and in poor health. If I were to make a pure guess based on inference, I would suspect that the direction they've received from EOP is to find third line alternatives for Obama to get behind that would move the Egyptian government towards elections while bolstering centrist candidates within the Egyptian Parliament-- it's what makes the most sense, I think you'll agree. Gamal Mubarak would've been a disaster, elections tinged by violence and extremism would've been worse and while a military coup would've been better than either of those two options it would promote too much regional instability; I would guess that a free election with well funded centrist candidates would've been our play. If I were to take another guess, I'd further suggest that the military is taking advantage of the regional instability brought about by Tunisia and moving now specifically because they were rebuffed by the White House when they approached General Mattis, whom they know well, after he took over CENTCOM last year with the Army's plans for succession. The Egyptian Army knew that we wouldn't be happy to be seen supporting Gamal and that we also wouldn't want to see the possibility of the Brotherhood in power, so they would logically float the idea of their being the "safe" middle course with claims that they'd merely be an interim government, which I'd wager we took to mean "the interim between now and eternity". As far as the Egyptian Army is concerned, it's too bad Mubarak didn't get sick while W was the US President as I'd bet my mortgage they would've gotten a different US response from Condoleeza Rice & Co.

It doesn't seem like a "Brotherhood dominated Egypt" is anywhere near a certainty or really even a probability at this point. My ears aren't to the ground on the political landscape as well as yours, perhaps, but it seems like secular concerns echo those that we've had brought up here: namely, that a move to any sort of Sharia would be a lateral move at best and a signal for violence at worst. Yet it remains as a concern regarding both US relations and, much more importantly, peace in the region. I see no reason why the people of Egypt should not be trusted with the fate of Egypt. To think otherwise at this stage of the game reeks of ethnocentrism to me.

It's the power of the people in the streets that would ultimately be the vehicle to bring down the government (unless the Army feels it slipping away, in which case it's the tanks that will do it); we agree on that. Where we seem to diverge is who will lead the people when the dust settles; the only extant organizations that could do so are the military and the Brotherhood. The fact that there is nothing but a vacuum after that is to my mind made very clear by the opportunistic rush back to Egypt of Mohammed elBaradei, a guy with no claim or tie to the governance of Egypt but an inveterate opportunist who has very overtly played all sides in his role at IAEA. The will of the people in the streets is all well and good, but it almost never translates to a real governance structure in the aftermath-- someone is always there to fill the power vacuum. Your claim of ethnocentrism is not well founded; I don't think that anyone here thinks that the Egyptian people are ultimately unable to lead themselves or that they ultimately shouldn't do precisely that. The problem, rather, is that those currently best positioned to fill the power vacuum that the threatened removal of Hosni Mubarak would suddenly create are a coterie of bad actors-- a military junta, a misguided and opportunistic el Baradei or what I fear is the most likely option if the military can't control what it has initiated, the Brotherhood. With those the only realistic options to take the reins (and I'd be very happy to have you show me that I'm incorrect about those possibilities or what I'll say next), then the best option for the United States, the region and the world at large and (if I can say so without another charge of ethnocentrism from you) the Egyptian people who want true freedom is a phased down Mubarak regime that moves towards orderly elections in 2012. Sadly the only other acceptable option is a very bad one, the Army.

[Fresno Bob]

Dave Emery has always argued that the Muslim Brotherhood are patsies for the Martin Boorman-led Underground Reich

http://trueconspiracyblog.blogspot.com/2006/08/david-emory-and-theory-of-underground.html

[DMT]

Every person I met in Egypt hated Mubarak and, granted we were tourists, most of them were extremely friendly to us as Americans and only about a quarter had strong anti-American sentiments (that they shared with us respectfully). Obviously that's an extremely limited and biased sample but just sharing what I found while I was there.

[Lurker765]

[Don Quixote]

Things are getting even crazier since Mubarek's announcement that he's not going to seek reelection but will also not step down until September. Pro-Mubarek groups are clashing with opposition. Hundreds injured. Some pretty insane video on CNN right now showing just how many people are in the streets (a LOT).

So much for Egypt being a stop on my around-the-world trip. That was the country I most wanted to visit, too.

For her 80th birthday (last September), my brother and I gave Mom a trip to Egypt, since that was the one place she had mentioned that she hadn't seen and wanted to visit. I'm VERY glad she went in late November-early December.

Getting closer to the subject--I'm with Bob on this one. As is typical in Middle Eastern situations, there are several scenarios which could play out here, none very good. Where I disagree is on the competence of their military; as several wars have proven, the Egyptian Army always has lots of new, shiny toys, but not necessarily the ability to use them well.

However, as bad as the idea of a military or military-backed coup or rigged election would be, a takeover by the Brotherhood or a Brotherhood-backed stooge would be worse.

[Igor]

Really him not running was not a suprise, they have been lining up his son for a while to take over, now anouncing that he won't run either is another story.

[Bob Kohm]

F As is typical in Middle Eastern situations, there are several scenarios which could play out here, none very good. Where I disagree is on the competence of their military; as several wars have proven, the Egyptian Army always has lots of new, shiny toys, but not necessarily the ability to use them well.

FWIW, the professional opinion of the Egyptian Army that I've heard from several people who do that kind of thing for a living is that it is the best led Arab army with the best equipment and training in the region. I'm guessing that your "as several wars have proven" comment roots from the performance of the Egyptians in the wars of the late '60s and early '70s; I wouldn't want to do that if I was evaluating a very different military armed to the teeth with US weaponry and systems and outstanding C4i capacities. These aren;t the Saudis with expensive toys and no training, either. This is a potentially deadly threat to Jerusalem.