The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    acanuck's picture

    Reshuffling the Mideast house of cards

    By acanuck on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 4:58pm |

    Interesting couple of weeks in the Middle East, no? Tunisians take to the streets to depose their country's long-entrenched dictator. WikiLeaks-type revelations destroy the last shreds of credibility Mahmoud Abbas's regime had with Palestinians. Hezbollah (acting entirely within Lebanon's constitution, BTW) installs its own choice for prime minister. George Bush's vision of Arab democracy on the march finally takes form!

    And now, following Tunisia's lead, Egypt. The elephant-sized chicken in the room appears to be coming home to roost, and the U.S. State Department simply lacks any stategy to deal with that. Hillary Clinton urges restraint on both sides, and that the government "address popular grievances." Problem is, there is just one overriding grievance: the continued rule of the universally hated "pharaoh." Even people who benefit from the regime see it for what it is: tyrranical and corrupt.

    It's near-impossible to envision the sudden collapse of such a well-honed instrument of repression as the ruling National Democratic Party has crafted. The 1.5-million-strong military, for starters, is not going to let itself be jostled aside. Almost certainly, though, 81-year-old Hosni Mubarak is going to be told to abandon any thought of either running for re-election or handing over power to his son Gamal. Maybe even name a less-tainted vice-president and speedily hand over responsibility to him.

    That's how I think the regime will try to preserve itself -- by cutting adrift the Mubarak dynasty. Plus, of course, a smattering of surface "reforms" to show they've got the message. It won't satisfy the popular demand for change, but they'll hope it dilutes it enough to let them ride the crisis out.

    The State Dept. has the same desperate hope. Personally, I'm with the Egyptian people.

    Comments

    I highly doubt that cosmetic changes will stem the protests. This genie is out of the bottle. I think that the regime's only hope is for the opposition to fracture.

    As for the State Dept, the status quo is no longer an option. The US gov't could get away with backing Mubarak when the opposition was meek and dominated by Islamists, but violent suppression of protesting youths? Fuggedaboutit.

    My prediction: Clinton will soon call for genuine democratic elections, though she'll try to let Mubarak serve out his term until the scheduled election in Sept.


    by Michael Wolraich on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 6:12pm

    Of course, the official opposition -- the banned but tolerated Muslim Brotherhood -- wisely stayed out of the initial protests, so the street movement could be clearly seen as not linked to their agenda. ElBaradei may have jumped the gun by returning from abroad and declaring his willingness to lead a transition; he's now reportedly under house arrest. Ayman Nour, leader of the main secular opposition party, appears to be out on the street with the protesters. All these groups share an identical priority: getting Mubarak to quit. I don't foresee any of them wavering from that.

    Clinton and Obama will wait another day or two to see if the crackdown succeeds. But you're right: they know the Mubarak regime is finished. The only question is how quickly the rotten corpse needs to be buried, and who wields the shovels.


    by acanuck on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 6:53pm

    Correction: Mubarak is 82. Happy birthday, Hosni. How time flies when you're wielding absolute power.


    by acanuck on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 6:57pm

    Muslim Brotherhood -- wisely stayed out of the initial protests, so the street movement could be clearly seen as not linked to their agenda.

    I doubt this interpretation very much. I rather suspect it's more like they got caught flat-footed. Among a lot of young folks there the Brotherhood is as much a part of the hated status quo as the government. They are part of the "you have two choices: tweedledum and tweedledee" thing for decades that eventually leads to an eruption like this. That's not to say that someone smart and charismatic from the Brotherhood might not be able to seize the day after the fact, but from what I've been reading, Brotherhood leaders are MIA because they didn't "get it." If a leader comes from them, they will have to be coming with a new narrative, too. That's not in any way to suggest the answer has to be secular. That's not clear yet. It could very well be Islamic, but not old fogey style Muslim Brotherhood.


    by artappraiser on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 8:37pm

    Whether by design or not, the Brotherhood did make the right call in initially staying neutral. The regime tried hard to pin blame for the unrest on them, but everyone -- especially the average Egyptian -- saw that was BS. I do agree that Mubarak has in a way co-opted the Brotherhood by letting its candidates run (and actually win) in a number of parliamentary seats. Contrast that with how hard he's come down on Ayman Nour's secular party -- banning its rallies, beating its activists, jailing its leader on trumped-up charges. The intended message was obviously that the choice was either the secular NDP or the radical Islamists. No middle ground.

    In an actual fair election, ElBaradei or Nour would stand a good chance against whichever candidate the NDP might put forward. The Brotherhood lacks a candidate with that kind of popular appeal. In the last presidential vote, they actually toyed with the idea of nominating a secular politician as their candidate, but decided against it. For now, I think they'd be perfectly happy to see Mubarak removed from office, and an end to the antidemocratic rules that have kept the NDP in a legislative majority for so long.


    by acanuck on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:02am

    The next 24 hours will be very, very interesting. Mubarak has doubled down, calling out the army to replace the police, who've proved ineffectual in quelling the protests. Clearly, the top brass are willing to risk whatever credibility the military has among the populace to defend the regime, so it comes down to how brutal the ordinary Egyptian grunt is willing to be in the name of following orders.

    These people have families, and share the national awareness of being in a fin-de-regime situation; they know if they refuse to enforce a clampdown, 98% of the population will embrace them. Think of the tank commander swerving to avoid that protester in Tienanmen Square. China eventually brought in troops from outside Beijing to break the Democracy Now protests. But the anger in Egypt is spread across the entire country -- Alexandria, Suez, Assiut, not just the capital.

    Even if the protests get brutally crushed, I think the scenario I outlined above plays out: Neither Mubarak nor his son will run for president later this year. It's just pointless to try preserving such a hated dynasty. I can even envision the NDP establishment conceding to let dissident Mohamed ElBaradei win the vote, if it can keep him on a short leash and not relenquish too many of its ill-gotten perks. Egypt's ruling elite can be pragmatic if it needs to be.

    A little aside: the notion some pundits are pushing -- that Obama's Cairo speech laid the foundation for this revolt -- is rubbish. Thirty years of repression and stagnation set the stage.


    by acanuck on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 11:27pm

    For anyone who wants real coverage of this, it is being live-streamed by Al Jazeera English. Just google it. It is far superior to the cable stuff.

    by CVille Dem on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 6:54pm

    I second that, CVille. This is Al Jazeera's meat and potatoes.


    by acanuck on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:05am

    All I see is a phenomina that is not located in one country.

    These are good points and we are outsiders looking in.

    Tianamen Square comes to mind here.

    Let us pray!!


    by Richard Day on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 7:13pm

    What I found very, very interesting was a statement out of Devos that was broadcast earlier over AlJazeera. That there was a "Risk" of these protests spreading to other countries in the area. And it's the term Risk that was so telling. That the there is a fear among the attendees that they would have their power and status confronted and challenged by the people they have been abusing and cheating for so long. This was picked up almost immediately by the anchor at the time though the analyst they had on attempted to deflect it as a reference to some US security apparatus, which really did not make much sense in the context.


    by cmaukonen on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 7:48pm

    And this comment is very telling as to the mode of Arabs and how the US views them.

    And "democracy" is scarcely to be heard on the lips of the president or his most senior officials.

    In fact, newly released WikiLeaks cables show that from the moment it assumed power, the Obama administration specifically toned down public criticism of Mubarak. The US ambassador to Egypt advised secretary of state Hillary Clinton to avoid even the mention of former presidential candidate Ayman Nour, jailed and abused for years after running against Mubarak in part on America's encouragement.

    Not surprisingly, when the protests began, Clinton declared that Egypt was "stable" and an important US ally, sending a strong signal that the US would not support the protesters if they tried to topple the regime. Indeed, Clinton has repeatedly described Mubarak as a family friend. Perhaps Ms Clinton should choose her friends more wisely.

    Similarly, president Obama has refused to take a strong stand in support of the burgeoning pro-democracy movement and has been no more discriminating in his public characterisation of American support for its Egyptian "ally". Mubarak continued through yesterday to be praised as a crucial partner of the US. Most important, there has been absolutely no call for real democracy.

    Rather, only "reform" has been suggested to the Egyptian government so that, in Obama's words, "people have mechanisms in order to express legitimate grievances".

    "I've always said to him that making sure that they are moving forward on reform - political reform, economic reform - is absolutely critical for the long-term well-being of Egypt," advised the president, although vice-president Joe Biden has refused to refer to Mubarak as a dictator, leading one to wonder how bad a leader must be to deserve the title.

    Even worse, the president and his senior aides have repeatedly sought to equate the protesters and the government as somehow equally pitted parties in the growing conflict, urging both sides to "show restraint". This equation has been repeated many times by other American officials.

    This trick, tried and tested in the US discourse surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, is equally nonsensical here. These are not two movements in a contest for political power. Rather, it is a huge state, with a massive security and police apparatus that is supported by the world's major superpower to the tune of billions of dollars a year, against a largely young, disenfranchised and politically powerless population which has suffered brutally at its hands for decades.

    The focus on reform is also a highly coded reference, as across the developing world when Western leaders have urged "reform" it has usually signified the liberalisation of economies to allow for greater penetration by Western corporations, control of local resources, and concentration of wealth, rather than the kind of political democratisation and redistribution of wealth that are key demands of protesters across the region.

    Ya think ????!!!


    by cmaukonen on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 8:07pm

    I just love it that the pop-up ad I get to the right of this post is about how to contact "sexy Arab girls."


    by acanuck on Fri, 01/28/2011 - 11:30pm

    The Middle East is looking at Egypt closely. It's a keystone. Tunisia was nothing but the mortar holding it in place. If Egypt fails the political structure of the Middle East could very well collapse and throw the entire region into turmoil. At the present, there's ample political troubles in Iraq. Shiites running roughshod over Sunnis and the Kurd doing their own thing despite the Iraqi government and disrupting the borders with Turkey and Syria. Iran has been having internal political strife for quite some time.  Afghanistan is still under the control of the Taliban...they're just letting the US think they have the upperhand. And Pakistan is under internal political strife with the Taliban on the West and India and their sympathizers on the East. And let's not leave out Turkey and Syria...they have internal political tensions they keep under tight wraps at the moment. Saudia Arabia is sitting not only on the world's largest oil reserves, they're also sitting on the largest powder keg of religious/political tension with only a short fuse as a safety net. Jordan seems to be the only Eden.

    The only thing we westerners can do is sit back, watch and pass the popcorn.


    by Beetlejuice on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 7:36am

    You've got to look on the bright side, Beetlejuice. Since a big part of the world's oil lies under those deserts, political turmoil in the Middle East may be the only thing that will save us from global warming. 

    Looks like we clever humans may actually engineer a solution to this problem, after all.


    by Red Planet on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:49pm

    Nuclear annihilation pretty well takes global warming out of the equation, as well. It's all good! LOL!


    by SleepinJeezus on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:57pm

    Actually, no one has yet to mention the importance of the Suez canel...just think about the impact closing it down would have. And the oil from the gulf too. I believe the US doesn't use any of it, however, if the spigot is throttled down, whatever is available on the open markets will rise...just how far I can't say or would even try to imagine. But you are correct...we'll have to shift our focus to alternative energy sources in weeks rather than years. And it may very well displace many people in the job markets who think they're immune. You gonna pass the popcorn ?


    by Beetlejuice on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 1:46pm

    I can't see any way Egypt's civil turmoil shuts the canal, Beetle. I also dispute your view of Jordan as "the only Eden" in the region. There are anti-government protests going on as we speak, and the country is in its own unique way a powderkeg. Great security apparatus, though.


    by acanuck on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 4:08pm

    I know some field engineers who have been working there in the recent past and was basing my opinion on what they told me about their time there and the difference when compared with Saudia Arabia, Turkey and Iraq. Jordan has been a sleeper nation which is another way of saying there's not much happening there, which I assumed from my conversations implied it was politically stable, so one need not worry about the country going up in flames if you were a tourist or on assignment there. But since I wrote my 2 cents worth I see there are rumblings...seems the Jordan government has kept the public disapproval defused and well under wraps. So I was wrong; Jordan does not appear to be the Eden I thought it was.

    As for the Suez canal, it's a vital, global transpiration link between east and west. So long as the civil disobedience is contained to Cairo, it's not an issue. But if someone gets a wild hair up their yingyang and wants to create havoc all they have to do is stage an attack on a ship. They don't have to do any physical damage...it's the psychological impact that will do the most damage. Think along the lines of flying jets into the Twin Towers, the USS Cole in Yeman, or pirates off the coast of east Africa. If a group of protesters want to get the world's attention, the Suez canal is the place... the victims are trapped with no place to hide or room to run.


    by Beetlejuice on Sun, 01/30/2011 - 9:50am

    "Eden" Sorry, Eden's precise venue is generally conceded to have been blown up (collateral damage...) during Desert Storm. Carry on.

    by jollyroger on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 1:42pm

    You're sailing in the wrong seas, matey. Eden is believed to be either in and around Bahrain or Qatar. The Persian Gulf was at one time was dry land. Eden is suppose to lie somewhere under the waters in the area.


    by Beetlejuice on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 1:52pm

    Precisely. Faulty Tomahawk. Next question?


    by jollyroger on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 2:00pm

    Before GPS, pilots had to rely upon IFR to know where they were in the world...IFR = I Follow Roads. And in the case of oceans, they followed ships and their wakes.


    by Beetlejuice on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 2:40pm

    "It is assumed that the Sumerians were organized into city-states before the Egyptians were, although it was once held that the oldest centre of civilization was along the Valley of the Nile. Although there is, as yet, no evidence of the Sumerians without basic elements of civilization, it is believed that they came from the North and East"

    http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume1/Part_IV/Chapter3.html

    New Discoveries in Babylonia About Genesis, 1949

    P. J. Wiseman: “All the real evidence we have, that of Genesis, archaeology, and the traditions of men, points to the Mesopotamian plain as the oldest home of man…..” 

    The Euphrates came out of Eden  

    The Hid’de-kel is the old name for the Tigris  

    (Genesis 2:10-14) 10 Now there was a river issuing out of E′den to water the garden, and from there it began to be parted and it became, as it were, four heads. 11 The first one’s name is Pi′shon; ……… 13 And the name of the second river is Gi′hon; it is the one encircling the entire land of Cush. 14 And the name of the third river is Hid′de·kel; it is the one going to the east of As·syr′i·a. And the fourth river is the Eu·phra′tes.


    by Resistance on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 2:31pm

    So Eden is in Iran, eh?


    by Beetlejuice on Sun, 01/30/2011 - 9:53am

    Where is EDEN? 

    GOOD MAPS

    Beetle, here is a good site I found with good maps and some intelligent discussion of the region.

    I think it is interesting to follow.  

    I didn’t’ look at the rest of the site so I am not endorsing it, other than the maps it provided  

    http://genesisflood.blog.com/tag/paradise/


    by Resistance on Sun, 01/30/2011 - 12:24pm

    What I'm wondering is, why don't the Egyptians get a name for their revolution. We went from the

    JASMINE REVOLUTION!

    to

    ... TURMOIL IN EGYPT.

    Any proposals? the Kofta revolution...? Anyone?


    by Obey on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 8:34am

    "The Catastrophic Muba-Wreck?"


    by SleepinJeezus on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 8:37am

    Nice.

    ;0)

    Though I was looking for something more uplifting - like Rock the Casbah (though somebody must have already used that one...)

    or something.


    by Obey on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 8:48am

    Uplifting? How about "The Hosni Nagila?"


    by SleepinJeezus on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 8:56am

    Cairomania


    by Michael Wolraich on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 9:33am

    Woo. I see why they pay you the big bucks!!

    ;0)


    by Obey on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 9:42am

    No More Pharaohs!

     


    by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 1:28pm

    Without profits  (prophets) to encourage the people, they reject the pharoahs.

    The Red Sea of debt swallowed up this one too 

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Egypt


    by Resistance on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 2:56pm