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

    Egypt.... the coup ... The bill?

    By David Seaton on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:46pm |

    Up until now, President Mubarak has enjoyed the support of the armed forces. He was, after all, a career air force officer suddenly catapulted to the presidency when Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1981. But if these protests continue and intensify there are bound to be senior voices within the military tempted to urge him to stand down. BBC News

    Lieutenant colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser, who overthrew King Farouk, was an Egyptian army officer. Anwar El Sadat, who succeeded Nasser, was a military officer, who earlier had joined Nasser in overthrowing Farouk. Hosni Mubarak, an air force general, succeeded Sadat on his assassination.

    Therefore it would be reasonable to suppose that Mubarak's successor will be a military officer too.

    The question would be: what kind of a military officer, what rank?

    As a general rule of thumb, the higher ranking the officer, the more conservative the coup.

    Notice that Nasser was a Lt. Col, when he removed Farouk, so was Lybia's Muammar al-Gaddafi, when he took power from King Idris, and of course Venezuela's Hugo Chávez was a paratroop colonel, when he attempted his coup d'etat.  American backed generals tried unsuccessfully to overthrow Chávez, but were not supported by the lower ranking officers. Lower ranking officer's coups are nationalist revolutionaries, higher ranking officers like Chile's Pinochet tend to act under American supervision.

    In the Egyptian case, the higher ranking officers are probably firmly in the US pocket, but among the colonels, majors and captains there may be men that are of the nationalistic mode of Nasser and that are chafing at Egypt's enabling Israel in league with American interests.

    The key to this question may very well be something as simple as the wives of colonels and majors whose husbands are not making as good salaries as the husbands of their sisters working in the private sector. These are men who have direct command over the troops... the fat generals sit in their offices raking in the graft. Imagine the bedroom scenes after family dinners... many a coup d'etat has begun there.

    Probably the first move to oust Mubarak would come from senior officers, eager to execute a Lampedusian, "change everything in order to change nothing" maneuver and thus keep American military aid in place. If this doesn't satisfy the masses in the street, than a group of younger officers, more in touch with popular feeling, might make their move. The question then, would be if those younger officers would be interested in some sort of "national reconciliation" with the Muslim Brotherhood, in which case America's whole foreign policy in the Middle East gets flushed down the Nile.

    The colonel becomes a general, the major becomes a colonel and their wives are happy, they are now the stars of the family dinners, the ones who can fix fat state contracts. They have to cut out wine and wear a hijab and pray five times a day? Paris vaut bien une messe.

    Cross posted from: http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com

    Comments

    The question then, would be if those younger officers would be interested in some sort of "national reconciliation" with the Muslim Brotherhood, in which case America's whole foreign policy in the Middle East gets flushed down the Nile.

    So far The Muslim Brotherhood has kept a low profile which is wise of them for if it appeared that they were behind the protests, sympathy for the protesters would be greatly reduced and their chances diminished. Not only would Americas Middle East policy be flushed, but the dreams of more than a few moneyed interests as well. But then...isn't that the same thing ?


    by cmaukonen on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 1:59pm

    American policy in the Middle East is already flushed down the Euphrates, the Tigris, the Litani, the Nile, the Jordan...and the major question is will Saudi Arabia avoid a similar uprising.


    by NCD on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 3:01pm

    Hey! W said it first: "Freedom's on th'march. It's God's gift to the brown man, too"

    by jollyroger on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 3:17pm

    Amongst the turds to be flushed down the Jordan, the comatose relic, Sharon, along with the colonial excresence he once ruled. (To play w/the metaphor)

    by jollyroger on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 3:21pm

    Saudi King Abdullah certainly sees the writing on the wall, NCD. His message to Mubarak, urging him to crush the "infiltrators" trying to depose him, shows how totally out of step he is with the popular currents swirling in the Arab Middle East.


    by acanuck on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 4:15pm

    Saudi Arabia won't likely change much until the oil runs out. According to Wiki about 1/3 of the population are foreign workers, who must do most of the labor, making life more comfortable for the locals, and the GDP is fairly high due to a small endemic population and high oil revenues.

    With Egypt, at some point, someone is going to have to take charge or else chaos will only increase poverty. Chances are some rich Saudi's are already sending money to Islamic fundies in Egypt as their latest foreign field operation, support 'em abroad, and they don't bother you at  home!


    by NCD on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 5:18pm

    As for David's predictions, the Egyptian military does appear to be the last pillar of the regime standing. After the police evaporated from the streets of Cairo, Mubarak had no choice but to call on the army to restore order. But aside from protecting key government buildings, the troops on the ground are keeping their powder dry, effectively defying their orders to crack down.

    That should certainly help the newly appointed VP and prime minister (both military/security types) to lead an orderly transition phase. But they are too tightly linked to Mubarak to really satisfy the Cairo street's demand for deep change. Only a free and fair (and speedy) presidential election will do that. ElBaradei vs. Nour? The West (and even Israel) could live with either one.

    BTW, some news reports have Mubarak's wife and two sons flying to London. Stay tuned. 


    by acanuck on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 4:41pm

    A "free and fair" election would probably lead to a Muslim Brotherhood government. El Barradei doesn't have any street organization, no connection with the masses.

    The key to this question may very well be something as simple as the wives of colonels and majors whose husbands are not making as good salaries as the husbands of their sisters working in the private sector. These are men who have direct command over the troops... the fat generals sit in their offices raking in the graft. Imagine the bedroom scenes after family dinners... many a coup d'etat has begun there.

    A group of junior officers who wanted to connect with the Egyptian masses, would have to connect with the Muslim Brotherhood. In any transition from a dictatorship you have to have a "national reconciliation", that means including the Brotherhood as they are the major political force in Egypt.

    The colonel becomes a general, the major becomes a colonel and their wives are happy, they are now the stars of the family dinners, the ones who can fix fat state contracts. They have to cut out wine and wear a hijab and pray five times a day? Paris vaut bien une messe.


    by David Seaton on Sun, 01/30/2011 - 1:45am

    You're quite right that ElBaradei lacks street cred, David. Which is why I said in my previous post I thought he'd jumped the gun by proclaiming his readiness to lead a transition to democracy. (He was no doubt convinced his international reputation automatically made him popular at home.) But he may win his gamble. Reports today say the Brotherhood and other dissident groups (including Nour's El Ghad party) have created a united front, with ElBaradei delegated to negotiate with the regime. Presumably, they've hashed out a rough draft of how a national unity government would work, at least on an interim basis.

    The big question is how ready the new VP, Omar Suleiman, is for dialogue. I'm presuming he's now the man in control, to the extent anyone's in control.

    After a decades-long rigged political process, it's hard to gauge how deep support for the Muslim Brotherhood runs in Egypt. They've managed despite electoral obstacles to win 20 per cent of legislature seats. (And by all accounts, Brotherhood legislators have played a moderate, diligent, even progressive role.) But as you note, they're the best-organized opposition group in the country; 20 per cent may be the best they can do if they finally face energized secular parties as opposed to the moribund NDP.

    For now, though, they appear content just to be a part of a prospective unity government. Hopefully, the U.S. will have the good sense to welcome such a government. We'll see.


    by acanuck on Sun, 01/30/2011 - 2:49pm

    I vaguely remember they taught us in school, the Russian Empire was brought down by 10% of the population.


    by Resistance on Sun, 01/30/2011 - 2:57pm

    The Muslim Brotherhood appears to be backing ElBaradei, which means that they are very smart. What they want is to be legalized under a transition government approved by the west. Their very layered grass roots organization and mass support will take care of the rest. ElBaradei is their "Kerenski".


    by David Seaton on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 3:09am

    The Brothers aren't Bolsheviks, David. And the possibility they could win and abuse power is no argument for denying Egyptians the right to choose their own government. Which is the only issue at stake right now.

    Some powerful institutions will survive Mubarak's fall, specifically the military and the surprisingly independent judiciary. Egyptian media are sure to be among the freest in the world as soon as the shackles come off. So there will be checks and balances. And I doubt that, after throwing off one odious form of authoritarian rule, people will be quick to rally to another.

    Finally, any new government will know its priorities: tackling poverty, corruption and joblessness -- not imposing sharia. Whichever party or parties rule Egypt, that should keep them busy for the next few decades.


    by acanuck on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:55pm

    I agree with you on everything except the last paragraph. While I would hope it would be true in this case, there are plenty of counter-examples to show that it's most definitely not always the case that "any new government will know its priorities".


    by Verified Atheist on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 12:58pm

    I wasn't stating a general rule, Atheist. But Egyptian opposition leaders of all stripes can surely see the straw that broke Mubarak's back was not three decades of political oppression but the economic stagnation and income disparity that came with it. Under a democratic system, they'll have to tackle those problems head on, or they'll be quickly cast aside.


    by acanuck on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 1:14pm

    I'm not convinced you're wrong in this particular case, but neither am I convinced you're right (about what the Egyptian opposition leaders surely see). If there's one constant in the universe, it's the stupidity that power can engender. That said, we owe it to the Egyptian people to let them guide this ship the way they see fit - prime directive and all that. I'll admit, if I were convinced they would end up with sharia law, I might rethink that, but I'm not, and I want to give them the benefit of the doubt.


    by Verified Atheist on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 1:21pm

    I think we owe it to the Egyptians to let them pick the kind of government they want, regardless of what they decide. There are strict interpretations of sharia that I find barbaric (stoning for adultery comes to mind) but I also find it barbaric that some U.S. states seek the death penalty for 13-year-olds, or jail people 20 years for a joint.

    Unlike David, I don't fear an Islamist takeover of Egypt. But suppose for a moment that were to occur. Exactly how would the combination of democracy and sharia in that country be less acceptable to the West than the combination of autocracy and sharia in Saudi Arabia, which U.S. leadership appears totally cool with?


    by acanuck on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 2:40pm

    Contrary to many I don't think a government of the Muslim Brotherhood or Islamism is necessarily a disaster. The first thing they would have to do is feed all the people and that would keep them pretty busy and out of trouble. They are not corrupt and actually supply most of the real social services in Egypt already. As to Sharia, it is a legal system that all Muslims understand with very strong traditions of jurisprudence. Not something you'd want to apply in the USA, but has worked reasonably well for centuries in the world of Islam... Not our problem,

    What is our problem? Basically by backing Israel unconditionally for so long we have completely fucked up in the Arab world. If Saudi Arabia goes the way of Egypt we will have zero influence in that area... The Chinese and the Indians can buy all the oil the ME can produce,, and the EU can buy from Russia.


    by David Seaton on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 2:45pm

    The whole sharia issue is a red herring in this discussion. Netanyahu is going on about the danger of an Islamist-dominated Egypt, but even he (and President Shimon Peres) seem to know events are now beyond their influence. It's telling that Peres referred to his old friend Mubarak in the past tense.

    Egyptian VP Omar Suleiman just told Egyptian TV that talks would be opened with "all political parties" about constitutional changes, and frauds committed during November's parliamentary election would be investigated. He didn't say Mubarak is stepping down, but earlier the army issued a statement calling the protesters' demands "legitimate" and declaring it would not use force against tomorrow's mass demonstration. Tick, tick, tick ... .


    by acanuck on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 3:38pm

    When the army said they wouldn't fire on the demonstrators that was "Goodbye that's all she wrote".


    by David Seaton on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 4:36pm

    I agree, acanuck, and so does Jack Shenker.  In fact:

    "But amid all the discussion about the impact the Muslim Brotherhood is having on Egypt's uprising, another story of these remarkable few days might be about the impact the uprising is having on the Brotherhood. Anani believes the protests have shifted the balance of power within the organisation, boosting the influence of younger reformists and weakening the more conservative old guard.

    "Egypt is witnessing the creation of a new regime, and is reconfiguring all its internal political structures - obviously the Muslim Brotherhood will not be immune to that process," Anani said.

    "The revolution has brought us into much closer contact with other secular protest groups with whom we're working now on a regular basis. The elder leadership respects those new links, because they have to," confirmed Assas, the 35 year olde Brotherhood member. Indeed many believe the triumphant surge of youth activism seen in Egypt this past week could have as significant effecti on the Brotherhood as on Mubarak's beleaguered National Democratic Party."

    As others have pointed out, once there is a new government formed, journalists will go wild with Disinfecting Sunlight.

    But Obama and Carter should stop endorsing Omar Suleiman in any way, IMO.  The People know exactly what sort of torture program he ran--for us.


    by anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 5:27pm

    As if! Prez made Omar's opposite number deputy CIA Director, IIRC..Don't want any of that tiresome accounta....uh, that is, rear view

    by jollyroger on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 5:56pm

    Very good comment, thanks.Cool


    by David Seaton on Tue, 02/01/2011 - 4:32pm

    Ditto. What makes Shenker's piece credible is that he goes out and talks to some Brothers instead of just thumb-sucking about them.


    by acanuck on Tue, 02/01/2011 - 8:43pm