Article on organization of protests
Gents-
Article in today's International Herald-Tribune by David Kirkpatrick and David Sanger talking about the origin of the protests in Egpt:
http://www.heraldtribune.com/article...to-Arab-States
Talks about the role of Facebook and social media in educating the youth and getting the first protests started.
Kill MiGs!
V/R,
Cliff
One slogan (Mubarak out) is met ...
but what do these headlines (all from today) bode ?
Robert Fisk (Independent): Is the army tightening its grip on Egypt?
CNN: Egypt shutters banks after new protests from employees, police
Daily Mail: Army takes over in Egypt and orders ban on trade union strikes after old regime deposed
and as background for the armed forces and their role in Egypt's economy, NPR (from 4 Feb), Why Egypt's Military Cares About Home Appliances:
Quote:
One reason for the military's peaceful response: the unique role it plays in the Egyptian economy. The military owns "virtually every industry in the country," according to
Robert Springborg.
Springborg, a professor at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, has written several books about Egypt, he's lived in Egypt, he's consulted with the Egyptian military, and he's an expert on the various businesses it runs. Here's a list he rattled off from the top of his head:
Quote:
...car assembly, we're talking of clothing, we're talking of construction of roads, highways, bridges. We're talking of pots and pans, we're talking of kitchen appliances. You know, if you buy an appliance there's a good chance that it's manufactured by the military. If you ... don't have natural gas piped into your house and you have to have a gas bottle, the gas bottle will have been manufactured by the military. Some of the foodstuffs that you will be eating will have been grown and/or processed by the military.
The reasons for this arrangement go back to the '60s and '70s, when the Egyptian military was very large as a result of the wars with Israel.
Regards
Mike
We should all try to be nice, really...
But this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
has little bearing on the matter under discussion. Higher GDP does not necessarily translate into higher disposable income for the average Egyptian or higher capacity to buy food. It also doesn't necessarily translate into higher government revenues and thus higher capacity to subsidize wheat imports.
What we do see beyond doubt is that while Egypt's wheat imports fluctuate, the trend is steadily up, and while the world wheat prices fluctuate, the trend is also steadily up. That means the slice of Egypt's government revenue devoted to subsidized wheat imports has steadily increased (of course you realize that total trade deficit and government budget deficit are very different things). That means either pulling money from other parts of the budget or increasing government revenue or going deeper into debt, all of which pose difficulties of their own. Regardless of GDP and population, it's fairly clear that the cost of subsidized wheat imports to the Egyptian government had reached a level that made it impossible to avoid passing the increase on to consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
A thirty-year one-man dictatorship was overdue. We need no facebook, wheat imports or other fashionable (Malthus is apparently never out of fashion!) explanations for Mubarak's demise.
Undoubtedly true, but these events do have triggers, and economic events can be triggers.
Egypt's inflation rates have been very high, well outstripping average personal income: almost 12% in 2010, over 18% in 2009. That's 30% in 2 years, and that tends to piss people off. Unemployment remains high, and overall population growth is less an issue than a large demographic bulge of young people entering the job market at a time when jobs are scarce.
Throw a steep sudden increase in staple food prices in on top of that and you turn incipient trouble into actual trouble.
In any event my previous comment was less on the role of food prices in sparking the uprising than on the potential impact of food prices on transition frustration. The people will want the government to make prices drop. Of course government's capacity to do this is limited, but that's not widely understood. This needs to be considered by economic policymakers and the multilateral bodies that set conditions for the loans and other assistance that a transition government will need. Subsidy structures will need to be dismantled, but trying to eliminate them all at once is likely to have a devastating political impact on what will already be a shaky government.
Approval isn't really the point, nor is what he believed...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dayuhan
Some see it differently, some do not. In both cases memories may be colored by self-interest. I find it perfectly plausible that Saddam told people he had US approval, but the idea that someone of his experience could orchestrate a meeting in which a diplomat could say nothing of significance and then assign significance to anything she said is outside credibility.
It may be outside the credibility of you and I, even of most in the west. It is not outside the credibility of many in the ME.
Quote:
If Saddam believed the US would tolerate an invasion, it would not have been a consequence of anything April Glaspie said during that meeting.
Nor is Glaspie the point other than the fact that an Arabist who doesn't understand Arab customs is somewhat of a waste and that's the factor which caused me to intrude on your conversation... :rolleyes:
Quote:
...Claiming that he actually was given permission is, as previously stated, a load of bollocks.
While that may be true to you and to most in the west, it is not to most in the ME. However, you can of course ignore that and them. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure most western governments should not do so else they'll likely make the same sorts mistakes in the area. And that is not a load of bollocks... ;)
Nothing the US did led Saddam to attack Kuwait, however, a lot of things the US did not do out of ignorance and arrogance aided and abetted the launching of that attack.
The Case That Egypt Diminishes AQ
http://blogs.reuters.com/bernddebusm...w-to-al-qaeda/
If you like backhanded swipes at Ma Clinton, it's there.
Conclusion:
Quote:
So, it is reassuring to know that America’s top spy, James Clapper, sees the link between the Muslim Brotherhood gaining political space and the adverse effect that would have on al Qaeda. “With respect to what’s going on in Egypt,” he told a House Intelligence Committee hearing, “there is potentially a great opportunity here to come up with a counter-narrative to al Qaeda.
Yes, I know that Clapper's head is being called for by the usual suspects.
------------------
As to phrasing the Iranian argument in terms of their "nuclear threat", geez, isn't this The Second Time As Farce? What, no Niger purchases?
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose
Has anyone else noticed that the Egyptian armed forces seem to have been following along with much of the advice given by Frank Kitson in Chap. 5 "The Non-Violent Phase" of his Low Intensity Operations, Subversion, Insurgency, and Peacekeeping (reprint from Hailer Publishing; and original in pdf) ?
See also this piece by Eric Margolis, Egypt's Faux Revolution: Bait and Switch on the Nile, which doesn't cite Kitson; but which suggests that the counter-insurgency strategy has been a "bait and switch" (which is what Kitson's Chap. 5 boils down to).
The "new" government seems to have gained something of a grace period, from Google Inc. executive Wael Ghonim:
Quote:
“If you get paid 70 dollars, this is not the time to ask for 100 dollars,” Ghonim said in an interview with Bloomberg Television yesterday. “If you really care about this country, it is not about you anymore. This is about restoring you know, that stability. This is about sending signals to everyone that Egypt is becoming stable and we are working on that.”
Ghonim, 30, who was released on Feb. 8 after being held by the government in secret detention for more than a week, said he met military leaders over the weekend and he believes they are “really sincere” about bringing about the change demanded by the Egyptian people.
“They realize the value of business and creating jobs,” the activist said. “We had a half an hour discussion about the challenges of how to get people back to work and how to create jobs. They are aware of the problems.”
And, although unrest still exists, the focus has shifted to the economy generally and to specific sectors:
Quote:
Egypt's Transitional Government Struggles to Retain StabilityBy Leland Vittert, Published February 14, 2011, FoxNews.com
CAIRO, Egypt – As Egypt struggles to return to normal just three days after former president Hosni Mubarak resigned, hundreds of government workers went on strike Monday over wages and corruption.
The Egyptian transition government, led by the army, tried to contain a wave of protesters who defied orders not to strike. Bus drivers and ambulance workers walked off the job and a group of police protesters marched through the streets.
The instability comes as the Egyptian people are demanding to know what the next government will look like and how it will begin an economic recovery. .....
Regards
Mike
Can Egypt's military meet people's demands?
A BBC News summary, which covers the issues the new, sorry adjusted regime:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12471990
I was struck by these passages:
Quote:
This trust, however wary, may be unrealistic. The Egyptian military was the backbone of the regime of Hosni Mubarak, it has its own economic interests and may not be the unified and disciplined institution that it seems from the outside.
Citing Max Rodenbeck, the Economist's chief Middle East writer and a long-term Cairo resident:
Quote:
One of the many worries is that the military is so isolated from society, that it has been for so long a world unto itself. This was very useful when it had to step in to take control of the situation in a crisis. But does it have the management and communications skills and network to manage this situation?
The day before, of, and after the revolution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dayuhan
If despotism alone were enough to generate revolution there would be a lot fewer despots in the world.
Dayuhan, there are indeed a number of factors influencing the origin, outcome, and consequences of a revolution. For a good analysis on these factors, written "in tempore non suspecto", I can recommend David B. Ottaway's "Egypt at a tipping point."
http://www.google.be/url?sa=t&source...sAuh3xr0pOPQag
State Owned Enterprises and privatization methods...
State Owned Enterprises
Quote:
A government-owned corporation, state-owned enterprise, state enterprise, government business enterprise, or parastatal is a legal entity created by a government to undertake commercial activities on behalf of an owner government. Their legal status varies from being a part of government into stock companies with a state as a regular stockholder. There is no standard definition of a government-owned corporation (GOC) or state-owned enterprise (SOE), although the two terms can be used interchangeably. The defining characteristics are that they have a distinct legal form and they are established to operate in commercial affairs. While they may also have public policy objectives, GOCs should be differentiated from other forms of government agencies or state entities established to pursue purely non-financial objectives that have no need or goal of satisfying the shareholders with return on their investment through price increase or dividends.[citation needed]
US Examples:
Egypt Generals Running Child Care Means Profit Motive, By Cam Simpson and Mariam Fam - Feb 15, 2011 3:00 PM MT, Bloomberg News
Quote:
As much as one-third of Egypt’s economy is under military control, said Joshua Stacher, an Egyptian-military expert and assistant professor at Kent State University in Ohio whose work has been published in five academic journals. Revenues from military companies are a state secret, along with the armed- forces budget, he said.
Quote:
It isn’t uncommon for governments and militaries to own or run their own defense-related industries and arms makers. In Singapore and Israel, for example, nationalized production of fighting hardware has been seen as a way to protect national security by avoiding dependence on foreign producers.
What sets apart the Egyptian military, the Arab world’s largest, is that its companies also offer an array of products or services in the domestic consumer economy -- and without civilian oversight.
Quote:
Military companies play a significant role in consumer food production, said Springborg, the Naval Postgraduate School professor.
Because the Egyptian military wanted to be self-sufficient in meeting the dietary needs of personnel, it runs “chicken farms, dairy farms, horticultural operations. And it of course has its own bakeries,” he said.
The military’s “business interests are very large,” said Bassma Kodmani, executive director of the Paris-based Arab Reform Initiative and a senior adviser at the French National Research Council. Those businesses, though, help build the nation and help keep capital within its borders.
“The army is not seen as corrupt,” she told a group of reporters in Paris last week. “It might seem strange to people in the west, but in Egypt it’s not considered shocking that the army builds highways or new housing projects.”
Treuhandanstalt
Quote:
The Treuhandanstalt (German: Trust agency) was the agency that privatized the East German enterprises, Volkseigener Betrieb (VEBs), owned as public property. Created by the Volkskammer on June 17, 1990, it oversaw the restructuring and selling of about 8,500 firms with initially over 4 million employees. At that time it was the world's largest industrial enterprise, controlling everything from steel works to the Babelsberg Studios.
Paul Brinkley's War, Pacifying Iraq with the Weapons of Capitalism, by Ullrich Fichtner, 04/22/2009, Speigel Online International
Quote:
Paul Brinkley is the head of a special American task force that aims to bring lasting peace to Iraq using the tools of capitalism. He represents a new approach to waging war, where the economic experts come in with the ground troops.
US Troubled Asset Relief Program
Quote:
The Troubled Asset Relief Program, commonly referred to as TARP, is a program of the United States government to purchase assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector which was signed into law by U.S. President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008. It was a component of the government's measures in 2008 to address the subprime mortgage crisis.
Originally expected to cost the U.S. taxpayers as much as $300 billion,[1] by 16 December, 2010 the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the total cost would be $25 billion,[2] although Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner argued that the final cost would be still lower. [3] This is significantly less than the taxpayers' cost of the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980s. The cost of that crisis amounted to 3.2% of GDP during the Reagan/Bush era, while the GDP percentage of the current crisis' cost is estimated at less than 1%.[4] While it was once feared the government would be holding companies like GM, AIG and Citigroup for several years, those companies are preparing to buy back the Treasury's stake and emerge from TARP within a year.[5] Of the $245 billion invested in U.S. banks, over $169 billion has been paid back, including $13.7 billion in dividends, interest and other income, along with $4 billion in warrant proceeds as of April 2010. AIG is considered "on track" to pay back $51 billion from divestitures of two units and another $32 billion in securities.[4] In March 2010, GM repaid more than $2 billion to the U.S. and Canadian governments and on April 21 GM announced the entire loan portion of the U.S. and Canadian governments' investments had been paid back in full, with interest, for a total of $8.1 billion.[6] This was, however, subject to contention because it was noted that the automaker had only paid back its outstanding debt, while the much larger portion of the governments' investment would continue to be tied up in the company's stock.[7]
Citigroup strikes deal to repay TARP, By David Ellis, CNNMoney.com staff writer, Last Updated: December 14, 2009: 10:15 AM ET
Quote:
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Citigroup said Monday it has struck a deal with the government to return $20 billion in bailout money to taxpayers.
The New York City-based lender said it would raise the money through a combination of stock and debt, the bulk of which would come from a $17 billion common stock offering.
Egyptians choose order over further political upheaval
Oddly there has been little coverage of the 'new' Egypt and the recent referendum had barely a mention - I expect all the reporters are in Libya - so this IISS Strategic Comment is welcome.
Link:http://www.iiss.org/publications/str...ical-upheaval/
Penultimate paragraph:
Quote:
Egypt continues to suffer from aftershocks from the revolution, including episodic violence and economic disruptions. By supporting the army's plans, Egyptians have made clear their preference for order and a strong state. The army is not by nature inclined towards radical change. However, as it continues to oversee the transition, it will need to demonstrate creativity as it seeks to protect its institutional position while not standing in the way of change.
I do wonder how such a nation can do without an effective and legitimate police. There has been mention of traffic police being back on the streets.
From The Monkey Cage: Urban Social Networks, Mobilization, and State Strategies
From The Monkey Cage (www.themonkeycage.org)
http://www.themonkeycage.org/2011/03...down.html#more
BLUF:
Quote:
The argument I made is that urban social networks can be powerful underpinnings for mobilization, and that the onset of insurgency hinges in crucial ways on how states react to this urban mobilization. State strategies and policies, driven by the interests of regimes and security forces, are more important in shaping what happens to urban uprisings than the raw stock of government capacity and material power. The fate of rebellions, given surging social mobilization, rests on fundamentally political decisions about whether to unleash extreme violence on urban protesters and insurgents.
Regards
OC
Has Egypt's revolution become a military coup?
Quote:
CAIRO, Egypt — Just days after the departure of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak on Feb. 11, the nation’s new, self-appointed military leaders pledged, within six months, a swift transition to civilian rule.
Crowds of the same protesters that demanded Mubarak’s ouster cheered as their army said it would steer the nation toward a “free, democratic system.” Seven months later, however, many Egyptians are finding that little has changed.
As the so-called Supreme Council of the Armed Forces increasingly cements, and in some cases flaunts, its firm grip on power, the revolution that inspired a region is beginning to look more like an old-fashioned military coup.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/n...-military-coup
And if so, who is behind these shennanigans?
Quote:
CAIRO: A fresh attack overnight on a pipeline delivering gas from Egypt to Israel left one person injured, witnesses and Egyptian security sources said Tuesday.
At least three gunmen in a van opened fire on a gas installation before an explosion hit the pipeline near the town of al-Arish in the north of the Sinai peninsula, witnesses said.
It was the sixth such attack on the pipeline, which carries gas through the Sinai and on to Jordan and Israel, since Egypt's former president Hosni Mubarak was toppled in February.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...155743/1/.html
Thread for reference : http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...715#post115715
