Mike,

You took a statement I made regarding our own actions on the first part, and then compared it to a statement I made regarding the actions of the affected populace on the second part. I might not have been clear, no intent to drive you nuts.

Cliff,

When have I ever said the US should withdraw from the Middle East? Never. Ever. We are over engaged and have been since the end of WWII, shaping governance in ways that have helped disempower populaces from the process of governance and in ways that have enabled so many of these governments to act with growing impunity toward those same populaces. We need to change the nature of our engagement to one that is less controlling. To withdraw would leave a vacuum that would be a disaster that I would never advocate.

I will be the first to admit that I shine a harsh light on government. I do so for a range of reasons. Certainly I believe that government is the greatest source of causation for insurgency. I stand by that and will listen calmly to any who can point out situations where that is not the case. So, point one out and lets discuss it. But ideology is everywhere. In the US right now we are surrounded by the protestant ideologies that changed the West, by the communist ideologies that changed the East, and by the Islamist ideologies that are changing the Middle East. Yet where is the insurgency? We have economic hardships, we have a large segment of the populace that is extremely dissatisfied with the current government, yet again, no insurgency? To understand insurgency one cannot merely study where it is, but one must also study where it is not. So ideology is not enough, poor economics are not enough, and a disdain for the current government are not enough. In some countries any one of those three might be enough on its own. What makes the difference?

But in America we are blessed with a uniquely reliable "hope" in the confidence that the vast majority of Americans have that the system will work. That voting is reasonably trustworthy and that a government will not override the system and ignore the popular will to stay in power through co-opting of the elements of state power. States without such hope are vulnerable, and insurgencies almost always happen in states where the legal means either nevery have existed or have been turned off by the government.

States where the populace does not recognize the right of the government to govern are similarly vulnerable to ideological attack. It is this aspect of "legitmacy" that is so important to stability, and it is not the same as "official". Also States where some segment of the populace is excluded from fair participation in economic and political opportunity. Or where the rule of law is perceived as unjust in its application. All of these factors of governance make a state vulnerable to ideological attack. States where those factors do not exist are remarkably stable, even when poverty and other problems are rampant. These are all things that are within the power of government to do well or poorly as they choose, and typically it is a conscious choice of government when they do not exist.

Now, governments don't like to hear that. They like to hear that they are the victim of malign actors or radical ideology. They like to believe that it is the poor economy that is causing unrest or anything else that is outside their power to control. History just does not bear that out.

My advice to Mubarak would be not to step down immediately but to declare that he will absolutely do so and not run in the fall. To also announce that he is dedicating the next several months to broadly attended hearings, counsels, etc to get all of the grievances on the table and then to have panels of senior, credible leaders from many walks of life work out solutions to those problems. To also pledge to personally stay out of those processes and to focus his final months to ensuring that a secure and stable environment exists for such sessions to take place within. To grant freedom of speech and assembly and having CSPAN like coverage of as many of these sessions as possible.

I would recommend to other Arab heads of state to consider similar changes to avoid the problems that have hit Tunisia and Egypt. I will not grant governments victim status. I will not shift the blame to the people, nor will I buy into positions that claim the people are brainwashed or coerced to act out. Certainly that happens, but it is the exception rather than the rule. These are things within the power of government to address. Currently these governments don't think they have to. I think they are wrong.