Egypt's Spring Revolution (2011-2013)

[jmm99]

Foreign Affairs Coverage of the Crisis in Egypt and the Middle East - Summary: A collection of continuing Foreign Affairs coverage of the crisis in Egypt and the Middle East (most recent posted this week):

The Muslim Brotherhood After Mubarak: What the Brotherhood Is and How it Will Shape the Future
Carrie Rosefsky Wickham
February 3, 2011
Portraying the Muslim Brotherhood as eager and able to seize power and impose its version of sharia on an unwilling citizenry is a caricature that exaggerates certain features of the Brotherhood and underestimates the extent to which the group has changed over time.

The U.S.-Egyptian Breakup: Washington's Options in Cairo
Steven A. Cook
February 2, 2011
With the political era of Hosni Mubarak coming to an end, is the strategic relationship between Cairo and Washington similarly finished? The Obama administration must scale back its ambitions to affect change in Cairo.

Israel's Neighborhood Watch: Egypt's Upheaval Means that Palestine Must Wait
Yossi Klein Halevi
February 1, 2011
With Hezbollah calling the shots in Lebanon and Islamists poised to gain power in Egypt, Israel sees itself as almost completely encircled by Iranian allies or proxies. Where does this leave the future of a sovereign Palestine state?

Letter From Cairo: The People's Military in Egypt?
Eric Trager
January 30, 2011
As protests continue in Egypt, both sides -- the protesters in the streets and the Mubarak regime -- are wondering exactly which side the Egyptian military is supporting. Does the army hold the key to the country's political endgame?

The Psychology of Food Riots: When Do Price Spikes Lead to Unrest?
Evan Fraser and Andrew Rimas
January 30, 2011
The connection among rising prices, hunger, and violent civic unrest seems intuitively logical. But there was more to Tunisia's food protests than the logic of the pocketbook. The psychological element -- a sense of injustice that arises between seeing food prices rise and pouring a Molotov cocktail -- is more important.

Letter From Beirut: Crime and Punishment in the Levant: Lebanon’s False Choice Between Stability and Justice
Michael Young
January 26, 2011
In bringing down its government last week, did Lebanon just witness a coup d’etat or did it narrowly dodge civil war? Either way, Damascus, Tehran, and Washington are all watching.

Morning in Tunisia: The Frustrations of the Arab World Boil Over
Michele Penner Angrist
January 16, 2011
Last week's mass protests in Tunisia were less a symptom of economic malaise than of a society fed up with its broken dictatorship. Should the other autocratic regimes in the Middle East and North Africa be afraid?

Is El Baradei Egypt's Hero? Mohamed El Baradei and the Chance for Reform (broken link)
Steven A. Cook
March 26, 2010
The return of Mohamed El Baradei to Egypt has raised questions about the country's political system and the rule of President Hosni Mubarak. Is reform possible, and if so, is El Baradei the man to lead it?

Back to the Bazaar
Martin Indyk
January/February 2002
The United States has an opportunity to set new terms for its alliances in the Middle East. The bargain struck with Egypt and Saudi Arabia after the Gulf War seemed successful for a decade, but now the United States is facing the consequences: Washington backed Cairo's and Riyadh's authoritarian regimes, and they begat al Qaeda. The Bush administration should heed the lesson.

Cheers

Mike

[Dayuhan]

Foreign Affairs Coverage of the Crisis in Egypt and the Middle East - Summary: A collection of continuing Foreign Affairs coverage of the crisis in Egypt and the Middle East (most recent posted this week):

Interesting reading. The contrast between the piece on the Muslim Brotherhood and the rather hysterical "Israel's neighborhood Watch" piece is particularly interesting. Overall the chorus of panic and recrimination emanating from Israel is getting pretty deafening, example here...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...70U53720110131

Israel shocked by Obama's "betrayal" of Mubarak

If Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak is toppled, Israel will lose one of its very few friends in a hostile neighborhood and President Barack Obama will bear a large share of the blame, Israeli pundits said on Monday.

Political commentators expressed shock at how the United States as well as its major European allies appeared to be ready to dump a staunch strategic ally of three decades, simply to conform to the current ideology of political correctness...

...To win popular Arab opinion, Obama was risking America's status as a superpower and reliable ally.

"Throughout Asia, Africa and South America, leaders are now looking at what is going on between Washington and Cairo. Everyone grasps the message: "America's word is worthless ... America has lost it."

One has to wonder what exactly they want the US to do to preserve the hollow shell of Mubarak's rule. There seems to be a general reluctance to admit that Mubarak is probably going down no matter what the US does. Rats may leave sinking ships, but who in his right mind stays on a sinking ship?

Seems to me an excellent opportunity for the US to demonstrate that we do not necessarily hold our interests to be identical to those of Israel.

For the US, the story of 1953 Iran is an important one to understand when looking at Egypt today.

It may be even more important to understand that story when looking at Egypt tomorrow, or in the near future, as a new Egyptian government emerges. There will doubtless be all manner of panic over presumed Islamist influence, and all manner of calls for the CIA to do the dirty and bring back a tidy reliable dictatorship. This temptation will, I think, be best avoided.

The message the US needs to deliver, IMO, lies not in what we do to resolve Egypt's current crisis but in how we deal with what emerges after. Time for us to show, not say, that we are able and willing to deal with a government that puts Egypt's interests ahead of ours. Certainly there will be friction, but the way we choose to manage that friction will speak volumes, and have a lasting impact.

[Cole]

One has to wonder what exactly they want the US to do to preserve the hollow shell of Mubarak's rule. There seems to be a general reluctance to admit that Mubarak is probably going down no matter what the US does. Rats may leave sinking ships, but who in his right mind stays on a sinking ship?

Seems to me an excellent opportunity for the US to demonstrate that we do not necessarily hold our interests to be identical to those of Israel.

Ever hear the old joke about two men coming upon a Grizzly bear and the one says, "Run," and takes off to which the other says "you can't outrun a bear." The first replies, "That maybe true but I only gotta out run you." In this case Iran is the bear. Wouldn't you prefer both the U.S. and Israel to have a better hunting rifle and Israel to be the first target of the bear?

Second analogy: If your ship is sinking in water that will cause hypothermia and death in 10 minutes and a rescue ship (election) is 15 minutes away and you have nothing resembling a life raft now, do you jump now?

And you certainly don't need someone from the rescue ship telling you over the radio to jump now...or your young sailors who have no clue what hypothermia (or running a country) involves.

[CrowBat]

Continuing my attempt to understand Ken's flow of thoughts....

Try recomputing with that 1979 start date, see if that works, don't forget to count the Embassy bombings (all of them), attacks on the World Trade Center (all of them), the Barracks bombings (all of them), the aircraft hijackings and bombings (all of them) and I think you'll come up with a fair total over the first 22 of that 30 plus years. Not quite one major attack a year but not far off, either.

Throw in the ship attacks plus Viet Nam and Somalia -- which you may not deem important in this context but of which many in the ME and Asia are well aware and often cite, not least including Bin Laden and Zawahiri, the Egyptian and Abu Yahya al-Libi -- the Libyan AQ strategist.

<snip>

....its a view I've held for almost all that 30 years, certainly for the last 27 years, since the second Beirut Embassy bombing. As I said, I've been paying attention, you had no need to do so.

I think I understand your standpoint now, but have a strong feeling you're throwing quite a lot of unrelated events on the same pile, while ignoring the US involvement in many of them. At least you blame wrong people for attacks on the USA. I also don't agree with the premise of the US - generally - acting "lamely", or being provoked.

If you like, consider me a "Devil's advocate". I don't mind, since it happens often and I got used to that. My point is: as much as I can understand your standpoint, so I can understand the standpoint of those you say "provoke" the USA.

For example: the Iranians see themselves as provoked by the USA, time and again, and again, and again. Op Ajax in 1953 and installation of the Shah was just the start, some of them "insist" on it, others don't even care about these events, but some much newer ones. See; Israeli invasion of Lebanon which (as they see it) and the resulting oppression of the Shi'a in the south of that country - couldn't have been undertaken without US support; assassination of their charge d'affairs in Lebanon by (what they see as) an US ally (Lebanese Christians), and which was a signal for the onset of an "undeclared war" against the IRI; US support for Iraq that brutally invaded them and actually enabled Khomeini to firmly entrench himself in power in Tehran - but also led to the development of the IRGC as the major military, political and economic power in the IRI -; wholehearted support of Wahhabism on at least two sides of the IRI (in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) since the 1980s (I'll not involved various "Stans" to this consideration now); US treachery after Iranians supported them so much in Afghanistan in 2001-2002, and then in Iraq, in 2003; clandestine US operations to steer troubles between ethnic minorities etc. As you can see, their list appears even longer than the one you could offer as argumentation that the Persians are "provoking" the Great Satan...

Now, you are relating various terrorist attacks against the USA with the IRI, and see these are a result of "soft" actions of various US admins. But, why don't you "connect the dots"? Who are the crucial theoreticians of the AQ, and who were not only the 19 idiots from 9/11, but also those who bombed embassies in places like Nairobi? Who are the MBs the Israelis are so in panic about? Persians - or Egyptians and Saudis?

In what way are - for example - Islamists from Egypt that turned so extreme they are not accepted even by their own "brothers" (from the Brotherhood), related to the Persians?

Sorry, not the least.

Furthermore, if you continue connecting these dots...and to bring us back to the actual topic of this thread: don't you find it at least "curious" that the people that run the AQ and became involved in actions against the US, emerged after Mubarak came to power, and since the USA began delivering extensive military aid to Egypt? Prior to that the MBs did not care the least about Washington. If you study them more closely, you find out that their motivation has nothing to do with the Iranian Shi'a, but with the Saudi Wahhabists. They turned against the USA after the US troops "violated the holy soil" of Saudi Arabia, in 1990. They were trained by the ISI in Pakistan in projects financed 50:50 by the USA and the Saudis, and ignored by the US while spreading their ideas from Marocco and Nigeria, via India to the Philippines.

You also mentioned Somalia: as of 1981-1983, Somalia was a recipient of the US military aid, as a counter to the "reactionary and pro-Soviet government" in another former US ally - Ethiopia: I strongly doubt anybody in the DC ever came to the idea to study how comes Mengistu "turned" Marxist-Leninist (literaly) over the night. At the same, the US at least ignored provision of military aid provided by various Arab regimes to the Islamists in Eritrea...only to, 20 years later, find itself having to support Ethiopia against Islamists in Eritrea and in Somalia... Now, do you think Ethiopia or Somalia ever "provoked" the USA, or any US admin to have been "soft" to them too?

[Dayuhan]

Shortly after writing this:

a post-Mubarak Egypt does not have to be an Islamist nightmare or an Iranian clone. Of course the Israelis, and a few others, will wave that threat at us in an effort to persuade us to try to shape the new Egypt to their liking, but that would be an effort well worth resisting.

I browse around and note Sarah Palin saying this:

...information needs to be gathered and understood as to who it will be that fills now the void in the government. Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that...

Somebody really ought to remind her, and perhaps a few other people, that the US does not have veto power over who rules Egypt.

[slapout9]

Keyfaya is Arab for enough! this is a link to the RAND corporation study on the usage of social media and youth groups to cause regime change. Still reading the paper but there are some very strong parallels as to what is happening in Egypt......coincendence?????


http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG778.pdf

[Bob's World]

Americans will always have more in common with Persians than with Arabs, thus the irony of where we find ourselves today where Iran is cast in the role of "enemy" and so many Arab governments are cast in the role of "friend."

As CrowBat points out, we are attacked by the populaces of our allies, not the populaces of our enemies. That alone is metric enough to point out how out of balance the current state of governmental relations have grown to become over the years. Arab and Persian populaces both yearn for greater liberty and self-determination; greater infusion of democratic principles into the governments they design for themselves; and greater respect from the West than they have been shown over the past couple hundred years. But Persians don't attack us becuase they don't blame us for their current government. That issue is resolved. This, however is an unresolved issue in many Arab states where the people do blame the US for the state of their governance, and do attack us. None of these states have the wherewithal to attack us, even if they formed an alliance and called it a "Caliphate." Weak states are not threats to strong states. Populaces of weak states, however, can launch us into 10 years of GWOT tail-chasing. The game has indeed changed, but we liked to old rules better so ignored that little fact.

Egypt is important. Culturally and physically, it sits at the fulcrum point between Mediterranean Arabs and Arabian Peninsula Arabs; between West and East. It is an ancient culture and a true nation; as is Iran. As Anwar Sadat once said the others are largely "tribes with flags." There was a certain balance in place, but it was an artificial one, with far too many fingers on either side of the scale.

Because Egypt is so important there are a wide range of stake holders who are working a wide range of angles to push for status quo or change as they see best suits their respective cause. Some speak directly to advocate their cause, most take indirect approaches. They leak "intel" to someone who they know can and will leap to get in front of a camera and scoop the story; or they play on the biases of people like Ms. Palin to get her to stir up her base (as is Glenn Beck, Rush, etc). Similarly there are agents on the ground working agendas as well.

The irony is that the people are the ones who started this, the people are the ones who hold the true power to decide this, but it is the people who are the last consideration of most who are working hardest to steer events one way or another. As the world continues to evolve, it will be in finding balance points that the people buy into that will be the most powerful and enduring.

Amb. Bolton has said one thing that I agree with, and that is that the US needs to stop sending powerful and mixed message out into the airwaves, and needs to exercise a cogent plan of diplomacy behind the scenes and across the region. There is great opportunity here, but great risk as well.

[CrowBat]

....I browse around and note Sarah Palin saying this:
Somebody really ought to remind her, and perhaps a few other people, that the US does not have veto power over who rules Egypt.

Down to the bottom, brutal reality is that "Sarah Palin" has more to say about the future Egyptian president, than 79.999.996 Egyptians.

Bob,
Ken,
thanks for understanding my points (and that inspite of my usual Sunday-morning-sloppy-typing ).

One plea from me, if you don't mind: don't get my "prose" as an accusation or putting the blame on the US for "everything". I very well understand the machinery of the US politics, at home and abroad. The same with many of the countries we're talking about. So, that was a simple counting of historical facts, thinking about what you write, and trying to make you think about what I write. My experience is that I always "only" learn from such exchanges.

Few (this time relevant, I hope) observations for the time being:

Egypt is important. Culturally and physically, it sits at the fulcrum point between Mediterranean Arabs and Arabian Peninsula Arabs; between West and East. It is an ancient culture and a true nation; as is Iran...

If one can trust recent reports from Cairo and Zagreb (Croatia), Egypt might become even more important, since the Croatian company INA might have found two huge gas fields somewhere between Marsa Matruh and el-Alamein (yes, "that" el-Alamein). Some three weeks ago the (meanwhile former) Egyptian energy minister went as far as to state that Egypt might become one of major gas producers world-wide. For what it's worth: Minister: Egypt can be one of main gas producers.

What many in the world fail to realize is that the US government reinvents itself at 2, 4, 6 and /or 8 year intervals due to our political process. That is no excuse...

Trust me, it's even less of an "excuse" considering the fact that in regards of ME, all the administrations since Nixon - without any exceptions - are sticking to the policy developed and introduced by Kissinger: Israel is dictating the US foreign policy in the Middle East, irrespectivelly - often regardless - of the price the USA pay for that.

That's the essence - also that of what's currently going on in Egypt. Stay tunned, the "Super Bowl match" between the teams of "Egyptian Opposition" led by coaches Obama and Clinton on one side, vs. "Mubarak", led by coaches Netanyahu and AIPAC on the other, is going to be continued "right after this"....

[Ken White]

That's the essence - also that of what's currently going on in Egypt. Stay tunned, the "Super Bowl match" between the teams of "Egyptian Opposition" led by coaches Obama and Clinton on one side, vs. "Mubarak", led by coaches Netanyahu and AIPAC on the other, is going to be continued "right after this"....

Yet one can hope we'll get a bit smarter.

Or, more to the point, hope that one team is not playing US football with a poor defensive line while the other is aiming for the FIFA World Cup and has an erratic midfield winger or two...

[Surferbeetle]

...crank up the Bambino Nel Tempo song, and pass the Martini and Rossi

From Al Jazeera on 4 Feb 2011: Berlusconi: Mubarak is a wise man

"I hope that in Egypt there can be a transition toward a more democratic system without a break from president [Hosni] Mubarak, who in the West, above all in the United States, is considered the wisest of men and a precise reference point," he said.

"I hope there can be continuity in government," he told reporters on Friday.

From UPI on 28 July 2010: Italy's Eni expands role in Egypt

CAIRO, July 28 (UPI) -- Italian energy company Eni announced Wednesday that it secured new deals in the Egyptian natural gas sector as it starts oil production in the Western Desert.

Eni announced that it started oil production in the Arcadia field in the Western Desert of Egypt just 45 days after it made its initial discovery.

The Italian energy company said it plans to drill four more wells in the area during the next year. The well is part of a plan to exploit deeper reserves locked in Egypt's Western desert and refocus oil strategies in the country.

Speaking of Rossi, he's finally coming back to Ducati's Moto GP Squad!!!!

[Dayuhan]

Down to the bottom, brutal reality is that "Sarah Palin" has more to say about the future Egyptian president, than 79.999.996 Egyptians...

That's the essence - also that of what's currently going on in Egypt. Stay tunned, the "Super Bowl match" between the teams of "Egyptian Opposition" led by coaches Obama and Clinton on one side, vs. "Mubarak", led by coaches Netanyahu and AIPAC on the other, is going to be continued "right after this"....

I think you're substantially overstating the extent of US influence... and if the Israelis had influence of their own to use inside Egypt, they wouldn't be shrieking frantically and fruitlessly for the US to do their bidding. Times change.

I sometimes wonder who will miss the declining American influence more, the Americans who wielded it or the critics who used it to explain everything that happened in the world. Things will be more complex without a clear bogeyman, and we may have to actually exert ourselves and try to understand the full range of forces at play. Even at the peak of US power there were many other forces involved, and the US was manipulated as often as it manipulated others, often with greater success.

For Egypt, of course, the hard part begins when Mubarak leaves. Transitions out of dictatorship are far from easy, especially if democracy comes into the picture, which it may or may not in this case. Popular expectations will be very high and government capacity is likely to be very low, a stressful combination. We're halfway through chapter one, and it's likely to be quite the saga.

[Fuchs]

Lots of hyperbolic people in the west will pay much attention to the PRC in the next 2010's and probably to India in the 2020's. They'll get over the changes soon.

Assuming that the domino theory applies to the Arab world, it could become very, very interesting to see how the Europeans behave.
The French have good relations with some Arab countries (thanks to dropping Israel in '67) as far as I know, but they don't exactly have a strategy-capable president these days.

Germany has no bad reputation in the Arab world either, but the German parties won't meet any Arab wishes regarding Israel and Germany has not exactly a track record of leading Europe in extra-European affairs. German political capital and strategy in EU policy have been focused on economic policy mostly.

I don't see Spain, Greece, Portugal or Italy capable of pulling off anything of relevance in regard to coining EU approach towards Arabs in the next few years.

The UK is pretty much an unknown variable for me in regard to Arab-related policies. A certain 'special relationship' may be a hindrance for them.

Finally the classic EU politics joker; highly capable, honourable men with good reputation coming from otherwise quite silent and unimportant European countries, such as Norway, Denmark or Luxembourg.
Norway isn't in the EU, but such a joker could turn out to become relevant nevertheless - and typically so behind the scenes.


My stance is simple; don't piss off the Arab populations and be a good neighbour and trade partner. There's no real security policy problem unless we fuel one.
A revival of the Russian-Arab ties of the 67-73 period would be the greatest possible failure of European security policy (short of actual great war) imaginable.