Egypt's Spring Revolution (2011-2013)

[Bob's World]

LINK.

If the article at the link is correct. Shades of Kermit Roosevelt...

As my Mother said, be careful what you wish for -- you may get it. We'll see how this works out for us -- and them...

Legal, trusted, and certain means of influencing government are far superior to illegal means. But when Illegal means are the only option, they are far superior to oppression and despotism. But this could go bad in a 100 different ways to be sure.

The only thing worse than acting out illegally in the pursuit of liberty is to do nothing.

Bigger picture: It is the power of these suppressed populaces and the role of the West in promoting, enabling and protecting these governments that has fueled the rise of Islamist organizations. This is what AQ has fed upon. If the US plays this smart, and empowers self-determination (which may mean that many of these leaders stay in power, open talks with their populaces, and implement reasonable reforms). If the US. plays this smart we have the opportunity to change perceptions about our role and intent in the Middle East in ways that can be far more effective in turning the tide of Islamist terrorism than any amount of security force capacity building or CT activities can.

AQ has been waging UW to stir up these populaces, but the populaces are responsive to their message due to the political (and economic) conditions that they live within. The US really needs to abandon COIN (to colonial and rooted in sustaining the status quo) and CT (only mows the tall grass, but does not address the roots) or even development (giving a man a fish when what he really wants is respect and liberty) with a more holistic "counter-UW" campaign that blends all of these things and more in a much better balanced and refocused mix that is aimed at root causes.

I remain optimistic in what is happening; but ever concerned that smart people with bad info will make bad decisions; or that the mob will be directed in ways that are ultimately counter productive.

Of note, Jordan is picking up steam as well. A map of where foreign fighters who traveled to Iraq to fight with AQ is as clear of a crystal ball as any as to where this thing is most likely to spread to next. Diplomats are hopefully meeting with all those governments to urge them to preemptively begin the reform process.

[Bob's World]

From Joe Felter's study on where Foreign Fighters come from back in 2005
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/harmony/pdf/...r.19.Dec07.pdf
(There is a bar graph that provides a great visual in the document)

Country of Origin
Saudi Arabia was by far the most common nationality of the fighters’ in this sample; 41% (244) of the 595 records that included the fighter’s nationality indicated they were of Saudi Arabian origin.7
Libya was the next most common country of origin, with 18.8% (112) of the fighters listing their nationality stating they hailed from Libya. Syria, Yemen,
7 After recording and comparing the information contained in the translated records, the CTC determined that 34 records were likely duplicates of the same individual. These records were deleted from the sample studied.
and Algeria were the next most common origin countries with 8.2% (49), 8.1% (48), and 7.2% (43), respectively. Moroccans accounted for 6.1% (36) of the records and Jordanians 1.9% (11).8

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2...fighters_N.htm

In a Dec 2010 article it points out that foreign fighters are once again flowing into Iraq. I would argue that the fastest way to stem that flow is change our approach with the government of the countries these men come from.

But a Mideast counterterrorism official said an estimated 250 foreign fighters entered Iraq in October alone. He said they came through the Syrian city of Homs, a hub for Syrian Muslim fundamentalists that is run mostly by Tunisians and Algerians. Other fighters have come from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Yemen.

[Dayuhan]

This is what AQ has fed upon. If the US plays this smart, and empowers self-determination (which may mean that many of these leaders stay in power, open talks with their populaces, and implement reasonable reforms). If the US. plays this smart we have the opportunity to change perceptions about our role and intent in the Middle East in ways that can be far more effective in turning the tide of Islamist terrorism than any amount of security force capacity building or CT activities can....

...Diplomats are hopefully meeting with all those governments to urge them to preemptively begin the reform process.

I still don't see how we're supposed to "empower self-determination", in any specific terms. Western diplomats urging reform will have about as much impact as an online petition. These rulers don't give a damn what Western diplomats say; they never have. They've heard the refrain so many times they could sing it in their sleep. It has no impact at all.

The link between domestic conditions, perceived US responsibility for those conditions, and AQ's recruitment remains speculative. AQ was able to recruit fighters quite successfully for jihad against the Soviet Union, which had nothing at all to do with domestic conditions in the countries where recruitment was taking place. "Expel the infidel from the land of the faithful" is a compelling narrative (at least to young men addled by religion and testosterone), and would likely be so even in a democracy. Certainly AQ's efforts to promote jihad against Arab governments have met with no notable success: they're really only able to sell the story when they are fighting foreign invaders.

[tequila]

I still don't see how we're supposed to "empower self-determination", in any specific terms. Western diplomats urging reform will have about as much impact as an online petition. These rulers don't give a damn what Western diplomats say; they never have. They've heard the refrain so many times they could sing it in their sleep. It has no impact at all.

I disagree if these urgings were actually tied to incentives or punishments. The stick of withdrawing $1.2 bn in annual U.S. military aid could prove an effective incentive for an army divided on whether or not to open fire on peaceful demonstrators, for instance.

[davidbfpo]

Abu M's recommendations on who is a true, real expert on Egypt:http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawam...ing-about.html

A profile of the new Deputy President:

The AFP has a lengthy profile of Omar Suleiman, who you can see here during his swearing-in ceremony, which I'll reprint in full.

Link and the entry is at 1757 hrs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...ests-live.html

On the relationship between US and Egyptian military:

The officer corps of Egypt’s powerful military has been educated at defense colleges in the United States for 30 years. The Egyptian armed forces have about 1,000 American M1A1 Abrams tanks, which the United States allows to be built on Egyptian soil. Egypt permits the American military to stage major operations from its bases, and has always guaranteed the Americans passage through the Suez Canal.

The relationship between the Egyptian and American militaries is, in fact, so close that it was no surprise on Friday to find two dozen senior Egyptian military officials at the Pentagon, halfway through an annual week of meetings, lunches and dinners with their American counterparts.

(Later)American military officials said on Friday that they had had no formal discussions with their Egyptian counterparts at the Pentagon about how to handle the uprising. No guidance was given, said Gen. James E. Cartwright, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In other words, we didn’t say anything to them about how they should handle it, and they didn’t tell us about how they were going to handle it.

From:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/wo...y.html?_r=2&hp

[slapout9]

Different perspective on the various revolutions going on.

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/index.html

[91bravojoe]

Our close personal friend.

[Bob's World]

$1.5B in aid last year is a powerful carrot. We have sticks too. The US employs carrots and sticks around the globe to promote national interests on a regular basis. To "empower self-determination" has never been an issue of lack of means, nor for want of proven ways. It is a matter of priorities as to what type of behavior (ours) we understand to be most important to serving our national interests.

No one said to send a petition. We tried that with King George, and he sent us his Army and Navy instead. This needs to not be done in public accusations and veiled threats over the airways either. This is the work for private rooms with small audiences, between senior leaders. When the affected people see their government making reasonable accomodations of their reasonable concerns following such meetings they will be able to deduce that we have taken a more neutral position.

There is a big difference between putting hard presser on an ally to do something he'd prefer not to do, and dictating exactly how they do things (mandating western-style womens rights, western-style democracy, etc). Few things are black and white.

What I find interesting on this forum is that when someone suggests "Black is not working and we need to change." the typical counter is "But White would not work either." Agreed. The answer lies between the two, and is likely closer to black than white in most cases, as simple changes of nuance and perception can have a tremendous impact.

Also, the US has no duty to "fix" Egypt, Tunisia, or any of the many other similarly situated allies we have in that theater. We do, however, have a duty to address the perception that we promote the security and sustainment of these regimes against the express will of their populaces.

[Rex Brynen]

I still don't see how we're supposed to "empower self-determination", in any specific terms. Western diplomats urging reform will have about as much impact as an online petition. These rulers don't give a damn what Western diplomats say; they never have. They've heard the refrain so many times they could sing it in their sleep. It has no impact at all.

Absolutely right. Populations are looking for signals of the degree of backing that authoritarians have--polite complaints in private have zero effect.

[CrowBat]

I still don't see how we're supposed to "empower self-determination", in any specific terms. Western diplomats urging reform will have about as much impact as an online petition. These rulers don't give a damn what Western diplomats say; they never have.

I'll respectfully disagree here.

Most of US-allied despots, and then particularly those clinching to power like Mubarak, are "hanging" on every signal they get from Washington. The Shah of Iran back in 1979 is a classic example. As long as there is no clear "you have to go" message from the White House, Mubarak is definitely not going to leave (except he's carried away by somebody else).

And vice-versa: the public in such countries is carefully monitoring the behaviour of leading US politicians, particularly the President. I witnessed several occassions where this went as far as that everyday Arabs monitored how often the US Pres appeared in the public, carefully following even their mimic and gestures. A clear signal of the kind, "people of Egypt, you are right to protest against Mubarak" would likely prompt additional thousands to the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, Suez and elsewhere.

Certainly AQ's efforts to promote jihad against Arab governments have met with no notable success: they're really only able to sell the story when they are fighting foreign invaders.

...IMHO, this is an image created by the fact that there are plenty of developments in the Arab world we do not get to hear about. For example, in Algeria the FIS was relatively successful in mobilizing at least a part of the population, back in the 1990s. Nowadays they've been pushed out into the expanses of Sahara and bases in Mali and elsewhere, sure. But, Algerian security services and military are still regularly undertaking large-scale operations against them (usually including heli-borne commandos, often supported by fighter-bombers), "far down in the south"...

Similarly, we know next to nothing about developments in large parts of Egypt outside the urban areas, i.e. outside major cities, in recent years. Some places in southern Egypt are effectivelly under the control of various extremists since decades and no security services trust themselves to go there (foreigners are strongly advised NOT to go that way). There are countless stories about the Egyptian Air Force having flown a number of massive operations in which entire villages have been obliterated. It's just so that even the specialized media hardly ever gets to hear about this (or even if, this was never reported).

Note that despite this situation, both - the militaries in Algeria and Egypt - continue to refuse adapting the emphasis of their doctrine from conventional warfare to that of COIN warfare and anti-terror operations.

Is the Pak Army/ISI's desire to exert control over Aghanistan one we should honor any more than India's desire that they don't?

IMHO, the answer is definitely negative.

An undisputed matter of fact is that the ISI is the major source of world-wide terrorism - and that already since 50 years, and so also until this very day (only a few days ago, the US Army issued another report about the continuous activity of ISI's instructors in relation to training Taliban inside Afghanistan, as well as in Pakistan).

If nothing else, I do not recall to have ever heard that any of the idiots from 9/11, any of the Abu Sayyaf group in the Philippines, or any of the FIS/AQM in Algeria have been trained by the Indian Army, somewhere in Punjab...

[Surferbeetle]

Crowbat,

Pokeman, urban dictionary definition, or something else?

Most of US-allied despots, and then particularly those clinching to power like Mubarak, are "hanging" on every signal they get from Washington. The Shah of Iran back in 1979 is a classic example. As long as there is no clear "you have to go" message from the White House, Mubarak is definitely not going to leave (except he's carried away by somebody else).

I would instead argue that US, European, and Asian political 'signals' are but some of the many variables populating the daily calculus equation run by a variety of political leaders as they test the winds to see what is possible today. Internal politcal/social/economic alliances, financial interests, patronage networks, the security forces, etc. all serve to both provide and constrain political options and must be balanced against external inputs and demands. For context the 2011 Pocket World in Figures from the Economist reports Egypt's GDP as $162 Billion in USD, with it's top four export destinations being Italy, USA, Spain, and India (in that order). The US financial support figure reported in the press is ~$2.5 Billion USD or less than 2% of Egypt's GDP. The World Bank's Middle East and North Africa website provides some further economic insights into the many variables juggled by political leaders in this region of the world.

... the public in such countries is carefully monitoring the behaviour of leading US politicians, particularly the President. I witnessed several occassions where this went as far as that everyday Arabs monitored how often the US Pres appeared in the public, carefully following even their mimic and gestures. A clear signal of the kind, "people of Egypt, you are right to protest against Mubarak" would likely prompt additional thousands to the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, Suez and elsewhere.

States and institutions often have more impact than individuals. The lessons learned from Turkey's EU accessions efforts, the Iraq OIF/OND experience, the Shia experience in Iraq during the first Gulf War, the interaction with the French in Algeria during the 1950's-60's, and Europe's (Germany, Russia, England, France, and others) interactions with the Ottoman's as the empire crumbled during the early 1900's are also included in these analysis'.

...IMHO, this is an image created by the fact that there are plenty of developments in the Arab world we do not get to hear about.

The sentiment regarding the paucity of 'good' information is and has always been true. A full awareness of the 'truth' will never be achieved...instead it's always approximations thereof....

[Pete]

It wasn't so long ago that many commentators were saying that previous American leaders of the Realpolitik school would never have countenanced the idea of invading of Iraq for the purpose of establishing a democracy there. There are dangers whenever U.S. policy errs to much on exporting our ideals on one hand or purely upon considerations of power politics on the other. I'm not sure there are any "perfect" solutions, as though we could somehow thread the needle and make everyone everywhere agree with what we're doing.

[Surferbeetle]

It wasn't so long ago that many commentators were saying that previous American leaders of the Realpolitik school would never have countenanced the idea of invading of Iraq for the purpose of establishing a democracy there. There are dangers whenever U.S. policy errs to much on exporting our ideals on one hand or purely upon considerations of power politics on the other. I'm not sure there are any "perfect" solutions, as though we could somehow thread the needle and make everyone everywhere agree with what we're doing.

...Realpolitik. Some of my benchmarks include Niccolò Machiavelli's work the Prince, Alexis de Tocqueville's study on American Democracy, Walt Whitman Rostow's model - Take off Model or Development Model, John Mearsheimer's book The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Stephen Walt's blog over at Foreign Policy, The Nixon Center's website, and of course Dr. Kissinger's amazingly verbose (it's something like 900 pages long yet it's interesting - and I hope to re-read it this year) book Diplomacy.

As to the Monday morning quarterbacking phenomenon, the Army has co-opted that human trait with the AAR...I still remember my very first one, held on a bitterly cold night somewhere high up in the Rockies....good times ....nonetheless they are worthwhile, it's at the heart of the SWJ business model, and of course our friend Socrates kicked things of with his Socratic Method of teaching...

[CrowBat]

Crowbat,

Pokeman, urban dictionary definition, or something else?

Insignia of No.31 Squadron UARAF as of 1959-1967.

I would instead argue that US, European, and Asian political 'signals' are but some of the many variables populating the daily calculus equation run by a variety of political leaders as they test the winds to see what is possible today. Internal politcal/social/economic alliances, financial interests, patronage networks, the security forces, etc. all serve to both provide and constrain political options and must be balanced against external inputs and demands. For context the 2011 Pocket World in Figures from the Economist reports Egypt's GDP as $162 Billion in USD...

I'm really sorry, but creatures like Mubarak do not think that way. Sure, they do think about _their own_ alliances, financial interests, patronage (in sense of what they already control and what they do not control - yet), but surely not about GDP, per-capita income or similar topics.

External inputs are very important for them, then if there is somebody who can cause any sort of trouble, this somebody's actions have to be prevented or stopped, in one way or the other (if by no other, then a threat that should the dictator fall there will be an Islamic Republic...).

Similarly when it comes to external inputs, they have to seriously consider the possibility that the military might turn against them if they prove incapable of ascertaining the same funding like when getting the US aid (the reason is that the military is usually the best organized and functioning institution in such a country, and armed - which translates into being capable of bringing them down).

In summary, Mubarak can't care less about "everyday" Egyptians: he's not responsible to them (otherwise he wouldn't be a dictator).

States and institutions often have more impact than individuals.

Very likely a valid point - except when it comes to those Egyptians I happen to know more closely. For most of them, Obama (or any other US president) = US. For them, they way he behaves, what he says, the "signals" he's "emitting", is the way the US is acting or going to act.

The sentiment regarding the paucity of 'good' information is and has always been true. A full awareness of the 'truth' will never be achieved...instead it's always approximations thereof....

Sure. Still, this is not making certain "standard" assessments/conclusions any more true. In this case, it was my point that the usual ("schoolar"?) standpoint that the al-Qaida's efforts to promote Jihad against Arab governments met no notable success, is based on non-availability of sufficient information.

To add a third example: the lack of news about internal dissent, often even unrest in Saudi Arabia means not that there is none, and even less so it's a land of milk and honey there. It rather means that the state is doing very well at suppressing any kind of independent reporting about what's really going on.

[Surferbeetle]

Insignia of No.31 Squadron UARAF as of 1959-1967.

Thanks for sharing, it's a distinctive avatar. United Arab Republic (Egypt and Syria) Air Force MiG 19’s and MiG 21’s? I have a friend, with some interesting stories, who was on the other side during June 5th ‘67.

I'm really sorry, but creatures like Mubarak do not think that way. Sure, they do think about _their own_ alliances, financial interests, patronage (in sense of what they already control and what they do not control - yet), but surely not about GDP, per-capita income or similar topics.

So...to follow along with Mr Gideon Rachman's, of the FT, train of thought (31 Jan 2011 - Democracy is Back - How Awkward) are General Mubarak and General Suharto vergleichbar? Each has had thirty or so years in power as president, preceded by significant distinguished military service to their respective nations. Both nations experienced stability and significant economic returns during their respective presidents rule. General Suharto was able to resign, facilitate a peaceful transition of power, and has not been too vigorously pursued in his retirement.

Currently President Mubarak has authorized his new Vice President Mr. Omar Suleiman to negotiate directly with the opposition (although Osama al-Ghazali Harb, head of the Democratic Front party is currently playing hard to get), perhaps prompted by Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei's efforts to negotiate directly with the Egyptian Army.

Perhaps that core of sense of service to one's nation fostered by military service should not be totally discounted?

Sure. Still, this is not making certain "standard" assessments/conclusions any more true. In this case, it was my point that the usual ("schoolar"?) standpoint that the al-Qaida's efforts to promote Jihad against Arab governments met no notable success, is based on non-availability of sufficient information.

Definitions of who comprises al-Qaida (AQ) vary, and there are significant gaps between desire, capability, and motivations of those who populate AQ as well as other organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood. Do you think that Saad al-Katatny is strong enough to represent interests of the Egyptian branch of the Brotherhood and does his organization truly represent the will of the majority of the Egyptian people…or that of the Egyptian Army?

To add a third example: the lack of news about internal dissent, often even unrest in Saudi Arabia means not that there is none, and even less so it's a land of milk and honey there. It rather means that the state is doing very well at suppressing any kind of independent reporting about what's really going on.

I appreciate your provision of examples...

It is very interesting to think about what effects the events in Tunisia and Egypt are having upon the youth of Saudi Arabia as well as those in power in that nation. Some of the recent fluctuations in the price of oil of late appear to be an attempt to price in this uncertainty.

[slapout9]

according to the linked article below. Article by former CIA officer(27 year veteran) Robert Grenier, he was also the former head of the Counter-Terror Unit.


http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/...democracy.html