U.S.-Egypt: Dance of the co-dependents

The ruling circles in Washington and Cairo are now each in their own way (but also, jointly) engaged in a dance of resistance to the wave of massive political change unleashed by the democratic revolution in Egypt.
This evening I watched Pres. Mubarak’s latest, very disappointing and retrograde televised speech to the Egyptian people, then read the careful but ultimately mealy-mouthed response from Pres. Obama. My reading of the situation is that within the ruling circles of both countries there are powerful factions that are resisting the wave of democratic change in Egypt, but also other other factions that have seemed inclined– whether from a genuine adherence to the principles of democracy and equality, or from a desire to try to “ride this tiger of change” in order, sooner or later, to leash and constrain it– to give more, and more substantial, concessions to the democracy forces in order to try to work with them.
For now, the conservative, change-resistant forces in both capitals appear to have won their respective arguments. In Washington, the speech that Obama gave was very long on fine principles but completely devoid of announcing any actual policy consequences for Mubarak/Suleiman if they continue to thumb their noses at these principles in practice.
“Going forward,” Obama said,

    it will be essential that the universal rights of the Egyptian people be respected. There must be restraint by all parties. Violence must be forsaken. It is imperative that the government not respond to the aspirations of their people with repression or brutality. The voices of the Egyptian people must be heard.

But these principles have already been very seriously violated over the past two weeks. And where was there any attempt by Obama to hold the Egyptian regime to account by, for example, withholding some portion (or all) of the aid that Washington so generously gives to Egypt’s military and “security” forces– or even, by mentioning the possibility of establishing such conditionality?
Nowhere.
The flow of military aid apparently– in this case as in the case of Israel, despite its repeated violations of Washington’s declared “wishes” regarding settlement construction or other matters– continues to gush unimpeded.
Americans, and everyone else, should worry about this situation a lot.
Some useful details about the conservative, pro-Mubarak faction within the White House were in this LA Times article today. The authors identified the pro-Mubarak faction in the White House as including the powerful trifecta of Hillary Clinton, Bob Gates, and national security adviser Thomas Donilon, along with both Dennis Ross (!) and Dan Shapiro. Identified with the pro-reform faction are named only a speechwriter, Ben Rhodes, and the veteran human-rights activist Samantha Power.
(Interestingly, the article notes that Dan Shapiro, who is the NSC official in charge of all Arab-Israeli matters, had previously worked as Obama’s outreach guy to the U.S. Jewish community during the presidential campaign. Oh yes, can’t we just all “take it on trust” that he is a guy who knows a lot about the Middle East and can understand the intricacies of the politics, society, and needs of each Arab country as well as he understands Israel’s…)
As for Ross, the former head of the Jerusalem-based Jewish People’s Policy Planning Institute, no further comment on his ability to be “fair and balanced” is needed here.
The reason we Americans should worry about this situation is that the interests that members of this powerful faction have in propping up the Mubarak-Suleiman duo are now, with every day that passes, dragging the ability that our country might have to have decent relations with the future democratic Egypt ever lower and lower. They also seem quite happy to have our taxpayer dollars continue to flow unimpeded into propping up Egypt’s corrupt and repressive “security” apparatus– in the same way that they do into Israel’s.
The anti-reform factions in Cairo and Washington still wield considerable financial, military, and organizational power. What they are losing more and more of every day is the power to persuade— especially, the power to persuade that large portion of Egypt’s 85 million fairly well educated and right now highly mobilized people who care very deeply indeed about the situation in their own country and who now, urgently, need to see some serious reform there.
And you know what? The current situation in Egypt is one in which military power– the power of the Egyptian military, the Israeli military, or even the U.S. military– counts for almost nothing.
This is one of the really exciting aspects of the present situation! All that long-sustained “investment” that these three countries have made in building up hi-tech, capable military formations in the region? In the present situation, it is worth nothing! Nothing. What would the Israeli military do to respond to Egypt’s cries for democracy? What would any of them do? What can any of them do that would not, almost instantaneously, make America’s situation in the region 100 times worse than it currently is?
Oh sure, the Egyptian military could roll their tanks into the square and kill a huge number of people… Or use their helicopter gunships, or whatever. But then what? The geopolitical consequences of any actual, significant use of force would be devastating– for the frightened denizens of the White House and of Abdin Palace, alike.
* * *
Change is coming in Egypt. The stubbornness that Mubarak exhibited today– that he exhibited last week, the week before, and back in November when he brazenly stole the country’s parliamentary elections– just makes the arrival of this change harder for everyone concerned. The desire for change has been bottled up for two decades now. Mubarak is trying to keep it bottled up for a further seven months. And almost inevitably, the more he tries to do this, and the more his allies in Washington and Tel Aviv encourage and enable him to do so, the bigger will be the explosion when it occurs. He and his enablers are acting in an extremely reckless fashion.
* * *
So many aspects of his speech, as I listened to it today, enraged and disappointed me. One that angered me a lot was the patronizing, paternalistic way he referred to those courageous men and women of all ages who have take their stand for democracy in the public square: Referring to them repeatedly as “youth”, he claimed to be like their “father”– and in true paternalistic fashion therefore to know what was best for them.
I think this discourse of the Egyptian revolution as having been “spearheaded by the youth” has been a misleading one from the outset. Okay, maybe people under 35 like Asmaa Mahfouz or Wael Ghonim initiated it in the first instance. But I wouldn’t exactly refer to either of them as “youth.” Asmaa is, I believe 26, and Wael 30 years old. Wael has two children. When I was Asmaa’s age, I had two children, too. Only under a particular (gerontocratic) view of the world would people in this age-range still be described as “youth”… And then, once the demonstrations in Tahrir Square started becoming large and serious, from January 25 on, the faces of the people there included many who looked to be in their 40s, 50s, 60s, or 70s.
So enough with being patronizing, already!
(I think many western commentators have bought too much into this discourse of the revolution being a “youth” phenomenon, too. Perhaps this was because of the association of “youth” with the tools of Web 2.0 organizing, and a fond illusion on the part of some Americans that it was really only these made-in-America tools of social organizing like Facebook and Twitter that allowed this upheaval to get off the ground at all. Guess what. The very solid, real-world logistics of organizing food deliveries, toilet facilities, news-runners, and first-aid stations have been even more important. Remember that even when Mubarak’s minsters cut off all the country’s internet connections for that couple of days, the organizing and the protests went right ahead.)
* * *
One of the notable things about this revolution is the degree to which it has already– even before it has attained the success that it seems so clearly headed for– reduced Israel’s importance in the region to something much closer to its appropriate size.
Israel, remember, has a population of about 7.5 million people (only 6 million of them Jewish), which is less than 10% of Egypt’s population. So the idea that the claimed security or other “needs” of Israel’s citizens should necessarily and in all cases trump the security and other needs of Egyptians is a crazy and racist one from the outset. Deal with it, Israelis: What is happening in Egypt today is far, far bigger than any of your paltry concerns. And if a new Egyptian government decides it wants to take up the issue of the protection of Muslim and Christian holy places in Jerusalem; or that it wants to take seriously the need to combat and reverse Israel’s many illegal settlement projects in East Jerusalem and the rest of the occupied territories; or Israel’s continuing punitive siege of Gaza; or Israel’s continuing violations of Lebanese airspace– then why should anyone in the world feel they need to try to protect Israel from a determined Egyptian diplomatic campaign to end these continuing violations of international law?
The now-inevitable collapse of the Mubarak-Suleiman regime in Egypt will have other, more far-reaching consequences for U.S. power in the region, and in the world, too. I am not talking about an Egypt that is hostile to Washington: Indeed, I sincerely hope that that does not come about. What I am talking about is an Egyptian government that will serve its own people’s interests first, and therefore will not feel any “need” to keep itself in power by allying itself closely with the U.S. military-industrial project in the region and the world… An Egypt in which the armed forces are returned to a reasonable size, both numerically and politically; in which the generals and retired generals no longer control huge swathes of the economy; and in which there is no longer a whole, powerful class of people like this whose power rests almost wholly on retaining their access to the teat of American military aid and therefore their integration into American military planning.
The Middle East (“Centcom”) has been the major overseas project for the U.S. military-industrial complex since the end of the Cold War; and within the Centcom area, for various reasons Egypt– or rather, the Egyptian military and “security” forces– have played a pivotal role. It is this relationship that Frank Wisner, Bob Gates, and other key members of the U.S. political elite are so eager to protect.
But the whole of Washington’s Middle Eastern power-projection project has become a deep financial sinkhole over the past 10 years. It is financially unsustainable over the three- or seven-year term, under any circumstances. There is no ‘victory” in Iraq, no “victory” in Afghanistan, and not even any longterm U.S. ability to maintain its present military domination of the Gulf region… Thus, as the Pentagon’s ability to continue projecting its power into the region will be retracting over the years ahead, so too will its need to rely on Egypt as a launching pad, and therefore the U.S. taxpayer’s willingness (let alone her ability) to continue shoveling money into Egypt’s military-security complex.
* * *
As we saw all too painfully tonight, the forces of Egypt’s democratic revolution cannot yet expect an easy or straight path to victory. The casualty list has already grown achingly high. (200 dead over the past three weeks? 300? The memorials are proliferating… And nearly every one of these men and women was struck down by U.S.-supplied bullets, or beaten to death by members of the U.S.-supported “security forces.”) But the Egyptian revolutionaries are steadfast. They have shown an impressive ability to organize, and to refine and develop their organization to meet changing needs. They are gaining momentum among previously undecided segments of the public. And many of their leaders seem to have reached the (very realistic) judgment that there is no simple turning back for them now. The fear they express is that if they bow down now, then the forces of counter-revolution will come after them all, and their children and grandchildren after them.
Ah, I wish I were in Cairo tonight. But there is important work to do here in the United States, too. Long live the equality of all human persons. Long live the rule of law– domestically and in the international arena. Long live an end to hypocrisy. Long live this wonderful Egyptian revolution.

MBs show their impressive communications skills

Well, it’s two for two for the Muslim brotherhood in the NYT and WaPo today. On the op-ed page of the WaPo, we have Abdel Moneim Abou el-Fotouh, arguing why Democracy supporters should not fear the Muslim Brotherhood, and on the op-ed page of the NYT we have Essam al-Errian explaining What the Muslim Brothers Want.
Their messages are very similar to that of the Errian (Erian) articles on the MB website that I referred to here, yesterday.
Aboul-Futouh today:

    We are mindful, however, as a nonviolent Islamic movement subjected to six decades of repression, that patent falsehoods, fear mongering and propaganda have been concocted against us in Mubarak’s palaces the past 30 years and by some of his patrons in Washington. Lest partisan interests in the United States succeed in aborting Egypt’s popular revolution, we are compelled to unequivocally deny any attempt to usurp the will of the people. Nor do we plan to surreptitiously dominate a post-Mubarak government. The Brotherhood has already decided not to field a candidate for president in any forthcoming elections. We want to set the record straight so that any Middle East policy decisions made in Washington are based on facts and not the shameful – and racist – agendas of Islamophobes.
    Contrary to fear-mongering reports, the West and the Muslim Brotherhood are not enemies. It is a false dichotomy to posit, as some alarmists are suggesting, that Egypt’s choices are either the status quo of the Mubarak regime or a takeover by “Islamic extremists.” First, one must make a distinction between the ideological and political differences that the Brotherhood may have with the United States. For Muslims, ideological differences with others are taught not to be the root cause of violence and bloodshed because a human being’s freedom to decide how to lead his or her personal life is an inviolable right found in basic Islamic tenets, as well as Western tradition. Political differences, however, can be a matter of existential threats and interests, and we have seen this play out, for example, in the way the Mubarak regime has violently responded to peaceful demonstrators.
    We fully understand that the United States has political interests in Egypt. But does the United States understand that the sovereign state of Egypt, with its 80 million people, has its own interests? Whatever the U.S. interests are in Egypt, they cannot trump Egyptian needs or subvert the will of the people without consequences. Such egotism is a recipe for disaster. With a little altruism, the United States should not hesitate to reassess its interests in the region, especially if it genuinely champions democracy and is sincere about achieving peace in the Middle East…
    The people of Egypt will decide their representatives, their form of democratic government and the role of Islam in their lives. For now, as we verge on national liberation from tyranny, Egyptians in Tahrir “Freedom” Square and all over the country are hoping Americans will stand by them in this crucial hour.

Errian today:

    In Egypt, religion continues to be an important part of our culture and heritage. Moving forward, we envision the establishment of a democratic, civil state that draws on universal measures of freedom and justice, which are central Islamic values. We embrace democracy not as a foreign concept that must be reconciled with tradition, but as a set of principles and objectives that are inherently compatible with and reinforce Islamic tenets.
    The tyranny of autocratic rule must give way to immediate reform: the demonstration of a serious commitment to change, the granting of freedoms to all and the transition toward democracy. The Muslim Brotherhood stands firmly behind the demands of the Egyptian people as a whole.
    Steady, gradual reform must begin now, and it must begin on the terms that have been called for by millions of Egyptians over the past weeks. Change does not happen overnight, but the call for change did — and it will lead us to a new beginning rooted in justice and progress.

These guys have an impressive degree of organization, an impressive degree of clarity (especially if you consider how chaotic and risky the situation is, in which they’re operating), an impressive understanding of the need for clear, dignified, and consistent communication to a wide variety of audiences, and an impressive ability to stay on message.
Maybe the Obama administration folks could go to them for some lessons in these matters?

Egypt: Regime’s slow crumble continues; MB leaders spell out their position

The demonstrations and anti-government protests continued and multiplied throughout many parts of Egypt today. No sign the opposition is backing down. Indeed, it is settling in for the long haul, and reports from around the country indicate that in several places the regime may be starting a slow crumble.
On January 27, I blogged that the decision the Muslim Brotherhood announced that day, that they would formally be joining the protest announced for January 28, “could very well mean the end of the Mubarak regime.”
It hasn’t happened yet, as we know. But the MB did bring to the protest movement a degree of discipline, organization, and nationwide reach that it had not had until that point.
As of today, I believe the two main scenarios are (1) a slower or faster victory for the pro-democracy movement, as the bastions of the old regime continue their present crumbling; or (2) a counter-stroke by the regime and its allies inside and outside the country that would most likely be very brutal and would leave Egypt in a mess for a very long time to come.
I’ve been trying to keep up with the actions and pronouncements of the MB. I just read this short account on the MB’s English website of the press conference they held earlier today.
They were positioning themselves as cautious (but generally negative) regarding the discussion with VP Suleiman that they– along with most of the other opposition groups– entered into last Sunday:

    During the conference the MB reiterated that they are not seeking power nor do they have any intentions of fielding any of the group’s members for presidency.
    According to the group the preliminary dialogue with the newly appointed Vice President Omar Suleiman was nothing more than the testing of waters in an attempt to see the regime’s real intentions for reform and constitutional amendments which would guarantee freedom and democracy for the people of Egypt.
    The MB asserts that the group’s major concern is the wellbeing of all Egyptians regardless of religion, political trend and sect. It relayed its disappointment of the talks stressing that the regime sidelined the key demands in order for peaceful transition; that being the immediate stepping down of Mubarak…

Their English website is not great. The Arabic one is much better. I wish I had time to translate more, for example, from this article that key MB intellectual Esam al-Erian (who was arrested on Jan.29 and released a few days later) published on it today. It is a succinct, eloquent, and straightforward presentation of their position.
He wrote:

    The Brotherhood has announced that they will not put forward a candidate for the next presidency and that they will be looking at the programs of the candidates to find the best among them. They will put forward candidates for parliament, on the basis of a desire to participate, not to gain a majority, and they will ally themselves with all the nationalist forces in order to bring about true stability built on a foundation of freedom, justice, human dignity, and social justice.

During the article, Erian repeats a number of times that the Brotherhood– despite withstanding terrible oppression at the hands of the regime, including the detention of more than 30,000 of their members during the Mubarak years– has remained committed to nonviolence and to seeking change through peaceful, constitution, and parliamentary channels.
He writes,

    If America is to restore its credibility in Egypt and the Arab world, it must respect the right of the Arab peoples to choose their rulers on the basis of democracy, and it should not rely on the power of the rulers to repress the peoples.
    If it wanted to guard its interests, particularly its strategic interests, then it must respond to the desire of the people to build a democratic order marked by transparency and accountability…
    America will lose its allies among the Arab rulers one after the other if it doesn’t change its policy and reconsider all its strategic alliances in the region. The wave of democratic change has arrived in the Arab region and the power of the winds of change and the people is endless. The false American attempts to do nation-building in Afghanistan and to build a democratic system in Iraq both failed. But the Egyptians have proved that they are able– without any help from America– to build a better future. And if God wills it they will build a truly democratic system in Egypt that will shine its light on the region.
    America is the richest and most powerful state on earth, and for long decades it has claimed to be the leader of the free world and has raised great slogans [on this matter.] So how should it act if it were to honor the right of the peoples to self-determination and to choose their own leaders, and the fundamentals of democracy; and if it were to preserve world peace and international cooperation in the fields of economy, information, and technology, so that it could become an example to humanity that would earn the friendship of the whole world…

Today’s Muslim Brotherhood is thus far from being the “scary, fundamentalist menace” that so many people in the U.S. fearfully portray it as being. I read Dr. Erian as calling us Americans back to our better selves and our better values.
The Obama administration has huge sway over the Egyptian military, which it has funded, trained, and supplied for 30 years now. Our government therefore bears considerable responsibility for the gross rights violations that the military in addition to the police, have been continuing to commit even this week… Even after Obama “asked them politely to stop doing it.”
Asking politely is not nearly enough. All aid to Egypt’s military and “security” bodies should be cut off until they puts in place clear and clearly enforced orders that their units will not engage in, and will not connive in, any actions that violate the rights of civilians.
The role of Egypt’s military is to be the shield of the people’s rights, not their violator. And its role as the people’s shield should not be subordinated to the agendas of any other nation. That has tragically been the case for far too long now. Let Egypt’s citizens work peaceably together to design the ground-rules of their own democracy. Why would anybody think they are “not yet” capable of doing that?

Changed travel plans

By the way, I know I’d blogged earlier that I would be in Cairo and Beirut around now. I’ve postponed those visits. My (somewhat childish, let’s face it) journalistic impulses urge me to go– at least to Cairo, right now! But I have a business to run here: some great book projects underway. Also, some good, important things happening in the family.
I shall be continuing to write about Egypt (and everything else) as I have time to… but from here in the U.S.
For the best on-the-ground reporting in English from Egypt, follow Issandr El-Amrani, or Jonathan Wright.

JWN’s 8th blogiversary

… is today.
Over the Christmas of 2002, my son Tarek said to me a number of times, “Mom, you really should start a blog.” I said, “A what?” (not surprisingly)… And then as he told me more about the concept, I became more and more intrigued.
Long story short, he helped set me up JWN… first on Blogger, then on MT (and I even have a plan to move over to WordPress sometime, not yet implemented.)
So here was my very first blog post, from February 6, 2003. In it, I gave my evaluation of the really terrible, mendacious and war-preparing presentation that Colin Powell had just made to the U.N. You remember, the one that included all the allegations about the “aluminum tubes” and the alleged presence of Al-Qaeda operatives in areas of Iraq under Saddam’s control…
Over the days that followed, I tried to do as much truth-squadding as I could regarding those completely unfounded allegations. (I also did a little at the Christian Science Monitor.) And over the six weeks that followed February 6, I did what i could to use my blog to warn against the many dangers that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would, in my analysis, almost certainly lead to.
On March 19, 2003, I blogged the way I’d learned about the start of the invasion by writing this post, which featured my 17-year-old daughter Lorna.
Lorna is now an accomplished and lovely young woman of 25 who’s deep into a doctoral program here in the U.S.
And what has happened to that whole generation of 17-year-old Iraqis meantime???
The anti-war movement failed to halt the onrush of that war. We failed to halt Israel’s assaults against Lebanon in 2006, and against Gaza in 2008.
We failed to halt the U.S. escalation in Iraq in 2006, and in Afghanistan last year.
Now, however, I submit, the dysfunctional (or even, clearly counter-productive) nature of all those attempts by the U.S and Israel to solve their problems by the application of massive amounts of military violence has become clearer than ever. Military violence is not a sustainable or even, at any level, a logical path to greater peace and human wellbeing.
And I think more and more Americans are understanding that now?
… Anyway, it’s been a huge eight years in world politics, in my engagement with world politics, and in my life as a blogger.
If you want to see the extent (and the rough balance) of the things I’ve been blogging about, go to the blog’s front page, if you’re not there already, and scroll down the left sidebar till you come to the “Topical Index”. When the categories have become too big, I have tried to break them down, by calendar year or even (for Iraq for a whole period there) by quarter. I see the biggest category is “Palestine 2009” with 165 posts tagged there.
Over this period, I have also built up some great relationships with other bloggers. And even last year– acting partly on another suggestion that Tarek had made a while earlier– I got the idea of founding Just World Books as a way to bring the work of these bloggers in a better way to a broader reading public.
I love being a book publisher! But it’s been a lot of work, founding a company– becoming a businesswoman, for goodness’ sake!– learning all those new skills that I never knew I’d ever have any need of! Then, over Christmas (again), I decided it was time to restore a bit of work/blog balance to my days; and that I needed to reconnect with my voice as a blogger.
Just in time, eh, before this amazing new wave of uprisings started busting out all over the Middle East!
I should note that another of the pleasures of blogging has been to host the forum that the commenters here all contribute to. Having this conversation across national barriers, time-zones, and worldviews has really been amazing. Back when I started doing it in 2003, it felt even more amazing. I don’t want to lose that spirit of wonder and appreciation about this aspect of the blog.
… Where will we all be in another eight years, I wonder?

Can Omar Suleiman be Egypt’s De Klerk?

… As a Quaker, I have to believe in the possibility that any person on God’s earth is capable of becoming a better person and acting in a more generous and wise manner than hitherto.
In his speech on Tuesday, Hosni Mubarak announced that his role model in life was Ceausescu, not De Klerk.
Since then, his hastily-appointed vice-president, Omar Suleiman, has been diplomatically nudging the old(er) guy aside and seizing the reins of effective power. Many of which now lie in the need to negotiate a completely new social/political compact with the many pro-democracy forces in Egypt.
He made a start today. This could be a new chapter in the “divide and rule” strategy he has pursued toward Egypt’s oppositionists throughout his many years of the country’s extremely rights-abusing General Intelligence Service.
Or, it could be the start of a process that will lead Egypt much closer to the rights-respecting order that its 85 million people so desperately need.
(When De Klerk started out talking to Nelson Mandela in 1990, he didn’t know which way that was leading, either, I think. Took them four more years to reach the pivotal, free and fair, elections that changed South Africa forever.)
At this point, I’m not analytically “calling” the way that Suleiman’s outreach is heading. Firstly, it’s far too early to tell. Secondly, I’m just off to Quaker meeting. So holding my Egyptian friends– and all of Egypt’s people– quietly in God’s light for an hour seems like a really good thing to do.