By Patricia H. Kushlis
It always amazes me how the pundits – and others – are so willing to extend advice albeit often unsolicited when an administration is faced with a foreign crisis. The most egregious proffered that I’ve recently encountered was by Elliott Abrams who devoted an entire Washington Post commentary on Saturday to describe how the Bush administration had it right in terms of the necessity to send in the troops, er, I mean press hard for democratizing the Middle East and the Obama administration has been too soft on dictators including, of course, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt.
Now the fact that Abrams and company stiffed the AK-led government (the mildly Islamist party still in power in Turkey) when in 2003 it upheld its democratic and constitutional right to hold a parliamentary vote and based on that vote told the Bush administration that the US could not use the country as a land invasion route into Iraq is obviously, for Abrams, beside the point.
Selective amnesia
Strange how some people practice such selective amnesia when it’s in their interest. I didn’t see the Bush administration jumping up and down in support of Condi Rice’s poorly received speech in Egypt in 2005 (or Bush’s own vain calls for democratization at the time) in which she told Mubarak he needed to democratize the country or there would be big domestic trouble ahead. You do have to wonder who was in charge of the White House during the Bush II era. The great decider – or someone else.
Sunday on CNN Fareed Zakaria began GPS with his own assessment and roadmap for Egypt’s future. This sounded strikingly like that of Mohamed ElBaradei’s who, surprise, surprise, Zakaria had just finished interviewing before talking to a panel of American experts on Egypt and/or the Middle East. The latter: All white, all male and all with prestigious East Coast affiliations including two from the Council on Foreign Relations. In my view, this was CFR overkill– but given the choices, I’d rather hear what they had to say than folk from the right wing “think” tanks.
Mubarak's time over?
Zakaria’s panelists did have different slants if not opinions: although – if my memory serves me – all agreed that Mubarak needed to absent himself quickly from the scene. The major question seemed to be whether the Obama administration should be expressing this sentiment in public or private.
Presumably the deciding factor in a Mubarak “early” retirement will depend upon Egypt’s generals. You’d think he’d be willing to move on - he is 82 going on 83 and thirty years in one job for anyone is more than enough. Maybe the Saudis could find an empty palace in Jeddah or Riyadh for him and his entourage. Or even build one. They certainly don’t need USAID funds for the project.
Meanwhile, Global Post has reported that Mubarak's son Gamal, his mother Suzanne and sister are in London - sighted near their home in the posh section of Knightsbridge So much, apparently, for the heir apparent.
Obama's weekend phone calls
Moreover, in weekend telephone calls to Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and British Prime Minister Cameron, as reported by the LA Times and the Washington Post (this information had yet to show up on the White House website as of 11 pm EST Sunday), Obama called for the first time for an “orderly transition” to a more representative government with or without Mubarak’s presence.
Furthermore, reading between the lines of a telephone conversation (telcon in State Department lingo) between Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his Egyptian counterpart, Mullen “expressed his appreciation for the continued professionalism of the Egyptian military . . .and both individuals “reaffirmed their desire to see the partnership between our two militaries continue” suggests that the US would look askance if the Egyptian military decides to play shoot-em up in Cairo’s Tahrir Square against unarmed demonstrators.
In essence, the roadmap outlined by Zakaria and ElBaradei that would establish a unity government to prepare for elections in September sounds in line with the Obama administration’s current thinking, at least as of this hour as the demonstrations continue, the Egyptian air force practiced close ground intimidation with F-16s and the army has introduced M1A1 Abrams tanks on the scene.
Better that the military devotes its efforts to chasing looters and rounding up escaped criminals than attempting to defend against what seems to me to be a lost cause. But then, maybe they’ve calculated that unlike in Tunis but like in Tehran two years ago a little hardball and brutal repression will put the demonstrations to rest. Yet, just as Egypt is not Tunis, it is not Tehran either.
Each country and each circumstance is different.
Like in Tunisia but unlike in Iran in 2009, Egypt's religious element has taken a back seat. The religious leadership at Al Azhar University seems to be out of the picture or at least keeping its mouth shut in public and the Muslim Brotherhood was caught napping.
The Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s Islamist movement, did not begin the demonstrations but now supports them and by Friday had sent its members into the streets and squares to join in. The demonstrations that began last Tuesday were started by a youth group called April 6 that includes many young well-educated Egyptians.
April 6: The group that made the revolt
April 6 was organized as a Facebook group in 2008 in support of workers in the northern city of Mahalla and has successfully organized pro-democracy rallies and been more willing to “risk arrests and call for public protests” according to the BBC than others. So the Mubarak government’s decision to shut down the Internet was aimed squarely at them. But it was too late, the organizing had been done and by Friday, the Brotherhood had decided to join – enlarging the ranks by sending its own members into the fray.
April 6 had welcomed El Baradei when he returned to Egypt in February 2010 and like other opposition groups – including the Brotherhood – supports his leadership of a transition government that would lead to free and fair elections in September. But April 6 is secularist, democratic and moderate and is not interested in a radical or a religious state.
So Egypt’s future still hangs in the balance but the scales are tipping.
Will the generals side with the Mubarak and his cronies, will they shift allegiances or will the military itself split ranks with, perhaps, the Air Force remaining loyal to Mubarak, a former Air Force officer, and the Army seeing things differently?
The Obama administration has made its closely calibrated call, there is a news report in Al-masry Al-youm, Egypt’s most influential newspaper that Egypt’s Minister Defense and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces – presumably Mullins counterpart in the telephone call - Mohamed Tantawi joined protestors in Tahrir Square on Sunday. The opposition is discussing the contours of an interim government and April 6 is calling for a nationwide strike on Tuesday just in case.
Will Egypt go the way of Tunis or Tehran? Events move quickly in revolutions. My bet is on Tunis but in a far more orderly fashion.