Weekend Sober Thread: Shit's Gettin' Real in Egypt

From: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.iranchamber.com/history/islamic_revolution/islamic_revolution.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.iranchamber.com/history/isla ... lution.php</a>

So February 11th was the magic moment, guess history does (kinda) repeat itself.

 

I might be missing someone but I think ALL American tv "journalists" are actors nowadays. They may have started out as something else but they've been turned into actors over time.

I'm amazed at how this whole thing has turned out. Hoping that the opposing sides can figure out a way to install a new government of the people without (too much) bloodshed.

 

At least 300 families disagree with that part of the statement.

That being said, I'd like to reiterate something that is truly Earth-shattering that was pointed out above you:

18 days
+ one 30-year dictatorship
+ Modern Arab nation
+ protests with non-violet intentions

= government overthrow

Ho. Ly. Shit.

 

Obama was just on saying that Hosni Mubarak only has two more chances to stand down, and then we're going really get serious about this democracy thing.

 

<a class="postlink" href="http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/02/07/hey_wsj_you_seriously_think_that_saudi_arabia_fears_islamic_extremism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... _extremism</a>

The important bit:

 

Well, they happen to share a border and a peace treaty with a small, democratic country that has the strongest, most diverse economy in the region, maybe they can learn a thing or two from them.

 

Congrats Egypt, Mubarak has stepped down, and the military has taken control until an acceptable government can be formed. Who wants to bet that an acceptable government will never be formed, and the military will rule Egypt for the foreseeable future? $20 right here.

 

Honestly, I think the military will probably go the way of Turkey. The Egyptian military is regarded as incredibly professional overall and, while this is an ideal time for a power grab, I just don't see it. As long as the generals get to keep their power/wealth they have no real reason to want to run the country. Being in charge and dealing with all the bullshit seems like a much bigger headache than it's worth. But I guess we'll all know in 60 days or so, since that's when the election should be held under the current constitution (if I remember correctly).

 

I recall hearing that Egypt has compulsory military service. If that's true, the chance for a new military regime is slight. The revolutionaries would be the families of the military.

 

Also, surprising lack of "Let my people go" references.

 

I doubt it. A US-obedient lackey being replaced by a military coup that refuses to work with the US? I imagine even Obama would have more than vague words on that topic. They can't afford to lose our economic aid along with the 1,000 Abrams tanks that make up the backbone of their ground military.

 

Who's next?

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/12/yemen.protests/index.html?hpt=T2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/ ... tml?hpt=T2</a>

 

Congratulations Masr. There's a lot to say about this, but right now all I have to say is, my god, you did it.

 

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/algerians-defy-ban-to-stage-protest-15081948.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 81948.html</a>

Is Algeria the next domino?

 

Anyone have a transcript or clip of the military's communication #4? AJE blog just gives a synopsis, but they say the military will hand over power to an elected civilian government and respect all international treaties.

Doesn't mean that a civilian government wouldn't later on repeal the treaty, but it's a positive sign.

 

So now that Mubarak is gone, is it appropriate that we can do a post-mortem on the first phase? Specifically, how y'all (the ones more educated than myself on this subject) think the US handled/reacted? What does this new phase in egypt mean for their relations with the US? Do you think the US will be looked upon un-favorably by the protesters/revolutionaries (can I call them that? I really want to call them that?) for their handling of the first phase? What do you think the US should do/not do during what-happens-next?

Basically, what does this mean for all of us?

 

AJE blog coverage of Algeria.

<a class="postlink" href="http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2011/02/12/live-blog-feb-12-eye-algeria" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/ ... ye-algeria</a>

It would be interesting to see if Tunisia or Egypt go beyond lending moral support in other revolutions, and actually take an active role.

 

Not sure if they turned the internet back on, but I'm sure that'd help clear the streets a little bit. First thing the military needs to do. "Facebook is back on, go home. THEN go to work."

 

A lot of foreign policy analysts have pointed out at that, regardless of who came out on top in this or who we supported, it was a lose-lose situation for the United States. In the short term, I would agree with that assessment. We either continued to prop up a dictator and be seen as an unfavorable puppetmaster by Egypt's people, or we appear flighty, "abandon" Mubarak and support a population that seems not to give a damn one way or the other if we approve of their revolution. And that's a core issue. You're asking if the population will look upon us unfavorably because of how we handled the protests, but the fact is, they already looked upon us unfavorably. We're seen as a direct cause of their woes, so anything Obama says about freedom, democracy and legitimate government now looks incredibly cheap when held up against the realities of the last thirty years.

If Egypt gets its civil democracy, we will no longer be the hand-holding chums we once were. Associates, yes, but in the name of money and not necessarily common political interest. I believe we've earned that loss of status. We brought this on ourselves by applying short-term, quick-fix solutions (the support of authoritarian rule) to long-term regional problems (a lack of political stability). In that way, Egypt is an important lesson for us. It puts our hubris in check and forces us to rethink one of our core foreign policy guidelines for the last few decades: the realpolitik statute that "what works is what's right".

This is clearly no longer the case, and pragmatism dictates that we recognize this, especially since these protests are spreading to other countries. Democracy in the Middle East could make things infinitely more complicated for us. We may lose some allies. We may not be able to set terms and broker deals as easily as we once did while men like Mubarak were in power. At the same time, that kind of wheeling and dealing with dictators sours global opinion of the U.S. and, as I've said before, breeds extremism and tacit support for extremism.

In the end, it's a trade-off. We'll lose the influence we once enjoyed in the Middle East. However, with Arab states existing under self-determined governments, it becomes much more difficult for extremists to justify violent action against us, and much harder for Arabs to permit them to do so, passively or otherwise. At that point, terrorists cease to be freedom fighters in the eyes of oppressed Arabs, and become bad for business. And doing business is what this is all about.

 

I once attended a speech by some guy who used to write for the New York times (I've forgotten his name since). Dude was an absolute twat. His entire speech was about the necessity of the US using realpolitik to deal with international problems. At the end, I stood up and asked if maybe our hypocritical support for dictators would harm us in the long run. His answer boiled down to: "No, and fuck you're stupid for thinking that."

I feel a bit vindicated.