Everyone knows that an Egyptian prison can be bad for your health and your toenails, they stuff ballot boxes, suppress opposition etc, so when a lot of people come onto the streets declaring that the ruler should step down (29 years is enough for anyone, surely), one is sympathetic.
When their demonstrations are mainly peaceful (apart from a few clashes with the pretty nasty police force), one is more sympathetic still.
And when the government sends thugs out to attack them, the sympathometer is off the scale. I must confess I thought the anti-Mubarak people were all going to be horribly beaten at best on Wednesday night, as stone-throwing pro-Mubarak crowds pushed them back into the square. But they stood firm, fought back and were well in control today, despite deaths from what may have been sniper fire.
Naturally I'm on 'their' side. But who are 'they' ? They don't like Mubarak, that's for sure - but is that enough policy to run a country on ?
Not all the pro-Mubarak people were thugs, and I saw some being interviewed just outside the square. They looked prosperous middle class, and made some reasonable points. One eloquent guy asked what had happened to Iraq when Saddam went? He didn't want to see that in Cairo (and there has been looting. And didn't a lot of prisoners break out of jail?). Another reckoned that if Mubarak stepped down there would be anarchy.
I'd been impressed with the way the demonstrators had fought back - but according to one report many of the fighters were Muslim Brotherhood chaps doing jihad. I certainly saw the odd chap in robes chucking rocks with the rest.
And while the way ordinary people set up local vigilante groups to defend their neigbourhoods against looting was admirable, some of those same people were quick to believe government warnings of 'foreign agents' and to start their search for the 'Israelis' who are behind all the unrest (IMHO Israel were probably quite happy with Mubarak, who preferred anti-Israel propaganda to anti-Israel action). There are some eight million Egyptian Coptic Christians, members of one of the oldest churches in the world, who have kept the faith for 1400 years as second-class citizens in a Muslim country, and who have been discriminated against, as well as coming under murderous attack by Islamist extremists. Iraq*, where ancient Christian communities have been slaughtered or driven out, is a terrible warning of what could happen to them.
Over on the Left blogs and the Guardian op-eds, some idiots see their favourite flavour of socialist revolution as imminent, some idiots see Cairo as a useful exemplar for London, more see the bad guys seemingly losing - and cheer that process without too much thought as to what comes next. I worry that might be all too close to my position.
So I'm generally supportive but with no illusions. A corrupt quasi-dictatorship with a democratic front-end, a strong Islamist presence, and a young, over-educated and under-employed demographic profile offers plenty of ways for a transfer of power to go wrong.
* re Iraq - I supported the overthrow of Saddam, but no one can say the implementation's been anything but poor - with dreadful results especially for minorities like Christians. In my defence I'd say that
a) everybody who knew anything about the region and ever made the pages of the Guardian predicted that Iraq would be America's Vietnam, Baghdad their Stalingrad. And that all over the Middle East the "Arab Street" would rise, threatening regimes from Cairo to Casablanca.
What nobody, as far as I can recall (and I was keeping my ears open), said in 2003 was :
"If you overthrow Saddam, the Sunnis will kill all the Shias - and vice-versa"
b) one unknown blogger did seem to grasp the potential for disorder, writing in his third-ever blog post, back in 2003 :
"... will survival be the biggest worry for most Iraqis ? The US and Brits are going to have to turn themselves into aid workers and/or policemen with some speed. When a strong police state collapses, anarchy often follows ... Night is falling in Baghdad. Let's hope they don't wake up to a looted and burning city tomorrow. I'm very pleased - but it seems to me that for the Coalition the hard work has only just begun."
Trimmed
11 hours ago
26 comments:
Iran taught me never to trust a revolutionary who spoke English; they will tend to be pro-Western. When the masses poured into the streets — and that hasn’t happened in Egypt yet — they were Khomeini supporters who spoke not a word of English. The media kept interviewing their English-speaking sources and the CIA kept up daily liaison meetings with SAVAK — until the day they all grabbed a plane and met up with their money in Europe and the United States. The liberals, those who weren’t executed, also wound up in the United States, teaching at Harvard or driving cabs.
Let’s be very careful about the description of this rising. The Western human rights groups will do what they can to emphasize its importance, and to build up their contacts with what they will claim are the real leaders of the revolution. The only language these groups share with the identified leaders is English, and the funding for these groups depends on producing these people. And these people really want to turn Egypt into Hampstead. The one thing I can guarantee is that is not what is going on.
The demonstrations open the door for the Muslim Brotherhood, which is stronger than others may believe. They might keep the demonstrations going after Hosni leaves, and radicalize the streets to force regime change. It could also be the Muslim Brotherhood organizing quietly. Whoever it is, they are lying low, trying to make themselves look weaker than they are — while letting the liberals undermine the regime, generate anti-Mubarak feeling in the West, and pave the way for whatever it is they are planning.
John Mauldin
Couple of points: 1) Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria are all PRODUCTS of socialist revolutions. When they got independence, they did things by the Arab socialist playbook: they massacred all their "traitors", they expelled all the foreigners and Jews, they confiscated all their property and nationalised it. Result? 50 years of incompetence, under-development and corruption.
2) Mubarak's thugs have a legitimate reason to want the regime to continue. When Hamas (a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood) took over in Gaza, the first thing they did was to massacre all the Fatah members. Mubarak's family and the regime elite know they'll be able to escape; the rank and file know their lives are on the line.
To continue my last point: in the 60s radical chic revolutionaries in the West (France especially) looked towards Algeria and Tunisia especially as heroic examples to be followed - in the same light as they regarded Cuba. Up until two weeks ago, the ruling parties of Algeria, Tunisia and Egypt were all still members of the same Socialist International as our own dear Labour Party - they have all been discreetly expelled in the last few days.
""If you overthrow Saddam, the Sunnis will kill all the Shias - and vice-versa" "
Shows that we didn't know much about Islam - most of us still don't
There are some eight million Egyptian Coptic Christians in Iraq
No, there aren't. ;-)
Laban- I wouldn't worry unduly about your take on Egypt being close to that found on the leftie blogs; it simply cannot be denied that Mubarak, rather like the Shah,or Karzai, is a nasty piece of work who is supposedly our 'ally'.
What is startling is the fact that, despite the bother in Tunisia last month,neither the US or Israel really saw this coming. As late as 25 January, the Knesset was being told by a Mossad big cheese that “there is no concern at the moment about the stability of the Egyptian government.” The septics also appear to be playing catch-up; hence the dispatch, on 31 January, of ex-Ambassador and top spook Frank Wisner Jr. Only then did the US elite seem to countenance the possibility that Mubarak is a busted flush, and that they needed someone out there to help facilitate Plan B, namely, an 'orderly transition'. 'Plan B' however could be a pretty tall order, even for someone as well versed in the black arts of covert ops as Wisner fils.
These people have zero tradition of individual freedom.
The history, the religion, the culture, the lack of resources, the exploding population are all against it.
When a pair of clowns like Tony Benn and Daniel Hannhan are rooting for "democracy" it really says it all.
There was a westernised girl there interviewed who said that she was so desperate to get rid of the regime she would abide by the popular will even if it meant Sharia law - she'll end up in a burkha
A woman commented that under M. they didn't need to lock their doors, and there was nobody scaring the kids - so he must have been doing something right
Some years ago I met an Iranian woman about 70. It was very sad, she and her family had had a good life-style. The husband was quite well up in the railways, she showed me photos of herself about age 35 - swim-suits, knee length dresses, happy family group
The Iranian Revolution put her in Islamic dress(chador?) and effectively imposed house arrest - all the good times were gone.
True the lower elements of society had a bad time under the Shah, but did they have any more fun under the Khomemi regime? Wouldn't have thought so - religious police, all sorts of restrictions; population doubled apparently whilst the country's income remained static, so povery must have increased markedly.
Can we really commend our "democracy" which as is all too obvious is no democracy at all? We have a few baubles, not the substance. We have been brought to our knees, to the near prospect of national disappearance. In these circumstances it is perhaps natural to think back to strong rulers, Cromwell, Henry V.
I still remember the SWP posters in 1979:
"Suport the Iranian Revolution"
How did that work out for ya?
"dr cromarty said...
I still remember the SWP posters in 1979:
"Suport the Iranian Revolution"
How did that work out for ya?"
Ended on the gallows for Iranian communists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_executions_of_Iranian_political_prisoners
Lefties never learn
I worry that might be all too close to my position.
It does seem close doesn't it?
In truth I am actually a little surprised at you. The Guardianista in you is still strong.
What nobody, as far as I can recall (and I was keeping my ears open), said in 2003 was :
"If you overthrow Saddam, the Sunnis will kill all the Shias - and vice-versa"
Yeah, although there was that interesting incident when a couple of SAS troopers dressed as Arabs were arrested by the Iraqi police and were found to have a car full of explosives. It didn't end up in court, because if you remember, the Army sent a Convoy of Warrior IFVs to smash down the walls, storm the police station and rescue them.
What was going on there you might ask?
Well,it would kind of fit with an overall plan of stirring up ethnic tensions and religious rivalries with a view to balkanizing the region.
But hey, that's a crazy theory.
Or is it...
A crazy conspiracy theory - even.
Speaking as a little englander, when these tumultuous events happen far away in JohnnyForeignerland, and in a JohnnyForeignerland completely unconnected in every way with our own dear little island, I feel that all one should say in such circumstances is "pass the popcorn".
However, if I were running an Empire, I wouldn't run it like this.
Here's how I would see it:
First of all, who is to blame for this mess? That'd be Goldman Sachs and friends:
http://www.truth-out.org/the-egyptian-tinderbox-how-banks-and-investors-are-starving-third-world67424
Secondly what is in our best interests?
This is simple. As things stand, we are tied to the USA, which in turn is tied to Israel. Anything that is an existential problem for Israel will ultimately be a problem for us. I don't like it. But that's the way it is.
As FDR said of Somoza, "he may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he's our son-of-a-bitch. And that is how we should look at Mubarak.
Nearly all revolutions start with the nice guys and end with the not so nice guys. The Muslim Brotherhood may be good for Egyptians, but they won't be good for Israel - which means its gonna be a problem for us.
And what matters, is us. Not them. This is one of the reasons why our Empire went down the pan in the first place: universalist idiocy. And it looks like it may bring down the Yank Empire of which we are a constituent part.
I can't believe I would link to Harry's Place but read this:http://hurryupharry.org/2011/02/05/egyptian-attitudes-to-israel/
I actually think this could go all the way from The War on Terrrrrr to Clash of Civilizations.
When it all kicks off, which I am sure as eggs is eggs it will, our Islamic friends in Bradford, Birmingham and the East End won't like it. They won't like it at all Mr Mainwaring.
This will place enormous strains on our multicultiwonderland.
No doubt, there are many here among us who quite understandably don't like the multicultiwonderland, and like rapture bunnies they can't wait to bring on the end times.
But you too Laban? No. You actually believe in Unicorns and Rainbows and that the overthrow of Mubarak will result in all the children of the world holding hands and singing Kumbayah.
Dontcha? You're a True Believer.
Come that wonderful day, we'll all sing along with the Goldman Sachs choir:
Feed the world
Let them know its Christmas time
Feed the world
Let them know its Christmas time...
;)
Mark
What is startling is the fact that, despite the bother in Tunisia last month,neither the US or Israel really saw this coming.
Have you seen this wikileak:
http://wikileaks.ca/cable/2008/12/08CAIRO2572.html
Or this in the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/8289686/Egypt-protests-Americas-secret-backing-for-rebel-leaders-behind-uprising.html
It seems the US Government are not only true believers, but facilitators as well.
Here we have the fundamental lunacy of the people who run the USA exposed. The US Government also believe in Unicorns and Rainbows and that the overthrow of Mubarak will result in all the children of the world holding hands and singing Kumbayah.
I always thought that bombing Afghans for wimmins rights was a smokescreen to hide the real intentions. But it seems the US Govt are actually true believers.
Here is an interesting blog post regarding a wikileak from the US Embassy in Paris about influencing the French Govt to be more multiculti:
http://curmudgeonjoy.blogspot.com/2011/01/other-one.html
It seems the idea that propels the US Govt these days is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnational_progressivism
Here is a great post on the Egyptian Revolution from someone with his feet more firmly planted on the ground, Mencius Moldbug:
Egypt: US foreign policy at the nadir
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7958140996781104565&postID=4773934793566509490
If you have the time, read the comments here from 'Albert' who claims to work for the US State Dept:http://mangans.blogspot.com/2011/02/muslims-in-europe.html#comments
Kleine Englander - if the Global Zionist Conspiracy is so clever and so powerful, how is it that UK Muslims will within a few years have an effective veto power on UK foreign policy, and that world power is moving at some speed towards those parts of the world where said conspirators are pretty-much non-existent? If it is a conspiracy, they're making a pretty poor fist of it.
Never underestimate the power of cock-up.
As for US 'secret backing', I imagine they're just being sensible and cultivating both sides to hedge their bets - what most govts would do. IMHO, as I wrote, Israel would be happy if Mubarak founded a Syrian-style dynasty.
Such drolleries!
Just on a point of logic little Englander - and I share your general nausea. You said we should not give a shit about foreigners but go all Bismarkian or Metterelinkin or whoever it was. But you pointed out that we are 'tied to' the USA and they were 'tied to' (nice phrase) Israel. So we're apparently stuck with it. Such a power this small contry in the middle east has to have us all in thrall. Darfurians don't get a look in - the ones who are still alive. What have they actually done for us except kill our troops and blow up hotels? Have you forgotton? No, I dont hate Jews or Yanks so shut the fuck up you feel like starting. If Israel were over-run I would not be celebrating. I'm not driven by hate.
'As for US 'secret backing', I imagine they're just being sensible and cultivating both sides to hedge their bets.'
Laban- that seems all the more likely in the light of this current development- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12374753
Kleine Englander-Mubarak has been pretty ill for several years and it isn't surprising that the current Ambassador has had past links with the 'April 6 democracy movement'. However in the last week the probability of a chaotic transition has risen whilst that of an 'orderly transition' (ie one not too unfavourable to US interests)has fallen. Hence the muted pro- Mubarak noises now issuing from Wisner's lips.
@" Sgt Troy 11th Dragoons said...
"dr cromarty said...
I still remember the SWP posters in 1979:
"Suport the Iranian Revolution"
How did that work out for ya?"
Ended on the gallows for Iranian communists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_executions_of_Iranian_political_prisoners
Lefties never learn
9:40 AM"
Do you think they died still being stupid? Or they realised (too late) their mistake?
Laban, did I say Global Zionist Conspiracy?
Er...no. I didn't did I.
Maybe your just having a larf - in which case, fair enough.
However, if you weren't, this is exactly why I don't like Harry's Place. Its the sort of place where if you say Bernie Maddoff was a crook, it can only mean one thing.
It would be a shame if this blog went the same way.
:)
--------------
Anon
Such a power this small contry in the middle east has to have us all in thrall.
Have you not heard of a book called The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, published in late August 2007. It was a New York Times Best Seller?
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Israel_Lobby_and_U.S._Foreign_Policy
I've got a copy. Because I found the whole 9/11, invasion of Iraq thing kind of interesting.
Is that wrong?
If it is, I find that very worrying. It brings to mind something Steve Sailer wrote: If you want an image of the future, think of a boot, stamping on the human mind - forever
So, there you have a very strong link between Israel and the USA.
You may have noticed that although the USA attacked on 9/11, British forces served in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I understand the Harold Wilson had to work at it to keep British troops out of Vietnam.
Where the yanks go, we tend to go.
Darfurians don't get a look in - the ones who are still alive.
Huh?
What have they actually done for us except kill our troops and blow up hotels? Have you forgotton?
What are you on about? The King David Hotel, or some Hotel the Darfurians have blown up that I don't know about?
No, I dont hate Jews or Yanks so shut the fuck up you feel like starting. If Israel were over-run I would not be celebrating. I'm not driven by hate.
Thank you for sharing that although I am not sure what you are getting at.
I don't wish to sound like I'm being sarcastic but if you were implying that I am driven by hate, or I would celebrate if Israel were over-run, then might I suggest you read what I've actually written, and don't add anything to it, or take anything away, or think about reading between the lines or subtexts or anything else that isn't actually there.
To assume, makes an ASS of U and ME.
I am not interested in internet flame wars, so have a nice day.
:)
"Have you not heard of a book called The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John Mearsheimer, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen Walt, Professor of International Relations at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, published in late August 2007."
Yes. I have read it, and, like you, own a copy. It is an as dry as the Sinai academic work wrapped in the most unpleasantly sensational cover. It is so dry that I forgot what the authors wrote on a page by page basis. Now, admittedly I was reading it on a train journey from Aberdeen to Glasgow; and these days, sadly, that in itself provides more than enough stimulation than my dodgy brain biochemistry can handle.
Either way, the poor bloody Egyptians, God help them, are going to end up as the meat in somebody's sandwich. The neos wanted democratic outbursts; well, they've got them.
Kleine Englander-
Thanks anyway for posting a link here to Albert's candid comments on Dennis Mangan's blog.
If the 'mighty wurlitzer' of US funded propaganda has (since the end of the Cold War) degenerated as far into the PC mire as Albert suggests, the much vaunted 'special relationship' probably deserves the coup de grace. But who is there this side of the pond to administer it ?
Who cares? Our current leaders are so ferally early 19th Century in their outlook on life, they might feel like having a go at refighting the War of 1812.
Do you think so, Martin? It strikes me that in the UK, no one at the top really believes in Afghanistan any more - but they don't want to lose face, and so more will die. The fact that we're all out of money is probably also concentrating their minds when it comes to any further military action.
And as for the States, they're like the cartoon character who's run off the cliff but not noticed yet and is still suspended in the air before the fall. The recent vote to both continue tax cuts and continue deficit spending was remarkable - and very foolish. There's a deal of ruin in a nation, but that struck me as almost a Munich moment for them.
In this instance, Laban, I hold my hands up to having been over-glib. My apologies.
You're quite correct, of course, to mention the fear of loss of face, and of course some of those more who will die in pursuit of that lost cause will include perfectly innocent Afghans, whose survivors will then inevitably be radicalised to Hell and back. It is quite striking to contrast the great hope for democratic agitation in the Middle East exhibited by Cameron, Hague, Osborne and all of the other usual suspects, all of whom trooped into the lobbies on Blair's coat-tails in 2003 in the hope that somebody would feel the rough edge of their power, with their extremely timid, almost mouse-like reactions to the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. In 2003, New Jerusalem was almost upon us, while in 2011, the primary focus seems to be getting the holidaymakers home (the selfishness exhibited by some British holidaymakers in travelling to inherently dangerous places and then expecting their fellow citizens to act as travel agents of last resort never fails to astonish me - don't these people know there's a recession on?)
America is lost, having at last hit the anthropological overshoot that was destined to be its final destination from the start. Dinnae fash.
To be fair, Martin, I think we're a lot further down the road to ruin than the Septics. But they seem determined to follow us - and Americans can normally accomplish their goals if they put their minds to it. The "cut tax and spend more" vote looks to have firmed up the odds on the next economic crisis, not to mention bringing the timescales forward.
Post a Comment