David Cameron Speaks Truth to Arabs

British PM David Cameron is rounding up a tour of the Middle East. He was the first head of state to visit post-Mubarak Egypt and he is currently in Qatar. At Qatar University he held a discussion with Qatari students and took questions on a number of issues ranging from the UK-Qatar relationship to the Arab Revolutions.

David Cameron with Qatari prime minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr al-Thani on 23 February.

While addressing the prevalence of dictators in the Arab World, Cameron told the audience about the use of Israel as a distraction:

“In too many countries in the Middle East, some rulers say to their people ‘be angry about [Israel], don’t be angry about the fact that you live in a non-open society,"


This is not a revolutionary idea. It is in fact the reality in which the Arab World has been living for the past 63 years. However, the fact that PM Cameron said this directly to Arab students, in an Arab country, is very significant.


What is probably more significant however, is that the Gulf Times, the national newspaper of Qatar that is owned by Emir Khalifa ath-Thani, did not mention this important bit of information in its coverage of the event.

Cameron was quoted promoting democracy:

“I’m a democrat.  I believe in democracy.  I believe in freedom and human rights and I believe in the building blocks of democracy; a free society, an independent judiciary, the rights of free speech and free association,”


But when it came to his remarks on Israel being used as a scapegoat, something dictators were using to distract their populations from their own ineptitude, they were nowhere to be found.


So the Qatari royals don't mind Cameron promoting democracy as long as they can cover up his expose of their best weapon at containing it.


What wonderful Mashriq Madness!

Revolution Grips Libya

The winds of revolution have finally reached the oppressive dictatorship of Libya. However, things are going very differently. Ghadafi has seen what happened in Tunisia to his West and Egypt to his East and has no intention of falling victim to the same fate.

In order to avoid this, he has instructed his forces to fire on the protestors wherever they gather. This has led to over 200 people being murdered in the passed few days. Soldiers who refused to shoot have been reportedly shot and burned. The Libyan Air Force has also bombed and shot at protestors as they marched on an army base.

The intense level of violence has led many Libyan Ambassadors worldwide, including the ambassador to the Arab League, to resign in protest. Libya's mission to the UN also just criticized Ghadafi and two air force pilots have flown to Malta and defected.

Since Ghadafi has pushed back so hard, the country is likely to descend into Civil War. His son, Seif al-Islam Ghadafi (who's name means Sword of Islam Ghadafi) said that his father will "fight to the last man, the last woman, the last bullet," in a long, rambling, 40 minute speech on state TV. His father has given one of the longest speeches in the history of the UN General Assembly, so it's nice to see the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree.

So now we'll just have to wait and see who buckles first, Ghadafi or the protesters. It has been reported that the Libyan side of the Egypt-Libya border is now under the control of the protesters. The protestors have reportedly taken over 9 cities in the east of the country and most if not all of the Bedouin and Berber tribes have renounced their allegiance to the government. Muslim scholars have also called on all Muslims to rebel.

No matter what happens, it doesn't look like this is going to end any time soon.

President Obama's Next Move

With Mubarak's resignation there is a huge danger that the military, which was handed/seized control, will want to stay in power. This has happened time and time again, and not just in the Arab world.

Up until now President Obama has been toeing the line, trying to play both sides because he was in an impossible position. However, now that the January 25 Revolution has succeeded in its main goal of removing Mubarak from power, Obama can finally come out and wholeheartedly support the revolutionaries.

President Obama must now come out and say that the whole world, led by the US, supports the democratic revolution of the Egyptian people. He should thank the army for its restraint and cool-headedness during the revolution. But he must, MUST, say loudly and clearly that the US will not support prolonged military control of the country. He should warn any overly enthusiastic army officers from overstepping their mandate. He should remind them that the Egyptian people will not stand for another dictator and neither will the United States.

This is a time for real leadership and this moment it too important to allow it to be hijacked like so many others in the past. That doesn't mean President Obama should tell the Egyptian people who to pick or what to do. It means that the United States, as the leader of the Free World, should make it clear that it will not accept a roll back of this Revolution by ambitious army officers. Since the US holds the purse-strings to the Egyptian army, it has quite a lot of pull and it is time we put that to good use.

It has been reported that President Obama is going to give a speech in about a half an hour. Let's hope he gets the message.

Liberation in Tahrir Square

Mubarak has fled to Sharm ash-Sheikh in the Sinai and Omar Suleiman has announced that Mubarak has just stepped down as President! The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces will be looking after things for the time being.

This is a huge day for Egypt, the Mashriq and the World.

Will the military keep the power it just assumed? Will they hand it over to the people? Who will run in the first free elections in Egyptian history?

Stay tuned! 

El-Baradei on Peace with Israel

Muhammad El-Baradei was on "Meet the Press" this weekend and said something very important in regards to Egypt's Peace Treaty with Israel:

Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel is “rock solid,” Egyptian opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” program.

“I assume Egypt will continue to respect it,” ElBaradei said when asked about the current treaty. He also said “everyone in Egypt, everyone in the Arab world wants to see an independent Palestinian state.”

This should be very comforting to the many people who have been going on and on about how the Revolution will be the end of Egyptian-Israeli relations; that the peace treaty that has been in place for 30 years will come tumbling down with Mubarak.

Not this isn't a guarantee that it won't, but it is very encouraging. Most Egyptians still hate Israel and aren't happy about the peace treaty, but that doesn't mean they want to go to war either. And, even if they do, having a leadership that is pragmatic enough to recognize the consequences of rescinding the treaty could prove to be enough to keep it in place. Inshallah.

Mubarak's Reforms Rejected

Mubarak has been trying desperately to show the Revolutionaries in Tahrir that he understands their complaints and that he is willing to bring about the changes they demand. All of them, that is, except for the one that calls for him to step down immediately.

On the surface the reforms Mubarak is proposing are not insignificant and they are reforms the opposition has been demanding for years. They are:

1. Lifting the restrictions on presidential candidates
2. Liberalizing election controls (read: stop election rigging)
3. Presidential Term Limits
4. Increase press freedom

So why are these reforms now being rejected? Because the Revolutionaries see them as a stalling tactic. Even with all these reforms, Mubarak is still insisting on staying in power until the September elections. He has said he won't run for yet another term but that doesn't mean he isn't interested in hand-picking his successor.

The Egyptian People don't trust Mubarak and they have good reason. If they agree to the reforms and go home, they will lose the Revolution's momentum and when Mubarak reneges on his promises, it will be even harder to get people to come out and protest again.

Another issue is that Mubarak has made his new Vice President Omar Suleiman his main negotiator with the opposition. In addition to Suleiman being a life-long Mubarak loyalist, part and parcel to the government's repression of the people, WikiLeaks has released new papers detailing his close ties to the Israeli government. These documents are the perfect illustration of the problem with the Israeli-Egyptian Peace Treaty.

When two countries have peaceful relations, it should not be surprising that they cooperate, especially when dealing with groups considered to be an enemy by both states. The cables show the Egyptian government worked hand-in-hand with Israel in blockading Gaza. Hamas is a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of Israel and it is a direct offshoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, which, though admittedly less violent (at the moment that is), wants to overthrow the Egyptian government (it has said it only wants to do so through non-violent means like elections, but I guess we'll have to wait and see). We can take some solace in the fact that unlike in the Palestinian Territories, the Muslim Brotherhood would most likely not come close to winning a democratic election. But it makes sense the Egyptian government, represented by Suleiman would want to do everything in its power to limited the Brotherhood's power and influence.

So why is Suleiman's "collusion" with Israel seen as such treachery? Because for the past 30 years Egypt has had peace with Israel on paper but been at with with Israel in its heart. Mubarak has not done anything to promote good relations, encourage tourism or even make minimal changes in the school curriculum that would teach Egyptian children that Israel is their friend and not their enemy. Israelis are still talked about as the enemy, Jews are represented in the State-run media as demons and child-killers and Zionist is probably the worst curse word you could call someone. 

But the biggest reason why these "revelations" about Egyptian-Israeli cooperation are so shocking, is that Egypt has been pretending to be the champion of Palestinian rights for more than 60 years now. The Egyptian government has been telling its people that it has been working on behalf of the Palestinians, fighting Israel for them and later lobbying Israel for them but never, ever working with them. Allah Forbid! When in fact the reality has been very different.

• Creation of the Palestinian State wasn't even on the agenda for Egypt in 1948, it invaded Israel in an attempt to conquer the Negev and create a landbridge between Arab North Africa and the rest of the Mashriq
• While occupying the Gaza Strip from 1947 to 1967, Egypt trained Palestinian Guerillas to attack Israel while keeping them under military occupation themselves. There were no moves towards Palestinian self-determination
• Again in 1967 and 1973 Palestinian self-determination was not a real goal
• For the past 30 years, Egypt has raised the Palestinian issue with Israel, but done very little to actually bring about a change in policy

Given the incredibly contradictory nature Egyptian rhetoric and actions, it is no surprise that the Egyptian people would be angry. Though to say that they are surprised their government doesn't practice what it preaches I think is a little much. They didn't trust the government to begin with, but it seems like the Palestinian issue is the one area that is held as sacrosanct. "Even Mubarak the oppressor wouldn't sell-out the Palestinians completely," was the thinking. But when the conversation is framed by the idea that having close relations with Israel is viewed as "selling out," then the cause of peace has already lost. 

Until major reforms are made in the minds of the Egyptian people, the peace will remain cold and shaky. It is possible that a peace treaty with the Palestinians could ease the tension, but it isn't guaranteed. Whoever comes to power in post-Revolutionary Egypt must reform the Egyptian attitude towards Israel and not just Egyptian government.

Right-Wing Fears

Ever since the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 began last week, there have been many right-wingers who have been bemoaning the loss of a crucial American and Western Ally. They have been ranting that Mubarak's departure will bring about a coup by the Muslim Brotherhood and signal the end of American influence in the Middle East as our other allies either fall victim to their own revolutions or distance themselves from the US before we can abandon them ourselves.


These views were repeated today by Sima Kadmon of Yediot Ahronot in her Op-ed The American Betrayal.


Her first point is that President Obama is a political amateur, willing to abandon America's allies without taking into account history or culture. She then takes this to the "logical" conclusion that America will abandon Israel if that is the way the political waves shift. While ignoring her repetition of right-wing theories about Obama's credentials, the idea that the American shift in favor of the Revolutionaries in Egypt somehow signals lack of American resolve or a "betrayal" is absolute hogwash.


She says:
"For dozens of years, he was the only leader the West could rely on, the dam in the face of Islamization."


Kadmon recognizes that the American relationship with Mubarak was based on his commitment to fighting Islamists and guarding the Peace Treaty with Israel. But those were the only real reasons for the "alliance." If it were not for these, there would be no reason to work with a dictator who summarily tortures, kills and jails his own citizens and does absolutely nothing to promote peace and understanding with Israel other than refrain for engaging in outright war.


Conversely, the American relationship with Israel is multifaceted and based on 60 years of close political, cultural, economic and military ties. These connections are bipartisan and are felt by the majority of the American population. The idea that this can just be thrown away is laughable.


Kadmon continues:
"And when America does this to the Egyptian president, what should any other ally think? Perhaps that it’s better to conduct oneself like Iran or Syria, rather than like a moderate Arab state."


This is a legitimate concern. How can our other authoritarian Arab allies know that we won't abandon them when their people rise up against them? 


They can't. American ties with Middle Eastern dictators are based on two factors: Oil and the War on Terror.


There was no deep and abiding American commitment to Egypt before the Revolution. The US took stock of the situation, recognized an opportunity to steal an ally away from the USSR and secure the first Arab-Israeli peace agreement. That was it and Mubarak knew it. 


Say what you want about Arab dictators (I have a few choice words myself) but they aren't stupid. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia recognizes that without oil, his country has absolutely nothing to offer the US. That is why after 9/11 he ordered oil to be sold to America at a premium much lower than the market value.


As for Kadmon's assertion that it might be better for US allied Arab dictators to act like Iran or Syria, she may be right. But that would also mean international isolation and a loss of substantial US economic and military aid.


Kadmon asserts:
"it’s clear to all that if Muslim groups take power in Egypt at the conclusion of the uprising, our [Israel's] peace deal with Cairo is doomed."


I have written many times that the likelihood of a Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt is very unlikely. That being said, there are a number of additional economic factors that would lead to the collapse of a Muslim Brotherhood led Egypt very quickly should that unlikely scenario occur.

1. American Aid - Currently, Egypt gets $1.3 Billion (that's with a B) of aid from the United States every year. While most of this is military aid, the economic aid is significant as well. In order to maintain its role as the leader of the Arab world, Egypt can't just throw away that kind of money along with its ties to the leader of the Western world.
2. Tourism - According to the BBC "The Egyptian government is keen to protect the tourism industry, which generated revenues of $11.6bn (£7.3bn) in 2009." With the Muslim Brotherhood in power and tourism will drop significantly, putting more people out of work, which is one of the main factors for why the Revolution has so many supporters.
3. Oil - Much of Egyptian Oil resides in the Sinai desert but if the Muslim Brotherhood revokes the peace treaty with Israel, Israel will take back the Sinai by force (the deal was Land for Peace, if they take back the Peace, Israel will take back the land). Not only that, but Egyptian Oil and Natural Gas exports account for less than 1% and 2% of exports worldwide respectively. World investment will move to other, more stable countries without a huge effect on the market.
4. Suez - Following an Israeli retaking of the Sinai, the Suez Canal - one of the largest and most used canals in the world - would be closed, just as it was between 1967 and 1979. If Egypt wants to continue to gain the revenue from running this important waterway - not to mention the prestige of owning it - it will need to keep the peace. Additionally, if Egypt wants to be able to export any of its remaining Oil (or any other products for that matter) to the Asian market without sending it all the way around the Cape of Good Hope, it will want to keep the peace to keep the canal open and working.

I must point out that all of these reasons are based on Western logic. However, the Middle East often operates on its own system of logic that is, well, illogical. It could come to pass that the Egyptian people make decisions that go directly against their best interests. 

Let's pray that cooler, wiser and more logical heads prevail.

Mubarak: I want to resign but it will lead to chaos. Newsflash Mr. President, Egypt is already in Chaos

Mubarak gave an interview to Christiane Amanpour today. He told her about his talks with President Obama in which he said, "[Obama] you don't understand Egyptian culture." If he resigns it will bring chaos and then Muslim Brotherhood will rise to power. Surprise, surprise, once again he uses the Muslim Brotherhood as a boogeyman to try and scare America into supporting him again. Sorry, it's not working anymore.

Mubarak said that he didn't send out the counter protesters. Forget the fact that they were highly organized, well armed and riding horses and camels; he has no idea where they came from and certainly didn't tell them to riot or attack anyone. Stick to your story Mr. President, no one will ever see through it.

"I don't want to see Egyptians fighting Egyptians," he said. Apparently he doesn't want to see it on the streets but he was perfectly happy with it happening in his prisons for the past 30 years.

Apparently Mubarak's wife and his son, Gamal were still in Egypt at the presidential palace. There were reports that they fled the country when the Revolution began - likely with treasures looted from the Valley of the Kings.

Omar Suleiman said my favorite line of the day: "We will not use violence against them. We will ask them to go home and we will ask their parents to ask them to go home." Apparently the Revolution that is taking over the country, inspiring thousands across the region and forcing Mubarak to resign is just a few kids throwing a tantrum. No, the Egyptian leadership isn't out of touch at all.

But wait, there's more! Suleiman went on to say that believes the government has met the demands of the people by agreeing to step down and reform the constitution. They've agreed to all the demands, except for that one tiny one. What was it again? Oh yeah, Mubarak's resignation.

Mubarak Finally Plays the Jew Card

Mubarak is quickly running out of options. He tried saying he wouldn't run for president again. He tried firing his old cabinet and appointing a new one. He tried to claim that the protesters were really just lawbreakers intent on chaos. None of it has worked.

But in the Arab world there is one scapegoat that has never failed to increase people's capacity to believe in ridiculous conspiracy theories or suspend their grasp on reality: Jews.

Today, a young Egyptian woman has "come forward" to discuss how she was brought to Qatar by "Israelis and Jews" to learn how to bring down a government. The organization that she claims brainwashed her and other gullible Egyptians? Freedom House.

Yeah, right.

According to the article:
"after her initial recruitment, she was sent to Doha in Qatar with a group of other young people... "We received intensive training for four days. The trainers had different citizenships but a predominant number among them were Israelis," she said.

At the end of the interview the woman was asked what led her to confess her secret activities. At this point, she burst into tears and answered that President Mubarak was "like a father to me," which is why she decided to share what happened to her."


But she what is more likely is that her real father, or another member of her family, is being held in one of Mubarak's prisons. Though it could be as simple as her being paid off.


The utter lunacy in the assertion that Israel was behind the Egyptian Revolution is made even greater when one remembers that up until just a few days ago, Prime Minister Netanyahu was not only standing behind Mubarak, but instructing all of Israel's ambassadors around the world to plead with their host governments NOT to abandon him! It wasn't until yesterday (when he finally realized the revolutionaries would win) that he changed his tune and said that even if there is regime change, the peace treaty with Egypt would stand (which is Israel' prime concern at the moment).


Mubarak must know that claiming the Mossad planned the protests won't convince most of the revolutionaries to go home, since they know that the only reason they are protesting is because they genuinely want Mubarak to leave. But by blaming the Mossad, Mubarak is really talking to the Egyptians who are still sitting on the sidelines, deciding whether or not to join in the revolution.


Blaming Israel and the Jews is a common passtime in the Arab world. Whether it's saying the Mossad is training vultures to spy on Saudi Arabia, sending sharks into the dead sea to destroy Egyptian tourism, or  some other crazily funny scheme, or the more disturbing ones claiming Israel was behind Southern Sudanese secession, or using the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a screenplay for a Ramadan mini-series, or blaming the Jews for 9/11. It is on this history of conspiracy theories that Mubarak is building. Though they seem comical to us, theories like these are widely believed in the Arab world. Since Arabs know they can't trust the government for accurate news, they call all news into question and end up grasping at straws for something close to the truth. Often that leads people to believe that utterly ridiculous things are possible, from Mossad sharks to a conspiracy of Jews bent on world-domination and Arab subjugation.

But this time it probably won't work. The Revolution is too big and there are too many people involved. Also, even if some people might buy into the idea that Israel played a role in starting it, they have so many legitimate grievances that it won't likely prevent many people from taking part.

Reporters Under Attack

Pro-Mubarak rioters have been attacking journalists left and right today. They are angry at what they perceive to be a Western bias towards the revolutionaries. If this is what they are doing to Western journalists, imagine what they are doing to Egyptians! There have already been fatalities reported, though hard numbers are difficult to come by.

They hit Anderson Cooper in the head!

Hala Gorani was caught up in the riots as well.

The Revolution Spreads

As the protests in Egypt continue to grow, other Arab leaders are growing afraid that their days authoritarian rule may be numbered as well.

The BBC has a very interesting article discussing this issue, though it notably doesn't discuss Saudi Arabia.

It's too early to say if the nacent protest movements in these countries will continue, grow, or what direction they will go in, but one thing is clear: Arab leaders are going to have a much more difficult time governing from now on.


Jordan




Jordanians are also protesting loudly against their government, calling for more democratic control of parliament, where most top positions are still appointed by Kind Abdullah. The King sacked his old cabinet  and appointed Marouf al-Bakhit - a former Prime Minister, Ambassador to Israel and Turkey and retired Major-General in the Army - as the new Prime Minister. However, opposition figures have accused him of corruption and election rigging in the past and don't seem to pleased with his reappointment.

Syria

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has so far been spared any real protests to his grip on power, however that could soon. Protesters are beginning or organize on Facebook and Twitter, calling for a "day of rage" like the ones in Egypt. It remains to be seen how big this protest will be, but I think that will be directly tied to the events in Egypt. If the Egyptian protesters are successful, Syrians will be more bold and come out in larger numbers, but if the Egyptian revolution is quashed by the army, Syrians will fear the same thing happening to them. It's not a science, but it's something to think about.

Yemen

Yemen's President Ali Abdullah Saleh, told protesters in his country that he would not seek another term or set up a political dynasty. He has done this specifically to try and get opposition forces to cancel their planned "day of rage." While this statement was well received, the protests have not been called off and with unemployment hovering around 35%, these statements and a few economic reforms aren't likely to tame the movement any time soon. Given Yemen's radical history and the actual power of Islamists there, revolution in Yemen should be watched very carefully.

Mubarak Chooses Door Number 2: Violent Crackdown

Yesterday I discussed the few options lef to Mubarak at this point and it appears that he has made his choice:


               Then how is this going end? There are a few possibilities...

              2. Mubarak may make one last play for power and order police and army contingents that are still loyal to him to open fire on the crowds. This however is a double edged sword: people will either be too intimidated to keep protesting and go home until September or they will be so angry that the protests will swell even larger and become violent.


Mubarak has decided to unleash his supporters (read: members of his National Democratic Party and the police) on the protesters. Mubarak is trying to make it seem like these are counter demonstrations showing devotion to him and striving for a return to normalcy and security. Nothing could be further from the truth. 


The pro-Mubarak "protesters" were armed and an "Al Jazeera correspondent said men on horseback and camels had ploughed into the crowds, as army personnel stood by." (full story here: Al-Jazeera) Let me repeat that: Mubarak's thugs are attacking the protesters while riding on horses and camels! Not only that, but they are actively preventing protesters from leaving Tahrir (Freedom) Square, boxing them in.







What's worse is that the army is no longer protecting the crowds. When it was just the police attacking protesters last week, the army stepped in to stop it, but since these thugs are pretending to be other protesters, just in support of Mubarak, the army isn't doing anything. 


This is because the army hasn't decided exactly what its position is vis-a-vis the revolution. On the one hand, they are sympathetic to the protests and, as a national institution, want to do what is best for the country. But on the other hand, the army is very much intertwined with the current government. If the government falls their pensions and benefits will be up in the air, as well as their influence.


The two biggest factors in the Revolution right now are:


1. The response of the protesters to the crackdown.
If the protesters keep fighting and keep demonstrating, they can win. But if they are too afraid to keep protesting, then an uneasy calm may return, allowing Mubarak to stay in power until elections in September. So far, it seems like the protesters are staying put, but for how long depends on...


2. Which side the army comes out on: The protesters, Mubarak or neither.
If the army steps in on the side of the protesters, Mubarak is finished. 


If the army steps in on the side of Mubarak, depending on how much force they use, the Revolution will either be suppressed completely or badly damaged. So far there have been scenes of protesters and soldiers, arm in arm, chanting "We are Egyptians. We are Brothers." This looked great for the Revolution but the same thing happened in Tiananmen Square. The Chinese government eventually brought in troops from other provinces to do what the local troops wouldn't.


If the army remains neutral, it looks like the Revolution will go on. The protesters outnumber Mubarak's plainclothes supporters and if they hang on, eventually they should be able to overcome them. During the Iranian Revolution, the army - though officially serving the Shah - declared a policy of neutrality. This prevented the Shah from really cracking down on the protests and eventually led to his overthrow.


No one knows what will happen next. Stay tuned.


I hate to say it, but since President Obama equivocated and tried to play both sides, Mubarak took this to mean that the US was still supporting him and took a last stab at retaining power. It is time for the President to show true leadership and stand up for what is right with actions instead of empty platitudes.

Facebook in Egypt

see more Failbook

President Obama's Pointless Speech

Here is a clip of President Obama's short speech in regards to the Egyptian protests and his discussions with Hosni Mubarak:

In this talk, the President had to find a way to show US support for the protesters without making our other autocratic allies feel jilted and worried that our support for them would also come to an end soon. It should not be surprising then, with such contradictory goals, that the President appears to have failed in both regards.

Here are some notable quotes, highlighting the problems with supporting both sides:

"It is not the role of any other country to determine Egypt's leaders, only the Egyptian people can do that."
That's some great sentiment, but for the past 30 years, Mubarak was able to hold on to power in part due to American support. We knew he was rigging elections every 6 years and torturing and killing the opposition in between, but we supported him anyway. So while the President is right about the way things should be, that is not the way they are.

"Orderly transition... must begin now."
This would be great news if the President backed this up by calling on Mubarak to resign to allow this to happen. Since he did not and left the door open for him to oversee the transition, this will likely not satisfy the the protesters.

"[Any new government] must include a broad spectrum of voices and opposition parties."
This is great for Egypt, but not so good for our buddies in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Morocco, Yemen... Each one of their rulers now has to reevaluate their relationships with the United States. Maybe this will get them to liberalize or reform their governments. Maybe not.

"We hear your voices."
But without calling on Mubarak to respect the will of the people, it remains to be seen if the Egyptians will believe this. This speech seems to say, "we hear your voices, but we're unwilling to do what is necessary to help."

Since President Obama had to please all sides, he was unable to please either one. Which begs the question: why did he bother making a speech at this time at all?

Photos from Last Week's Protests

Here are some photos from the protests from last week taken by Anna Day. More will follow after airport security releases her camera and laptop. In the meantime, multiply the number of protesters by 1000 and you should get a good idea of what's going on.

Police tried to block the main Nile crossing.

They were unsuccessful.

I can't make out the whole text but this says "No to the Emergency Law" and "After today we will no longer be enslaved."
One of the main grievances of the protesters is that Egypt is still under the Emergency Rule that was established right after Anwar Sadat was assassinated in 1981.

Like many things in Egypt, this bridge is named after the Egyptian "Victory" during the Yom Kippur War of 1973.

"Tunisian Revolution, a Revolution of Freedom.
And Egypt..." (working on the full translation)

Mubarak's Dwindling Options

According to the latest news reports, over two million Egyptians have taken to the streets of Cairo to demand Mubarak's resignation (Al-Arabiya, YNet, Al-Jazeera, HaAretz). That number is probably inflated, but just a few weeks ago no one could have imagined protests even with just a few hundred people, let alone hundreds of thousands as there are now. With the Army's public statements of sympathy for the protestors and their outright refusal to respond with violence, Mubarak's options are quickly dwindling.

Mubarak's best hope for saving face would be to negotiate gradual reforms until new elections, which are scheduled to take place in September anyway (he's already trying to work this in: Haaretz, Reuters). But this seems very unlikely at this point. Most Egyptians would fear that he would use the intermediate period of calm to regain his hold on power.

It seems that at this point, Mubarak's only chance for a somewhat graceful exit is to appoint an interim President - be it Mohammad El-Baradei or Ahmed Zewail or even respected but heretofore unknown judge - and agree to resign. The protest movement will not accept anything less than his resignation and at least in this way Mubarak can appear to be working with the Egyptian people. However, this scenario is also very unlikely since Mubarak would likely have to go into exile to avoid the inevitable charges of treason and crimes against humanity that would be brought against him by the new government.

Then how is this going end? There are a few possibilities.

1. Like in Tunisia, Mubarak may eventually realize that his grip on power is unrecoverable and decide that exile is preferable to death. This is the best case scenario. The door would then be open for El-Baradei or Zewail or another opposition figure to take the reigns and oversee a transition towards real elections.

2. Mubarak may make one last play for power and order police and army contingents that are still loyal to him to open fire on the crowds. This however is a double edged sword: people will either be too intimidated to keep protesting and go home until September or they will be so angry that the protests will swell even larger and become violent.

3. Ambitious army officers may exploit the situation to stage a coup "on behalf" of the people and arrest Mubarak. While this technically could lead the way to a military backed democratic government, given the history of coups in the Middle East in general and Egypt in particular, it doesn't seem so likely this would be a step towards a more democratic Egypt. If one wants to take a more optimistic view, a coup could possibly just be a front for an interim government until new elections can be held. But coups are risky and people usually only engage in them when they will directly benefit from them (i.e. be the new president) so I wouldn't hold out too much hope for this option.

4. The least likely option and by far the worst: I wouldn't mention it at all except, sadly, it is being peddled on all the conservative radioshows and of course Fox News. The Muslim Brotherhood could exploit the situation, rise to the fore of the protests and win the new elections. Like I've said before, as much as we don't want Egypt to be the next Iran, the Egyptians want it even less. While the Brotherhood has been part of the protests, they have been on the periphery, not the center and their popularity is nothing close to what Mubarak claims. They are his go to boogeyman and like most boogeymen, once you shine a light under the bed, you'll find the stories you've heard about them don't match reality.

(from designyoutrust.com, perfectly sums up why Egyptians don't want to follow in Iran's footsteps)

Whichever one of these options comes to pass, the fact remains that something needs to change soon. Eventually people are going to need to go back to work, buy food and feel a general sense of security and none of that can happen while the country is rising in revolt. That is all the more reason to hope that Mubarak steps down soon so the protests don't take a more violent turn as they get more desperate.

Don't Believe the Hype: Egypt is the New Turkey, not the New Iran.

With everything going on in Egypt right now there has been a lot of talk about what is going to happen next and how that will affect the US, Israel and the rest of the world.

The loudest answer to this question is that being made by Fox News. They say that we need to keep supporting Mubarak because the only alternative is the Muslim Brotherhood. In short they are saying, "be afraid. Be very afraid." This is because Fox News gets better ratings when it's audience is too scared to go outside.

The next question needed to be asked is: why is this the go to answer that everyone seems to be jumping on?
The answer: Mubarak has been saying it day in and day out for the past 30 years precisely because it scares us to the point where we're willing to overlook torture, murder and the general abandonment of all our morals.

Does this mean the Muslim Brotherhood is a completely reformed, non-threatening, cuddly group of teddy bears that we should invite over for dinner? Of course not. But it does mean that maybe we shouldn't be cowering in fear of a group who's power and influence has been exaggerated for political purposes.

But isn't this exactly what happened in Iran in 1979? An American supported dictator is being overthrown and will inevitably be replaced by a radical Islamic state bent on war with the West and the destruction of Israel? Well that remains to be seen and there are a lot of good reasons why that probably won't be the case in this situation.

The biggest reason is that Egyptians have already seen how that story ends. The idea of trading in a repressive secular dictator for a repressive religious dictator doesn't hold much appeal. Sure, the Muslim Brotherhood is out at the protests, but that is mostly because EVERYONE is out at the protests. Is it possible that in the confusion they make a power play and try to take over? Yeah, sure. It is likely? No.

After the revolution is over, Egypt will not be a Western lackey any more. But that doesn't mean it will be an enemy. It will be more like our angry brother. It might yell at us and disagree with us, but it isn't going to try to kill us. Now that doesn't sound so great since with Mubarak gave us a rubber stamp on pretty much everything. But while he was doing that, he was using our support - political, military, monetary - to make sure that every one of his people hated us.

But Mubarak kept the peace treaty with Israel, doesn't that mean he's good for the West? No! He kept the peace treaty on paper, but did absolutely nothing to make his people understand why it is important. He did nothing to promote any sort of understanding. There are no celebrations or commemorations of the Camp David Accords in Egypt, but there are yearly parades glorifying the Egyptian "victory" of the Yom Kippur War of 1973. Mubarak did all this because it let him make peace with Israel while still keeping it as an enemy. It let him get America on his side while still dangling the "if you lose me you lose a peaceful Egypt," card in front of us.

Now this is actually a serious issue because Egyptians by and large hate Israel. While talking to my cabbie in Cairo last year on Sinai Liberation Day, he wouldn't say the word Israel without spitting on the ground after. If anything goes wrong, from a jump in unemployment to an unusually large sandstorm, the go to scapegoat is Israel. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis visit Egypt each year but relatively few Egyptians going in the other direction. 


The best possible outcome I can think of at this point is if Mohammed El-Baradei is selected to be interim president. He is a secular, democratic, pragmatist who understands that even if he doesn't like Israel, he realizes that keeping the peace treaty is in Egypt's best interest. Hopefully he will be able to temper some of the revolutionary enthusiasm and convince Egypt that it is easier to rebuild their country while not at war with the regional superpower; that if they lose the Sinai and it's oil to Israel again, they won't have the money needed to subsidize food or train new police or rebuild all the burnt out buildings.


In the end, Egypt won't end up like Iran. It will end up like Turkey; a secular-ish democracy, with a strong army, a shaky peace with Israel, while trying to simultaneously westernize and take up the mantle of Arab and Muslim leadership. Sure, Turkey isn't the Muslim darling of the West anymore, but it isn't fighting us. It's a NATO member that still wants to join the EU. That isn't the way I'd make things if I was in charge - I'll have to bring it up at the next Elders of Zion meeting - but it doesn't sound so terrible to me.