via DefenseNews.com (bold lettering is my effort to emphasize points, not DN's)
Israelis were struggling to mask dismay, if not contempt, for what are roundly viewed here as naïve, inept and potentially dangerous missteps by U.S. President Barack Obama, who has encouraged the masses seeking to oust Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.Wow.
With momentum continuing to favor Egypt’s grass roots, anxiety mounted here over the specter of a revived southern front commanded by an unknown, likely radical regime organized, trained and equipped with the very best from America.
At the outset of mass demonstrations last month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu directed cabinet members to hold their tongues about unfolding events in Sinai and beyond the Suez Canal. Anything uttered here would either irritate his government’s already-strained ties with the Obama administration or, worse, shift Egyptian street anger — still largely focused on internal repression and economic inequality — to anti-Israel or anti-Semitic diatribes.
Instead, Israel’s Foreign Ministry directed envoys worldwide to urge their host governments not to isolate Mubarak through word or deed, given his decades-long contributions to regional stability and his commitment to the 1979 Camp David Accords.
“The peace between Israel and Egypt has lasted for more than three decades and our objective is to ensure that these relations will continue to exist,” Netanyahu told cabinet colleagues Jan. 31.
But by late last week, with Obama leading the charge for a “new dawn” over a post-Mubarak Egypt, many here removed their muzzles in open support of existing centers of gravity — namely the Egyptian Armed Forces (EAF) and Mubarak-legacy leadership. In interviews here, military officials said Mubarak may already have been lost, but it’s not too late to fortify international recognition of the EAF and the vital, stabilizing role it can play in a future regime.
So when U.S., European and some Arabic television networks began broadcasting agitating commentary Feb. 3 about military action against demonstrators in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, Israel’s military spokesman agreed to respond on record about unfolding events.
“Based on our assessment of events on the ground, it is our understanding that the Egyptian Army is operating responsibly and in a manner that contributes to stability and preserves the peace,” said Brig. Gen. Avi Benayahu, Israel Defense Forces spokesman.
To be honest and not political, it has been curious how the White House and State Department could just dump an ally in the middle of a crisis so quickly.
Whoever wins in Egypt, they won't trust the US. Israel doesn't trust the US. Europe doesn't trust the US. China doesn't (who cares)...
Will anyone else?
I talk about other nations becoming unsturdy...shaky...yielding to the whims of ideology instead of practicality.
It seems that the same can be said for the upper reaches of the current US government, regardless of party.
This apparent dumping of Mubarak will have profound repercussions for US foreign relations within the Arab world. If they see the US so easily cast away its staunchiest friend and ally in the region, the rest of the Arab world may view the US as an unreliable partner, and turn to China (since Europe is practically powerless).
ReplyDeleteI know it's very popular and political correct to support the grass-roots uprising, but it still remains to be seen if Egypt will become a free and fair democracy - I'm certainly not holding my breath on that.
The Administration is seeing shades of the Iranian Revolution, but it looks like Egypt will not be Iran. Moreover, it's a possibility that the anti-Mubarak groups chose to negotiate, because they didn't like the prospect of a military takeover.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I liked your comments on Ares in regards to the "Is Europe Headed For Security Irrelevance?" discussion.
Couple of things:
ReplyDeleteI can understand Israel as a reliable ally against radical islam. I can't much see what else makes him such a valuable ally --not to the extent of receiving so much aid per capita--.
This said, from here:
+ Israel's _public_ backing of Mubarak might have been the last nail in the coffin.
+ At least in BCN and the left wing papers, the Egyptian army is being seen as a safe haven. And it's giving these media a constipate. ;)
+ I'm not sure a Western government can publicly endorse a government with such heavy handed use of force against its citizens. Not right now. And, personally, I wouldn't find it quite moral --might have to do it anyhow, that's another question--.
I do think Mubarak's gone. With some kind of luck, it'll be an evolution instead of a revolution. We'll see.
Take care.
have to disagree Ferran.
ReplyDeleteEgypt was the leader of the Arabian Armies allied against Israel. without its leadership, Arabian nations populations have been hostile towards Israel but from my view it appears that they governments have been rather neutral. no love but not necessarily outright hate either.
heavy handed with its people? yes. sadly its the tradition for middle eastern countries. do we want to see the Saudi Arabian government overthrown? no. but they're just as brutal.
what about Jordan? same...brutal but the best we can get.
the list goes on.
practicality sometime trumps morality when it comes to international affairs.
we want democracies everywhere but where its not possible, then a benign dictator might be the solution to a sticky international problem.
We don't disagree, here. I did say "_publicly_ endorse". Yes, I accept it must be done, sometimes. But discreetly. Governments really have to grok the Information Era. You don't want certain sentences to pop up in a blog 10 minutes later. Of course, there such an "un-political" saying: Words are silver; silence, gold. The chain of statements from Western governments is becoming ridiculous; and they have NOT made the slightest effort to educate people on the support to Egypt --and its limits--.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I'm not sure if, after a time, there isn't a certain inertia that blinds us to any other option. And that gives wings to those who blame us while we continue to support regimes that take us for granted.
Take care.
Who is our ally? Mubarak? Or Egypt?
ReplyDeleteSupporting a brutal tyrant against a popular uprising is rather... un-American.
who was our ally in Iran? the King or the minority of religious zealots that took to the streets to protest them?
ReplyDeletehow can we support so vigorously the demonstrations in Egypt yet have a hands off approach in Iran last year???
i will make no judgments but the approach to those two events is remarkable.
it seems that when it comes to enemies this administration has no voice but with friends, we'll body slam them at the first opportunity.
Neither were our true allies in the Iran Revolution.
ReplyDeleteEgypt is potentially different. So far, the extremists don't appear to have a major role in the uprisings. It has the makings of a democratic revolution. Big difference from Iran '79.
The administration is making a calculation based on the impact of their moves on the ground. In Iran, if the US had spoke out vigorously in favor of the demonstrators, it would have made it easy to blame the whole thing on American meddling. This would have emboldened the Iranian government to crack down even harder.
Note, the Obama administration has been criticized for not speaking out more forcefully in favor of the protesters too. And Mubarak has used what little the US has said and done to try to fan nationalistic flames against us. It's a careful balance.
I would take issue with most of this post.
ReplyDeleteMost obviously, it's hardly the case that the US "dumped" Mubarek. The guy has had billions in US funding and support over three decades and yet he was unable to create a tolerable society and economy. The Egyptian people dumped Mubarek, and short of sending in troops to suppress peaceful protests in some kind of international Kent State, the US can't really do anything to change that.
Regional Arab allies should take the conclusion that has been obvious for decades; governments which fail to provide the basics of a modern state (strong/equitable economic growth, low corruption, avenues for political expression) can not expect to be bailed out by the USA from their own people.
The Israeli Gen's comments seem reactionary and out of touch. Mubarek is not a viable long term ruler. Even before these protests he would have retired soon. Expecting the US to hitch their wagon to the sickest and least popular horse is idiotic. What comes next in Egypt is obviously an open question, but there is no way the US or Israel will gain any influence over the process by backing the one person almost everyone agrees is at fault for 30 years of repression and misery.
I'm a little disappointed, given how much Israel's security depends on a stable and pacific Egypt, that it's thinking has been so flawed in this matter. While I'd settle for simply shutting up, this is an opportunity to really redefine the entire Arab-Israeli setting. Why is there no development assistance to promote political moderation? Why is there no support, or commitment to work with, democratic groups who clearly seem to be gaining in stature?
you've inserted more than a few falsehoods.
ReplyDeletefirst, how can you say that regional Arabs should take the conclusion that governments that fail to provide the basics...
they haven't for the past 100 years.
he hasn't provided for a tolerable society?
he's kept a lid on his little part of the Arab world for years...many years...
reactionary Israeli government?
what do you think will come if Mubarak leaves? it won't be Mother Theresa i can tell you that.
oh and as far as your development scheme...guess what, its been tried but doesn't work in the Middle East...
Somalia, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the rest have all tried it and failed.
your theory is good in the class room but not in the real world.
>how can we support so vigorously the demonstrations in Egypt yet have a hands off approach in Iran last year???
ReplyDeleteTwo reasons,
First, in certain situations foreign intervention can backfire by allowing opponents to wrap themselves in the flag and accuse others of treachery. Given how central nationalism/anti-Americanism is in parts of Iranian society, this is a real issue. Allowing the Gov.Iran to slander protesters as CIA spies and saboteurs doesn't help the protesters.
Second, it's immoral to gin up a population to rebellion when you ultimately have no intention of helping them. Even dropping the moral implications of encouraging people to risk their lives for a cause you wont yourself support, there are long run implications of having encouraged the most ardent anti-government groups to risk imprisonment or death prematurely.
so once again we have a case where we throw an ally under the bus and an enemy has free reign???
ReplyDeletewow.
i don't get it.
anyone can come up with a billion reasons not to act and it seems that liberal Americans can find everyone of them to defend our nations current stance.
i still disagree with it. but thats cool, we all have our various opinions.
>first, how can you say that regional Arabs should take the conclusion that governments that fail to provide the basics...
ReplyDeleteHow the hell can anyone reach any other conclusion from the current events? People are protesting over shitty living conditions. That's pretty obvious, and many Arab states have actually recognized it to varying extents. See the recent Kuwaiti "gift" of four thousand dollars to its citizens. So what if living standards have historically been low? All countries are historically poor, and everyone wants a fulfilling life today.
>what do you think will come if Mubarak leaves? it won't be Mother Theresa i can tell you that.
It's not an "if" question. Mubarak IS leaving. Maybe sooner, maybe latter, but anyone who thinks the long term relationship will center around a locally despised, 83 year old dictator is simply deluding themselves. Obviously the ouster of Mubarak wont transform Egypt into Sweden on the Nile, that's why it's important for the US/Israel to support moderate forces as opposed to stubbornly clinging to something the tide has already washed away.
>oh and as far as your development scheme...guess what, its been tried but doesn't work in the Middle East...
That's total bollocks. Everything in the Middle East has always been subordinated to security considerations of one form or another. The US spends billions of dollars per year financing Egypt to buy fighter jets, yet less than half of that to promote development. The very presence of autocrats like Mubarak, who syphon billions into Swiss bank accounts, and encourage webs of corruption and patronage retard economic growth.
bollocks you say?
ReplyDeleteindustrial production is industrial production, even if the end product is defense related.
want to talk about that aid?
M1 Tanks....locally produced.
want to talk about that aid???
development of design bureaus in Egypt.
want to talk about security subordinating other considerations?
lets talk about HAMAS or FATAH right across the border...how about other actors in the region.
nothing moves forward unless security is established.
remember the aid workers in Haiti?
they ran like scared children and demanded that the military protect them.
security first, everything else later.
oh and Mubarak is leaving but i'd wager that it won't be in 6 months.
thats the same kind of thinking that got the Lockerbee bomber let out of jail early.
>so once again we have a case where we throw an ally under the bus and an enemy has free reign???
ReplyDeleteHow, exactly, did the US throw Mubarak under the bus?
Did the US cut military financing? No.
Did the US encourage him to loot the country's economy? Presumably, no.
Did the US not stress to him the importance of addressing popular demands? No.
Did the US, even once, call him on running a police state or condemn the rampant violence against ordinary people? No.
Has the US done all this over a period of several decades? Yes.
Seriously, if the US "threw an ally under the bus," what would you have done differently? As far as autocratic police states go, Egypt is the only one that has counted on American political and financial support for decades.
follow the above link and read the article.
ReplyDeletethats how we threw an ally under the bus.
> follow the above link and read the article. thats how we threw an ally under the bus.
ReplyDeleteI did, the only thing the article mentioned is Obama vaguely calling for "a new dawn" "late last week." Are you seriously suggesting that this timid call for moderation was somehow the cause of protests which began weeks earlier?
So, what, if you were Obama you would have supported Mubarak going Tiananmen Square on the protestors? Maybe issuing some kind of support statement for a "solid ally," which begs the obvious question of why anybody in Egypt would head such a statement.
You're still not answering what role the US had in undermining the Mubarak regime and what steps could currently be taken to shore it up.