“…The fact that you have sent him here just goes to prove that you are the leading…asshole in the state.”
–From the telegram complaining about the new Sheriff, in the movie “Blazing Saddles“
So before we go any further, if you’re just coming to the story, here’s what you’ve missed so far:
Egyptians, sick of how life is, blew up on January 25th (which, if you did not know, is Police Day in that country). Massive crowds came out in the streets, protesting against President Hosni Mubarak and the National Democratic Party (NDP) apparatus that has been running the Republic of Egypt since the very day the country was born.
On January 28th it happened again, and along the way Tahrir Square was occupied. It remains occupied to this day. That’s dead downtown Cairo, with the Egyptian Museum only a few hundred feet away; the political symbolism as well as the practical effect have rocked the country.
At the same time, all over the country (including in Alexandria, Luxor, and the Sinai) there have been similarly large demonstrations-and in every case, the crowds turned their anger on the police that had been attacking them for all those decades, burning numerous police facilities and staging a standoff at the Ministry of Interior, which is essentially National Police Headquarters.
The police withdrew from the streets, with predictable consequences for basic law and order.
On Tuesday, the crowds got bigger…but there was no more violent “acting out” behavior. To combat looting, “neighborhood watch” took over, and volunteer checkpoints were set up around the city to search cars and, as best as possible, to disarm the potentially violent.
President Mubarak addressed the Nation; he announced he won’t run again, that he would appoint his “chief rendition manager” (we hire Egypt to help run our rendition program) as the new Vice President, and that only they could save the country from the instability caused by the protesters, which is why he can’t resign just now, even though he dearly wishes he could.
In the few hours after that the attacks on the demonstrators and media began, with unbelievable images of Molotov Cocktail-throwing pro-Mubarak street fighters sent out to the world via Al Jazeera and other networks.
We saw an actual charge of horses and camels, with riders bearing whips and swords, which they proceeded to use on the “Go Away Mubarak!” crowd.
Some of the pro-Mubarak attackers were grabbed up by the other side, and by an amazing coincidence quite a number of police ID cards were recovered in the process. It’s also reported that prisons were emptied to help create the looting and general instability the NDP was looking to “solve”, that workers in State-owned companies were bussed in to be part of the counter-protest, and that folks were simply rounded up off the street and given cash to disrupt the anti-NDP demonstration.
The Army, who had been present on the scene the entire time, only intervened after the pro-Mubarak folks began brandishing-and using-firearms.
All of this led to the Government, in the person of Omar Suleiman (the rendition manager turned VP), describing how he was shocked, just shocked, that such a thing could happen in Egypt and demanding that the anti-NDP folks stop instigating the violence.
He took questions from the press; one of the most bizarre moments was when he blamed camel herders who work the Pyramid tourist trade for the violence, suggesting they were so upset about the lack of tourists that they loaded up their livestock and took ’em downtown in an apparent effort to solve the thing themselves, and then, somehow, they kind of got out of hand.
Long story short, as of right now we’re at an impasse: the protesters want the President to resign and the current Government disbanded (they claim, with good reason, that last year’s Parliamentary elections were so fraudulent as to render them moot), and they want authority turned over to a committee that would hold power for a few months, after which elections would be held to seat a new legislature.
They are also looking to bring to trial various officials who are either corrupt or complicit in violence that’s been directed against the people.
Based on the election results, someone would be empowered to form a new Government-and as you might guess, the NDP wants nothing at all to do with any part of this plan.
That said, there is a ton of speculation that some sort of exit is being arranged-but it is also fair to point out that Mubarak may be able to simply wait it out until September, when elections are currently scheduled to be held. Considering the situation in the streets at the moment, however, that seems hard to visualize.
“And nobody yet has, no body yet has explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak and um, no, not, not real um enthused about what it is that that’s being done on a national level and from D.C. in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt. And um, in these areas that are so volatile right now because obviously it’s not just Egypt but the other countries too where we are seeing uprisings, we know that now more than ever, we need strength and sound mind there in the White House. We need to know what it is that America stands for so we know who it is that America will stand with. And um, we do not have all that information yet.”
—Sarah Palin, commenting on these same events, February 5th, 2011
So that’s a quick roundup of the past: now it’s time to earn my big-time fake consulting chops.
Look, my friends at the State Department and the Pentagon and the CIA and the NSC and the LMNOP-QRS-TUV or whomever, it’s a simple as this: if the people in some country are tired of being tortured or oppressed or just held back economically, and they look at their political leadership and they have the strong urge to send a telegram like the one I quoted at the top of the story, and that leadership pretty much has a monopoly on power…and they are basically being propped up by us…that country, sooner or later, is going to end up exactly like Egypt-and the people in that country are not going to forget that we were supporting the regime that caused their troubles.
To make it even simpler: if the local population can apply the word “hypocrite” to our relationship with the local government…you have been warned.
And you don’t have to look far to see those kinds of regimes: Yemen jumps right out at us, so does Saudi, Jordan is another, same with Pakistan. The Philippines might be one of those places, and Turkey, too-and Columbia surely is one of ’em. Israel has a restive Arab population, and someday we and they will have to face up to this same problem.
(This isn’t just a problem Americans have to worry about, either: if I were a political leader in China today…I’d be very nervous.)
So how do we, in a realpolitik world, “bridge” the relationships that we have with these regimes in a way that also bridges the relationships we have with the people of those countries and their very real grievances?
One way might be to use Egypt as an example: sit down with the leaders of some of these countries and say “Hey, look, this will be you unless something is done…now how can we help you open up in a way that still keeps your family, or your tribe, making a good living in a growing country, as opposed to having to run out one night with whatever cash you’ve hidden or can carry, leaving your palaces and oilfields and a few heads behind?”
Now I’ll be the first to admit that this has not been our style for 150 years or so-but just as the military has had to adapt to the new reality that we are not likely to be fighting masses of Soviet armor in Central Europe, our diplomacy is
going to have to wake up and realize that the best shot we have in making this transition is to actually be what we mythologize to the world that we are: defenders of freedom and promoters of Truth, Justice, and The American Way.
I’ll also quickly admit that, even in a “best-case scenario”, some of these countries are not going to have friendly relations with us going forward-but allowing that process to happen is probably the best way to establish our own credibility, and re-earning our “honest broker” status, in many cases, may be the best outcome we can hope for.
And it doesn’t have to be all bad: Vietnam, in a third of a century, went from being a country that we blew up on a daily basis to a country that has, for the most part, found its own way in the world-and we were able to adapt to that new reality just fine.
So let the warning be heard, Smart People In Power: there are a lot more countries like Egypt out there, there’s a simple test available to figure out which ones could be giving us trouble one day (the “hypocrite!” test), and we suddenly have a perfect opportunity to begin the process of “resetting” the relationships between the US and some of the most odious regimes with whom we are today doing business.
It’s gonna take some serious “tough love”, and a hard reassessment of who we are as a foreign policy “player”-but the undeniable reality is that, in the end, if we keep propping up these rulers who are working against their people’s best interests it is going to come back to bite us, over and over, just as it is in Egypt right now…and as the citizens who are supposed to be running this process while trying to avoid getting bit ourselves, we have to learn to recognize “we never saw it coming” for the giant load of hooey that it really is.
fake-consultant says
…than the intelligence professionals here, which is why the story opens with the fingerpointing reference.
howland-lew-natick says
Nobody predicted it. Isn’t that the way it happens? Maybe a young woman’s appeal triggered it. Maybe conditions. Maybe the Internet.
<
p>It isn’t unprecedented. Sometimes these things are set off by farmers in Concord or peasants storming a prison in Paris. Sometimes it’s just little things.
<
p>How many people in DC are thinking about it happening here? People who have taken great care to ensure the population doesn’t get out of hand. Brutality, intimidation, terror are tools that only work for so long. How many control freaks in the nations capitol are worried about what the people are thinking? (TSA, part of Homeland Security, even has a mind reader program to spot “terrorists”.) How long before people figure out they are more likely killed by people on a government payroll than by terrorists? What will the great reactionaries do?
<
p>History shows us that they tighten control. Expect to be treated no better than a kid in Houston. Expect the Patriot Act extension to sail through, perhaps even made permanent, Internet censorship bills passed without them even being read. More weapons procured to control the assembly of people from our “defense establishment”. More training in population control by armed authority and more centralized control over them by federal leadership.
<
p>With heebie jeebie paranoia gone wild in DC, who will lead the charge for more population control? Republican? Democrat? Or maybe good ol’ Bipartisanship?
fake-consultant says
…isn’t even ideologically directed: it’s fair to point out that a lot of interest in security is driven by the “sales reps” who sell fear on a national level and contracts to our government.
<
p>and for the most part no elected official has ever lost an election by going all “law and order”, so there’s an obvious bias that asserts itself on this issue.
<
p>but the real answer to your question–and this is the unfortunate part of the story–is that the leaders in population control won’t be a professional from any political party.
<
p>it’ll be the very population that is going to end up being more tightly controlled.
<
p>congress may have paseed the patriot act, but the public wanted it, big-time–and if the public demanded that it go away, it probably would.
<
p>in the end, we are the guilty parties here, even more than our representatives, and that’s one of the hard truths that have to be faced here.
sabutai says
Why hasn’t Egyptian foment happened earlier? Why now?
<
p>First of all, it has, and nothing came of it. For awhile, who was to think this was any different?
<
p>The French didn’t see Tunisia coming, and the French-Tunisia relationship is a lot more intimate than the relationship the United States has with Egypt. I would submit that the United States didn’t see this coming for the same reason they don’t see popular resistance coming in Belarus, Bhutan, Gabon, or Fiji — because it doesn’t usually happen. But then when a resistance arises (in a color or flower revolution), everybody looks back and wonders why it wasn’t anticipated. Nobody saw the American or French Revolutions coming. I don’t think this second guessing is particularly fair, particularly since we’re dealing with the fact that Republicans from McCarthy to Dubya regularly eviscerate our foreign affairs professionals and replace them with politically connected amateurs and uneducated seat-warmers.
fake-consultant says
…is actually quite similar to mine in that we both see these problems as existing in a ton of places, and that we see how we often place ourselves in a position that acts against the best interests of those populations.
<
p>the second guessing that i’m applying is to suggest that if we get right, across the board, with these populations, by working to move the regimes in a way that makes life better for those folks, that it will inure to us in a positive way.
<
p>essentially i’m proposing that we could do ourselves good by doing good, and i think the political leadership of this country would do well to adopt such a plan.
fake-consultant says
…if we move to this type of relationship with some of these countries, it takes the question of “when?” very much off the table, and removes the need to have to guess, which i gather intelligence folks often aren’t trying to do anyway, as much as they are monitoring trends and offering options.
sabutai says
I might be accused of being too hard-headed a realist on this, but you talk about getting “right” by these populations. This brings up two questions with which I wrestle:
<
p>What about populations that, if participating in a democratic election, would vote in non-democratic candidates? The German Reichstag on the eve of World War II counted the Communists and Nazis as the two largest parties…hardly the recipe for democratic government. In 2011, I think some populations would vote freely for leaders uninterested in democracy: either faction in Thailand, Muslim extremists in Yemen or Saudi Arabia, Silvio Berlusconi to name a few.
<
p>And the second is how to get right with, say, Saudi Arabia? Stop buying their oil and supplying their weapons? This not only wrecks the European, and thus Western, economy but also deprives us of our major bulwark against Iran. How do we do right by the North Korean people…and would they even know it?
<
p>The case in Egypt is impressive, and I don’t doubt that the United States can’t blithely support autocrats when there is a legitimate democratic alternative. However, siding with the alternative when all it will do is antagonize the current regime and possibly endanger supporters of that alternative doesn’t strike me as a great option. And I think that’s the case in many, many places (Belarus, Burma, Sri Lanka, the PRC, Bhutan, Gabon, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Honduras for starters).
fake-consultant says
…so let’s give it a shot:
<
p>so right off the bat, we are going to lose some of those elections, and we are going to be dealing with people we wish we weren’t.
<
p>so whgat would happen if we had to deal with groups that don’t like us?
<
p>we have hamas and fatah in palestine, and of the two fatah seems to be a group that can be more easily worked with…but egypt is able to deal with hamas, and to do so with some degree of reasonableness.
<
p>pakistan is the most difficult situation of all these countries, except perhaps china, and to me that’s because the real trouble in pakistan is ethnic (pashtun v punjabi) and it spills over the durand line into afghanistan.
<
p>we had relations with the taliban, in the late ’90s, and they might not have liked our culture (officially), but they were looking for an economic leg up, and we got ’em hooked up with oil pipelines and the like, and it’s gone downhill from there.
<
p>if we could find a way to bring economic development to a place like waziristan, or helman, in a way that is not offensive to the local communities (even something small, like wells and a clinic or two, or some help building roads), we can reach a place of “we don’t hate you enough to support al qaeda”–and if we could just persuade the punjabis of pakistan to “advance” the process with recognition from the home government, we might do everyone good.
<
p>we have done it, in africa, in small ways: here’s an example…and this kind of outreach is not atuomatically going to hurt us with these regimes.
<
p>beyond that, we can change elements of our behavior, on our own, without antagonizing allies, even if their role changes: egypt doesn’t have to be the place that tortures our “renditionees”, and israel doesn’t have to perform as many services for us as they do today–and those kind of changes, all by themselves, would be a big part of “doing good”, especially in egypt and presumably in pakistan.
<
p>if either electric or compressed natural gas vehicles were more popular in this country, we’d be in a position to speak to the saudis with a whole new voice–and as far as china goes, we have a lot of contacts, and we just have to keep trying with them as best we can, and making it clear to the population that we support openness.
<
p>and the news isn’t all bad:
<
p>sinn féin has pretty well made the transition from terrorists to politicians, the tamil tigers might just do the same, and it’s entirely likely that the muslim brotherhood ends up being the group that controls the most radical in egypt, rather than the source of the most radical in egypt.
lasthorseman says
http://www.globalresearch.ca/i…
<
p>http://www.globalresearch.ca/i…