by Barry Rubin
The New York Times building, NY, NY.
Would
you ever imagine that the leading American newspaper would openly
advocate siding with Islamist forces in the Middle East against all of
America’s allies and friends, and I mean with eyes wide open and with
full awareness that it sought to overthrow them? Well, the day has come.
How has the argument for this strategy, which the Obama Administration, is already pursuing, being made?
A New York Times July 30th editorial entitled
“Egypt’s Dangerous Slide” shows a real catastrophe for the United
States. What is amazing is that it takes less than five minutes to
deconstruct Obama Administration’s Middle East policy.
But be wary since if you do this—even once—you will be barred from 95 percent of mass media and academic jobs. [Note: What’s amazing about the previous sentence is that it is fact accurate. That’s why the public debate is so bad.]
After
all, we are at a moment when Israel-Palestinian talks haven’t even
agreed on pre-conditions (a point which is usually reached before the
two sides even begin talks) yet Secretary of State John Kerry predicts
success within nine months (and the mass media quotes him without
snickering).
“Deadly blundering by Egypt’s military rulers is making a bad situation much worse,” starts the editorial.
One
of the most blatant, arrogant views of the American foreign policy
establishment today is the frequency with which its members insist that
leaders know nothing about their own countries. Thus, Obama, a man who
has spent a few hours in Israel and has no empathy with it, can dare to
say that he knows better what the country needs than does Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Last
weekend’s massacre of marchers supporting the deposed president,
Mohamed Morsi, will make national reconciliation and a return to
democracy far more difficult.”
No
kidding. First of all, there was never going to be conciliation.
Second, the Muslim Brotherhood isn’t exactly eager to get national
conciliation, a point the editorial and the Obama Administration never
mention.
Third, the military wants massacres
because it seeks to intimidate the Brotherhood. That’s how things work
in Egypt. In fact, that’s what happened last time, when the Brotherhood
was crushed in the 1950s and 1960s, with its leaders sent to
concentration camps, tortured, and hung. And that’s what the Brotherhood
would be doing to its opposition if its regime had survived.The Brotherhood is portrayed simply as the victim.
In other words it is not Egypt’s leaders who don’t understand Egypt but rather America’s current leaders.
“The stakes are too high for any country to give up on the search for a peaceful resolution.”
No! Egyptians know that the stakes are too high not to give
up on the search for a peaceful resolution. This is the Middle East.
And this is true just like as with the Syrian civil war, the
Israel-Palestinian conflict, and every
secular/nationalist/traditionalist versus give up on the search for a
peaceful resolution Islamist battle in the region.But fourth the
Brotherhood is also provoking a lot of violence which is neither
reported or protested by the U.S. government
“Washington’s
leverage has been limited, despite…its good intentions undermined by
years of inconsistent American policies. President Obama urgently needs
to rebuild that trust. And he cannot hope to do so by maintaining a
cautious diplomatic silence while the Arab world’s most populous and
most important country unravels.”
Where
to begin! First, American policies have not been undermined by
inconsistent policies. Doesn’t anyone know Egyptian history?
1952-1956:
America supported the Egyptian military coup and even saved the regime!
Only when President Gamal Abdel Nasser behave aggressively—not so much
toward Israel but by conservative Arab states–and allied with the USSR,
did America turn against him.
1956-1973: An anti-American regime allied with the Soviet Union and aggressive against America’s friends was opposed.
1974-2011: The United States was allied with a moderate regime.
Get it? It must be hard for the current establishment to understand so let me capitalize it and put in bold:
IT WASN’T AMERICA’S FAULT U.S. POLICY WAS ‘INCONSISTENT”; IT WAS EGYPT’S.
As for “good intentions” may I remind you that Obama did not have good intentions at all. Just
like any British or American imperialist he sought to overthrow the
regime and replace it with a Muslim Brotherhood and thus inevitably
Sharia regime.
How’s that for “good intentions?”
And
if Obama wanted to rebuild trust–as opposed to protecting the
Br0therhood’s interests–he would rebuild trust with the Egyptian army
and people by supporting the new government rather than seek to empower
an anti-Christian, anti-Western, antisemitic, anti-American,
homophobic, genocidal, anti-woman totalitarian-destined regime.
The editorial continued:
“Whatever
Egypt’s new military strongman, Gen. Abdul-Fattah el-Sisi, thought he
was doing by summoning people to Tahrir Square last Friday to demand a
`mandate’ to fight terrorism, the result was to undermine Egypt’s
prospects for stability even further. Whatever self-described
pro-democracy groups thought they were doing by endorsing his call, the
result was to strengthen the military and inflame raw divisions between
civilian parties.”
He
knew exactly what he was doing. He wanted to build and mobilize a
civilian support base. And the civilian parties weren’t “inflamed,” they
hate each other and know they are engaged in a life-and-death struggle.
“And
whatever the Muslim Brotherhood leaders thought they were doing by
urging followers to challenge security forces, the result was to add to
the bloodshed and give the military new excuses for repression.”
Same patronizing tone. The Brotherhood knows what it is doing, too: it doesn’t want conciliation; it wants revolution.
“And things are likely to get worse until the military can be persuaded to hand over power and return to the barracks.”
Wrong
again. They will get worse if the military does hand over power. For
every day—except a few disastrous weeks under Mursi—during the last 61
years the army basically held power even if it was in the barracks.
“Other
Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia and its allied Persian Gulf
emirates, are unlikely to help. They are more concerned with stamping
out any potential political threat to their own autocratic rule at home
than in encouraging democracy in Egypt.”
Of
course because they understand Arab politics! And are they wrong?
Listen to them. A Brotherhood takeover of Egypt would increase the
political threat to them! Now you want to overthrow Saudi Arabia and any
other remaining American friends in the Arab world?
“Israel
has its own legitimate security concerns, mostly centered on preventing
threats from Egypt’s restive Sinai Peninsula and Hamas-ruled Gaza.”
And in parallel you want to further undermine Israel’s security?
“That leaves the United States and the European Union.”
Right.
If Egypt, the Arab states, and Israel don’t undermine their own
security the United States and the EU will. People, think what you are
saying here! Consider what insanity you are advocating!
In
other words, the pro-Islamist forces are the Muslim Brotherhood and
Salafists (and in a sense the Taliban and al-Qaida) backed by the EU and
United States, ([plus Turkey and Qatar along with Iran, Syria, and
Hizballah); while the anti-Islamist forces are the Arab countries and
Israel?
Does that seem strange?
“But
Washington has been doing less than its share. Excessive concerns with
maintaining good relations with Egypt’s generals and fears that a
loosened military grip on Sinai and the Gaza border might throw off
nascent Israeli-Palestinian peace talks have wrongly muffled America’s
public voice.”
I’m
not believing this stuff. Let’s get tough with the generals, not the
Islamists? And the best way to help peace talks is to return an Islamist
regime in Egypt? That will surely quiet Hamas and the jihadists in
Sinai and make Israel feel real secure. Oh by the way, the main threat
to even the Palestinian Authority (PA) is Hamas! No doubt the PA will
thank you, too.
“Most of all, President Obama needs to clarify what America stands for as Egypt struggles over its future.”
He sure does. By changing sides away from the Islamists and toward others, including Israel.
Posted originally via RubinReports http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2013/08/americas-real-dangerous-slide-is-to-be.html
Barry Rubin
Source: http://www.gloria-center.org/2013/08/americas-real-dangerous-slide-is-to-be-on-the-wrong-side-in-the-world
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment