Civil Discord in Egypt this past week...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Will the Mubarek government fall?

If so, will a more parliamentary form of government emerge?

If not, what accomodations, if any, will be made to Egyptians currently marginalized?

Will the Islamic Brotherhood accede to power, and if so what does that mean for the Middle East and for the West?

Thoughts?

[a completely inoffensive name]

What is the difference in purpose from this thread and the Egypt thread already made?

[Centurion1]

yeah seamus you need to lock your own thread.

[Major Robert Dump]

He poses very specific questions, and the other thread is too long and out of control.

I can't answer any of the questions other than saying a "wait-and-see" approach is warranted. The days of the US picking "stability" over justice I think are coming to a swift end. The old saying that "countries don't have friends, they have interests" is one that will fall to the wayside in the new information age makes it difficult for us as a nation to hide our unholy alliances.

Of course there are those who seem to think that america has never and can never do any wrong, and they are blaming the situation in Egypt on President Obama wholesale right now. Seriously, it's the usual pundits.

[PanzerJaeger]

The problem is that there are other emerging and re-emerging powers who are all too willing to prop up strong men around the world. Speaking as an American, standing for democracy and human rights is all well and good, but not if it leaves the United States at a strategic disadvantage in a critical region.

Egypt was a key ally against the Soviets and later against Islamic terrorism. Hopefully this unrest will yield a secular, democratic state that embraces Western values (lol), but President Obama needs to be prepared to deal aggressively with whoever comes to power to keep Egypt in the US' corner.

[Major Robert Dump]

The problem is that there are other emerging and re-emerging powers who are all too willing to prop up strong men around the world. Speaking as an American, standing for democracy and human rights is all well and good, but not if it leaves the United States at a strategic disadvantage in a critical region.

Egypt was a key ally against the Soviets and later against Islamic terrorism. Hopefully this unrest will yield a secular, democratic state that embraces Western values (lol), but President Obama needs to be prepared to deal aggressively with whoever comes to power to keep Egypt in the US' corner.

As an American, I would tend to agree with you. However, abscense a clear and immediate military threat it is hard to justify to anyone other than Americans that we support a bad regime to benefit us at their expense. Furthermore, where do we draw the line? Can nations continue to support oppressive regimes because it keeps their energy, labor and agricultural prices low? Doing such things also minimizes true acts of international humanitarianism and defense of human rights on the part of Americans.

There is no doubt that whoever takes the reigns in Egypt must be held accountable by both regional and world leaders. I can think of far worse regimes than the one being ousted in Egypt, and I find it highly likely that a fledgling democracy is going to fail, at least initially, and will require its problems to be ironed out.

The question is what level of patience do the Egyptians have, and what are their short term expectations? Short of long term financial infusions by multiple world partners, nothing is going to create equality and jobs overnight, but all too often the people involved in fledgling democracies and revolutions expect immediate results. I would hope the education level of Egyptians as a whole would prevent them from the same path as, say, Bolivia.

[Fragony]

Whoever gets the most out of it will have to think twice even when thinking about going to the toilet. I see nothing bad comming out of it even if it's the brotherhood, might even be good as they will have to change. Eyes of the world are on Egypt.

edit: power games! Iran openly backs the protesters, probably hoping it will spread to their real arch-enemy Saudi-Arabia.

[Fisherking]

It would seem form events that the people no longer want a government dominated by the military.

Every head of state has come from there since the ouster of the king.

They want free elections.

Will the military give in to this?

I think they may offer free elections, but I don’t know if they will keep their hands out of the matter.

[Furunculus]

Of course there are those who seem to think that america has never and can never do any wrong, and they are blaming the situation in Egypt on President Obama wholesale right now. Seriously, it's the usual pundits.

shouldn't that read:"there are those who seem to think that america has never and can never do any right, and they are blaming the situation in Egypt on President Obama wholesale right now"

[Fragony]

Interestingly enough the army has made a statement that they won't open fire on demonstraters. There suposedly have also been skirmishes between the army and the police. I wish Leet Erikson would drop in nobody understands the muslim world better

[a completely inoffensive name]

shouldn't that read:"there are those who seem to think that america has never and can never do any right, and they are blaming the situation in Egypt on President Obama wholesale right now"

No.

[Furunculus]

perhaps that is a US perspective, but from Britain mine certainly makes a lot of sense as the usual crowd of anti-yank whiners emerge from under their rocks. :)

[Fragony]

perhaps that is a US perspective, but from Britain mine certainly makes a lot of sense as the usual crowd of anti-yank whiners emerge from under their rocks. :)

They have been blisfully silent here ever since he has returned in the person of Obama. They have dived upon the Mossad training sharks to destroy Egypts tourist industry instead, oh the lefties what to do with them

[Husar]

As long as you don't think that America is always left, I can see some merit to both statements.

[Fragony]

You can't handle the truth, I am not 100% sure it's real though

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/imag...a40b4342fd.jpg

[Husar]

You can't handle the truth, I am not 100% sure it's real though

http://files.abovetopsecret.com/imag...a40b4342fd.jpg

A shark with an UFO latched onto it's head?

[Fragony]

A shark with an UFO latched onto it's head?

I knew it. Floating Unrecognisable Object would be better though, sharks float, bet it looks too much like FU. It isn't perfect yet though, it can't control it's emotions yet it killed a GERMAN tourist

question everything

[Fragony]

That's it, tourists being hauled out. 50 euro a week I think I'm going there, in for a little trouble Hax? I felt so helpless during the green wave let's show a little bit of solidarity.

[Subotan]

A Parliamentary regime would work best. The Arab world desperately needs to move away from the idea that power can and should be vested all in one institution, and one man. We need an anti-de Gaulle to establish the Fourth Republic!

[Ronin]

I´m for whatever solution makes oil prices go down and not have some religious nut come into charge.
I have realized a long time ago no good solutions ever come out of that area......only stable or unstable ones.

[Furunculus]

Frankly, it is up to the people to not only demand change, but to keep on demanding change until they achieve a permanent political settlement is acceptable to them.

Otherwise the inevitable result is one-man, one-vote, one-time.

If the Egyptian people seriously want a modern representative parliamentary democracy then they have my full support, even if they have to spill rivers of Egyptian blood to achieve it.

It is their right to have the opportunity to live their lives as legally responsible adults, it is their responsibility to achieve it.

I'll back them to the hilt, literally.........

[Hax]

Will the Islamic Brotherhood accede to power, and if so what does that mean for the Middle East and for the West?

Initially, no. There is a Dutch specialist in the Middle East who said that the Muslim Brotherhood aren't as extremist as we make them out to be. They are Muslim-democrats in the sense that as of this moment, they are not so much interested in the restoration of the Caliphate or the creation of an Islamic state as they are in the creation of a democratic state in Egypt. Afterwards, we'll see. However, if there are free elections and the Muslim Brotherhood would gain a sizable part of parliament, they'd still have to let some of their statements go in order to create a coalition. But who knows what they'll do? They've already said they're not interested in being in the next government, should Mubarak's reign collapse and free elections would be held.

The problem is that there are other emerging and re-emerging powers who are all too willing to prop up strong men around the world. Speaking as an American, standing for democracy and human rights is all well and good, but not if it leaves the United States at a strategic disadvantage in a critical region.

This is the crux of the matter. If you ask me, America is lucky that the protesters haven't aimed their guns at the US, but at Mubarak. Seriously, and now you're going to say "Well, if they pick the wrong party, we should just overthrow the government/declare war/(fill in statement here)". You remember Iran, 1953? You know what happened in '79? Yeah, direct result of Operation Ajax. And now look at Iran, don't they just love the US.

Egypt was a key ally against the Soviets and later against Islamic terrorism. Hopefully this unrest will yield a secular, democratic state that embraces Western values (lol), but President Obama needs to be prepared to deal aggressively with whoever comes to power to keep Egypt in the US' corner.

Not a chance. Egypt is a largely Muslim country, of course Muslim values will play a large role in how the country is organised. Is that a threat to the United States? Rashid al-Ghannoushi is the leader of the Tunisian Islamist party, but listen what he has to say about certain things:

Rashid Al-Ghannushi represents a progressive strain in Islamic reformism, and continuously stresses the need for innovation against social injustice. He underscores the importance of local culture, and an Islamist movement based in the needs of Tunisians and not in "the obscure theories of Sayyid Qutb". He has sided with worker's rights, unionism, and women's education and rights, though those rights are based in Islam and not Western liberal feminism.[2]

Would you rather deal with a al-Ghannushi or a al-Zawahiri? You tell me. The best part of his party? They're non-violent.

but President Obama needs to be prepared to deal aggressively with whoever comes to power to keep Egypt in the US' corner.

Why don't you first wait and see what those "Islamist" parties have to say and what they do before we bomb Egypt into a glass crater, y'know, just in case.

A Parliamentary regime would work best. The Arab world desperately needs to move away from the idea that power can and should be vested all in one institution, and one man.

Wonder where they got that idea from.

[Kagemusha]

Its all up to what standing will the army take. As of now the army seems to be acting calm and they dont seem to have any wish to take a violent measures against the protestors.It could be that they will simply not support Mubarak and so his show is over.

[Prince Cobra]

I think Mubarak is doomed. The dilemma who will take over stays - the islamist or more secular circles. Yet, it is quite likely Israel to find himself in a more hostile environment than it is now. IMHO it is also very important that the USA doesn't try to influence the tide of events. Lessons from past (Iran) showed this is very counter-productive.

On a different aspect, the Jasmin Revolution in Tunis turned out to be contagious. It already reached Egypt and Jordan. I think any country in the region can be next. Lybia and Syria for example. I wonder how this will affect the Iranian regime that has also become quite unpopular. We may witness serious, even surprising rearrangement in the Middle East.

Its all up to what standing will the army take. As of now the army seems to be acting calm and they dont seem to have any wish to take a violent measures against the protestors.It could be that they will simply not support Mubarak and so his show is over.

Kage, I am not even sure if the army can do something for Mubarak. The shah was not saved by the bullets of the army, I doubt Mubarak could be. It will only lead to innocent casualties and radicalize the revolution.

[Hax]

A good article from the Washington Post. It gives a bit of an insight on how the Muslim Brotherhood functions and what its goals are:


Misconceptions about the Egyptian crisis

EGYPT ON Monday continued to teeter between a popular revolution that would remove President Hosni Mubarak and a forcible restoration of order by the police and Army. The opposition called for mass demonstrations on Tuesday; the regime did its best to impede them by canceling trains and other transportation and continuing to block the Internet.
While Washington and the world anxiously awaited the outcome of that test of strength, debate continued on the stakes and the dangers of the Egyptian revolt. Unfortunately, the discussion has been infected by considerable misinformation. Several common but mistaken notions are in particular need of correction: that the protesters have no leaders or platform; that radical Islamists are likely to assume power in a post-Mubarak Egypt; and that the United States has little ability to influence the outcome of the crisis.
Though they surprised many in Washington - including the Obama administration - the Jan. 25 demonstrations that touched off Egypt's rebellion were anything but spontaneous. They were carefully organized by an opposition coalition, led by the April 6 movement - a secular organization dominated by young people. The movement originated three years ago, when it organized a day of protests and strikes; its Facebook group has nearly 90,000 members. April 6 is one of several broad secular coalitions that formed in recent years to promote democracy in Egypt. Another, led by former U.N. nuclear energy official Mohamed ElBaradei, has more than 240,000 Facebook members.

Over the weekend, most of the secular opposition groups and the banned Muslim Brotherhood met to form a joint platform. They called for Tuesday's mass demonstration and worked toward consensus on a platform. This probably will call for a transitional government, possibly headed by Mr. ElBaradei, that would lift political restrictions and lay the groundwork for free and fair elections. The coalition contains business owners, former members of parliament and defectors from the regime, and it has the capacity to oversee a political transition.
The Muslim Brotherhood remains Egypt's best-organized opposition movement, but so far it has played a marginal role in the demonstrations. Its long-term aim of establishing an Islamic government in Egypt is at odds with what the mostly secular and middle-class demonstrators have been calling for: the democratization and modernization of the country. The Brotherhood, unlike its Palestinian offshoot Hamas, abandoned violence decades ago.

No one knows how the Islamists would fare in a free election, since one has not been held in Egypt during the past half-century. But many Egyptian analysts believe an Islamist party would attract a minority of voters and would be unlikely, in the short term, to come to power. In the longer term, the best defense against it is well-organized and dynamic secular parties - which will only be possible if the current authoritarian regime is dismantled.

The most misguided assertion in Washington holds that the United States lacks the capacity to influence the outcome of the Egyptian crisis. In fact, both sides in Egypt have been aggressively appealing for support from the Obama administration, and for good reason - the United States supplies $1.5 billion in annual aid to Egypt, including well more than $1 billion for the Egyptian military. The White House has rightly hinted that that aid is now at stake, and on Sunday Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton finally announced U.S. support for a "transition" to "real democracy." Both in public and in every other communications channel, the administration should be making explicit the connection between future funding for the Egyptian military and that democratic transition.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

He poses very specific questions, and the other thread is too long and out of control.

I love specificity, but the orgahs are voting with their posts for the other thread. Ah well.....