West Asia News and Discussions

Vasu · Post by **Vasu** » 31 Jan 2011 10:13

Reported on DD News this morning - China has blocked the word "Egypt" from showing any results on many popular search and twittereque sites.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 31 Jan 2011 10:27

Clinton Calls for ‘Orderly Transition’ in Egypt

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/world ... diplo.html

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 31 Jan 2011 10:53

Ching-Chong Chinaman is simply terrified of any uprising in China or parts of China! However,the "news will out" as they say.CNN had pics of leaflets from Muslim fundamentalists warning the demonstrators NOT to trust El Baradei,the "puppet-Pretender"!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... reets.html

Egypt in crisis: vigilantes and prisoners on the streets
Egypt's anti government uprising showed signs of fraying into lawlessness on Sunday as a series of mass jail breaks saw thousands of prisoners released on to the streets.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 31 Jan 2011 10:57

abhishek_sharma wrote:Clinton Calls for ‘Orderly Transition’ in Egypt

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/world ... diplo.html

They are scared...They are VERY scared...If Egypt falls, all bets are off...Jordan will be next, and on to the big daddy of them all, SAudi Arabia...The entire middle east might look like Iran X n times!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 31 Jan 2011 13:53

it can be argued that jordan is farther along the path of reforms and freedom for the people. the Syrian and Saudi regimes seem to be firmly in the saddle....all the free benefits the saudis give their citizens like tax holidays, medical care, higher education (?) probably help to keep the lid on resentment...egypt is not as rich so educated salaried middle class, small businessmen and students are always there.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 31 Jan 2011 15:04

this is worth a read... the trigger of this round of protests is food prices, which have multiple and complex origins...

Food Revolution

It does not take a febrile imagination to guess what the Brotherhood’s ascendancy might mean for Israel, and for strategic stability in the Mid-East. Asia has as much to lose if this goes wrong as the West. China’s energy intensity per unit of GDP is double US levels, and triple the UK.

i didn't know this, indicates exactly why China is so paranoid about energy security

The surge in global food prices since the summer – since Ben Bernanke signalled a fresh dollar blitz, as it happens – is not the underlying cause of Arab revolt, any more than bad harvests in 1788 were the cause of the French Revolution.

Yet they are the trigger, and have set off a vicious circle. Vulnerable governments are scrambling to lock up world supplies of grain while they can. Algeria bought 800,000 tonnes of wheat last week, and Indonesia has ordered 800,000 tonnes of rice, both greatly exceeding their normal pace of purchases. Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Bangladesh, are trying to secure extra grain supplies.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Jan 2011 21:41

Nightwatch on Egypt. Postin in full due to the relevance of all the info.

LINK

Egypt: Security.

The government. On Saturday and Sunday, Army units remained deployed but inactive except around the national museums. Police forces withdrew from the streets, prompting formation of neighborhood and building ad hoc security patrols to deter looters.

On Saturday, police withdrew from the streets of Cairo and other northern towns. The Army evidently had no orders to maintain law and order. The demonstrators were allowed free rein in somewhat confined space, curiously. For example there were no reports of widespread indiscriminate looting, which normally goes with this kind of uprising.

Later on Saturday the police seemed to regroup and tested their capacity for crackdown, but keeping several buildings in Cairo safe from arson.

On Sunday, security police closed al Jazeera's local offices. Al Jazeera has been streaming live video on the internet of the protests since last Thursday. Multiple news services reported the police returned to the streets Al Jazeera reported that the police will be redeployed in strength "throughout Egypt" on 31 January.

Xinhua reported Army soldiers opened fire on protesters gathered in Cairo's Tahrir Square.

Comment: If confirmed this would represent the first time Egyptian soldiers fired on protestors in this crisis. All other reporting indicates soldiers have been sympathetic to the protests. This report looks like it was manufactured by Chinese media censors to intimidate China's student population.

On Sunday afternoon, President Mubarak met with newly appointed Vice President Omar Suleiman, Defense Minister Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi and Armed Forces Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Sami Annan, according to Al Arabiya. In the meeting with his senior commanders, Mubarak reportedly told the armed forces operations to control the security situation.

The opposition. The demonstrations were huge on Saturday in multiple cities; the largest was in Cairo's Tahrir Square. They were only slightly smaller on Sunday. The Muslim Brotherhood emerged from the murk and attempted to provide some organization and guidance. The Brotherhood's efforts to take control began late and might not have worked.

Politics. The government. President Mubarak ordered his new Cabinet to preserve subsidies, control inflation and provide more jobs, according to state television.

In a letter to newly appointed Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq, Mubarak also directed the new government should challenge all forms of corruption. The letter went on to stress the need for political reform in the constitution and in legislation via dialogue with all the country's political parties. In addition, Mubarak recognized as legitimate the concerns of the protesters, though he said religious slogans had penetrated their ranks, a reference to the Muslim Brotherhood, who Mubarak accused of instigating chaos. Egyptian media reported.

On Saturday, in a late night speech to the nation, Mubarak appointed his long time friend and chief of intelligence, Omar Suleiman as Vice President, making him the first vice president in 30 years. Mubarak never filled the task, knowing the Egyptian penchant for conspiracies.

The government resigned and he named a new prime minister.

The Opposition. The protestors rejected Mubarak's changes and continued to call for his resignation. Egyptian opposition forces agreed on the 30th to support Mohamed El Baradei, the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, to negotiate with the government, according to a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood, Essam el-Eryan.

Mohamed El Baradei joined the protesters in Tahrir Square in Cairo and told them, "What we have begun cannot go back." He said Egyptians have reclaimed their rights and have called for an end to Mubarak's regime. El Baradei also said that what the people have accomplished cannot be undone. He asked for the people's patience, as "change is coming in the next few days."

He called for Mubarak to leave office today to make way for a national unity government. The situation in Egypt clearly shows that Mubarak must leave, and his departure should be followed by a transition to a unity government with plans for a free and fair election, El Baradei added

In a statement issued today, two Egyptian protest groups --the National Assembly for Change and the April 6 group -- asked Egyptian opposition figure Mohammed El Baradei to form an interim salvation government, Al Arabiya reported. April 6 has called for a general strike.

One prominent opposition leader said his group would only negotiate with the Army because Mubarak's promises are the "same old nonsense."

Other reactions.
Royal Dutch Shell plans to remove its international staff and their families from Egypt on Jan. 30, an unnamed source said, Reuters reported. Around 60 families will leave as a safety precaution; they are waiting for final approval from the Egyptian travel authorities, the source said. According to a Shell spokesman, the company is carefully monitoring the situation and is preparing for several contingencies

Almost all international air service to Cairo has been suspended. Many countries ordered the withdrawal of non-essential personnel from their missions, advised against travel to Egypt and advised tourists to depart.

The Suez Canal remains open and functioning. The Port of Alexandria continues to operate, impeded only by the ability of workers to get to work safely.

General Comments: Mubarak has managed to rally his supporters sufficiently to organize a transition to a different leadership. The Army protected important buildings but did not execute the orders of the President during the weekend; not even the orders of Field Marshal Tantawi, the Minister of Defense.

The Army began to respond to the civilian chain of command only after the return from the US of the chief of staff, General Annan, and the appointment of Suleiman as vice president. That tends to reinforce the NightWatch hypothesis that the underlying issue in the government response is the succession after Mubarak.

For the first time in 30 years, there is a constitutional successor. Mubarak has created conditions for him to leave office. Chances are that he, like so many other authoritarian rulers, will overstay his last days and misjudge a good time to leave, which would have been Sunday.

No one will trust that Mubarak is an agent of reform after 30 years of brutality that the West and the secular Arabs approved, supported, sold arms to, and extolled as a model!!

Suleiman can command the respect of the security forces and the Army, but not the Brotherhood or the inchoate protestors. Thus, an overreaction phase has begun. The regime will attempt to restore order, using the police. The Army will not lead this crackdown.

It is not clear that El Baradei will be more than a short term spokesperson for the opposition. The Islamists represent a powerful alternative that is much better organized and has much better credentials for leadership of a new regime.

What has occurred thus far is an uprising. The salient characteristic of all uprisings is the lack of leadership. If they do not evolve a higher level organization and become a movement, they collapse, if only because people must eat and take care of daily necessities. The key indicator that this is still an uprising is that there is no group with which the government can negotiate and the protestors have no goals except the ouster of Mubarak.

The past four days have shown that unemployed educated youth will burn things in protest of their plight and can make government quail. They have not shown they achieve fundamental change. In Tunis and Cairo, the old regime remains in power. There is no revolution yet in Egypt and a large government distribution of bread would go far to stabilizing the situation.

As in Tunisia, the Egyptian uprising looks to be more driven by economics than more cerebral ideas of politics. The revolutionary phase has not begun.

Somebody in Washington needs to be working seriously on the future security of Israel. There is no guarantee that an anti-Israel Islamist government will not emerge, in the revolutionary phase of this uprising, if it moves in that direction. Such a government would abrogate the peace treaty and large scale, conventional warfare with tanks would re-establish itself as the future of warfare.

Ripple effects.
China: Authorities blocked the word "Egypt" from micro-blog internet searches, including Chinese web portal sites Sina.com and Sohu.com which are comparable to Twitter. Search results for "Egypt" said the resulting page could not be found or displayed according to regulations.

Comment: This is cyber control in China. It probably is just one of a full-spread set of controls to safeguard against attempts by Chinese youths to mimic Tunisia and Egypt. When a government blocks specific search terms, that is an indicator of much more widespread interference with the internet and social media. They are vulnerable to interdiction and to the insertion of misinformation.

Egypt-US: The U.S. Embassy in Cairo asked American citizens to leave Egypt as soon as possible. The Department of State authorized the voluntary departure of diplomatic families, dependents and non-essential workers. It also is arranging transportation for U.S. citizens out of Egypt to safehaven locations in Europe with flights to begin departing on the 31st. The State Department statement said the evacuation is voluntary for those who wish to leave.

Comment: This action during an apparent lull in the disorders signifies that the US has intelligence that the situation is likely to get much worse. Any kind of evacuation is exceptional and exceptionally expensive. State would not order it, if its experts expected an early improvement. This is a behavioral indicator that more trouble is imminent.

US-Saudi Arabia: U.S. President Obama called Saudi King Abdallah the evening of 29 January to review the two countries' bilateral friendship and to discuss the events taking place in Egypt, state-owned Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported on the 30th. According to SPA, the events in Egypt are accompanied by chaos, looting, intimidation of innocents, exploitation of freedom and expression as well as attempts to ignite chaos to achieve suspicious goals which are unapproved by either Saudi Arabia or the United States. Abdallah affirmed the importance of Egypt's stability, safety and security, adding Egyptian capabilities and achievements are integral to the accomplishments of Arab and Islamic nations.

Comment: Reading between the lines of an unusual Saudi press release about a conversation involving the King, the King's message is the US should not abandon the Egyptian leadership now by gambling on unknown opposition forces. That advice goes against thrust of the statements made by the US this weekend. The King's advice is sound under normal conditions, which these are not.

Sudan: For the record. More than 99.57 percent of voters from southern Sudan's 10 states voted to secede from the north in a referendum intended to end decades of civil war, according to the first official preliminary results released by Sudanese officials on 30 January. Mass celebrations began in the southern capital of Juba on the news.

Tunisia: Thousands of Tunisians on 30 January welcomed Islamist leader Sheikh Rachid Ghannouchi, the head of the Ennahda party, at the airport in Tunis, Reuters reported. The reception was the largest showing of the country's Islamists in 20 years, as many of them were jailed or exiled by former President Ben Ali. Ghannouchi was exiled in 1989

Comment: This might be the beginning of the real revolution and the news is not necessarily good.

In one fell swoop Islamic nations are under stress everywhere in North Africa: Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Northern Sudan, Yemen.

ShyamD, Things dont look good. No wonder yahudis are pissed.

Read the NW comments about KSA remarks. The underlying message is change in Egypt should be ridden by US.

To me at this time tee military system is deciding to take charge. They might replace Mubarak with Suleiman and Annan in charge.

They might even get some funds from KSA (oil price increase thanks to Egypt crisis fill their coffers) to stabilize in job creation and food imports.

Egypt is a military state from time immemorial. Successful Pharoahs were the ones who led troopsin battle.

The only thing is the military leaders put on civil clothes once they take office.

El baradei type leadership will lead to real instability. He never had a chance and if he cares for Egypt he should help Mubarak move on without trying to jockey for personal power.

AKalam · Post by **AKalam** » 31 Jan 2011 22:19

This reminds of the popular uprising in Dhaka and Bangladesh to remove Ershad in 1991. We did not have a perfect democracy since then, but it has improved with time and it is getting better in every cycle. IMHO the days of army rule are over for Egypt and many other impoverished Arab regions despite the apprehension about "Islamists" gaining more foothold and power, the tin pots with oil wealth may have some staying power for a few more decades (or not) because of the largess they can afford to lavish on their relatively smaller population.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Jan 2011 23:02

CNBC report:

LINK

Turmoil in Egypt has sent a message to rulers through the region that they need to get "ahead of the curve" or face similar destabilizing problems, Pimco's Mohamed El-Erian told CNBC.

While El-Erian, co-CEO of the world's largest bond fund manager, dismissed comparisons to the Iranian revolution of 1979, he said the unrest is nonetheless important for what it signifies regarding the mood on the Arab street.

"What happens is the rulers in the Middle East will understand that the combination of unemployment, high prices and the demonstration effect are such that they need to get ahead of the curve," he said. "It's the same for US foreign policy-understanding that you need to get ahead of the curve and that people matter."

Egypt exploded last week with violent protests against the government of President Hosni Mubarak.

At the center of the unrest were soaring food prices that triggered the large, impoverished population into protests similar to those that had happened in Tunisia, Yemen and elsewhere over the past several weeks.

In the US, the stock market sold off aggressively on Friday as concerns about trade disruptions worried investors.

But El-Erian said Egypt will remain an ally and a friendly trading partner, even as it charts a new direction.

"It is both possible and probable that the strong relationship with the US will remain. There is tremendous respect for the US there," he said. "Don't forget, Egypt relies on tourism, Egypt relies on the Suez Canal. I think you will see a continued ally for the US in the region, but it will be an ally that is moving forward and will look different than what it looked like before."

As for investors, El-Erian urged caution but said a market overreaction could create opportunities.

"We think of it as having to play both defense and offense," he said. "On the defense side, we have a concept at Pimco of safe spreads-make sure you understand where your real purchasing power is coming from as investors. On the offense side, we're starting to see some pretty indiscriminate selling. At some point Egyptian instruments in themselves will offer some value."

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 31 Jan 2011 23:21

ramana wrote:Yehudi bhai very upset at unintended consequences of Tunisian crisis being triggered.

Based on the later posts from Nightwatch and other articles, the theory that uncle may be afterall with the destabilizers has some credibility.

Isreal has a very uncomfortable relationship with Uncle since the rise of Obama. This may be an out of box solution underway to settle the US-Islam relations. US in the long term has to permaenently get out of anti-islam posture as economically it will not be in a sustainability more. Neocons may not like (may hate it). However, this could be PVNR type gamble to change the world equations being perpetuated by the Uncle.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 01 Feb 2011 01:42

Quick comments: they may get KSA to cough up $$$$. Mubarak survived off gcc handouts anyway.

KSA set up a military and security team to keep an eye on situation. They will go in to pick up US eqpt only if things deteriorate further.

Really not sure about this one.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 01:53

It could be in case the MB take power. Plausible but not probable.

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 01 Feb 2011 02:03

Well. US ambassador despatched to meet with senior egyptian goverment officials. This will be interesting.

I have a feeling Mubarak may threaten to turn eqypt into another Iraq. Might be holding ransom to the US. But I might be wrong.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 02:11

Shades of Shah of Iran in 1979?

Mubarak might be negotiating retention of the system not himself.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 01 Feb 2011 02:42

Even if the MB tries it will not be able to dominate the government entirely on its own. It can become a Iran type framework, but war with Israel means initial success but end of Mullahcracy. Those who want to erase Israel, know very well that a quick power given to the Islamists in the region will mean over-reaction and immediate hot-headed action - and with every chance of Isarel coming out of it still alive and kicking. But then the Islamist cause takes a bashing, and they can no longer be effective for the ultimate goal of removal of Israel.

The sponsors need to control the Mullahs for the time - until Isarel can be surrounded by regimes which can coordinate a final all-out erasure attempt. The thing is all the youth are not into this line of planning, and calculations can go wrong very very much. Even if USA cuts its losses and comes out of its "anti-Islam" image, it will still be ultimately under attack from Islam itself. USA does not have the societal and ideological resources to really withstand the much more stealthy attraction of Islam on its own soil.

If European entities are hoping to get rid of the "Jewish problem" once and for all, they may wake up one fine morning to see tables turned and the Islamists coming to Europe to solve the "European problem" once and for all!

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 01 Feb 2011 02:56

Tunisia. Egypt. So which is the next country? I heard things were simmering in Yemen too. That will be too close for SA comfort.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Feb 2011 02:56

Muppalla wrote:
ramana wrote:Yehudi bhai very upset at unintended consequences of Tunisian crisis being triggered.
. This may be an out of box solution underway to settle the US-Islam relations. US in the long term has to permaenently get out of anti-islam posture as economically it will not be in a sustainability more. Neocons may not like (may hate it).

Islam dont permit such safe getting out passage for Kuffar. The more Uncle and Aunties try to get away more they will be haunted.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 01 Feb 2011 03:05

From the "conservatively" aligned World Net Daily
The global Islamist revolt is here
Worldwide Islamist revolution explodes
Fear mongering? Truth Telling? Or is just simple Crusades again?

1. Can Islamists really free Middle East/West Asia from the clutches of Western powers?
2. If yes, then what is next for them? China and India? Or More of Europe?
3. If they do have an agenda, then how are they going to find funds?

Maybe all this is just to keep the month of January-February little warm for us people out in the frozen parts of the World.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 03:24

Its fear mongering. The revolt is not Islamist but purely citizenry protesting high prices and unrepresentative rulers.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 01 Feb 2011 03:46

1. Why protests now? Answer: People have been inspired by what happened in Tunisia.
2. But, these sort of protests have happened many times. So why did it snowball into something big this time?

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 01 Feb 2011 04:29

ramana wrote:Its fear mongering. The revolt is not Islamist but purely citizenry protesting high prices and unrepresentative rulers.

Aren't you contradicting your own earlier statements that this is not a "genuine" revolution but one that is sponsored by US?

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 01 Feb 2011 04:36

Mubarak is 82. If he thinks Gamal Mubarak cannot become the next President, then what is the point in him continuing!

He will be on his way, in another week at the most!

shyamd · Post by **shyamd** » 01 Feb 2011 04:48

A question for any TSP analyst. Is it normal for TSP to send C-130 jet to pick up Paki nationals in Egypt in such crisis? I am trying to draw a link here with the Peninsula Shield.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 06:19

Ambar wrote:
ramana wrote:Its fear mongering. The revolt is not Islamist but purely citizenry protesting high prices and unrepresentative rulers.
Aren't you contradicting your own earlier statements that this is not a "genuine" revolution but one that is sponsored by US?

I was referring to the WND links quoted by SwamyG, which say Islamists are taking over. I said that is fear mongering. n Egypt its not so. Any thing wrong?

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 01 Feb 2011 06:30

I was referring to the second part of your statement about it being a "purely citizenry protesting high prices and unrepresentative rulers". If that is indeed the case, then that echoes my previous statements that this is not another 'color revolution' but a genuine revolution. Yes, the likes of El-Bardei and Islamic brotherhood might try to piggy-back on this uprising to seat themselves into power. Whatever the situation is, US cannot be too pleased with the way things stands right now. Ofcourse, if a strong contender comes up them they will try to build bridges with him - after all, nobody likes to see their tens of billions $ go waste.

As for other dictators who have been disposed off by US through uprising,well,they all became a thorn in US' flesh and had to go.What reason does US have to get rid of Mubarak or King Hussein and create more uncertainty for themselves and Israel ?

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 06:51

300 Indians flown home from Cairo

http://www.hindu.com/2011/02/01/stories ... 681200.htm

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 01 Feb 2011 06:57

ramana wrote:Its fear mongering. The revolt is not Islamist but purely citizenry protesting high prices and unrepresentative rulers.

Those two are not necessarily mutually exclusive...The primary opposition in all middel eastern regimes (Saudi, Jordan, Egypt, Syria) are islamist groups...Tunisia was a bit of an exception, but we shall see how the cookie crumbles there...Funnily, the "despotic" regimes are mostly all "secular", relatiely benign (to the West)...

In Egypt, El Baradei's support is similar to Karzai's support in Afghanistan, maybe less..

Israel, US and India as well need to be very wary..

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 07:04

Post-Mubarak transition in works, analyst says; others see regime ploy

http://www.politico.com/blogs/lauraroze ... _says.html

Senior Egyptian military officials are preparing for the transition from Hosni Mubarak’s 30-year rule and have opened discussions with the opposition, according to a veteran Middle East analyst who spoke with Egypt’s vice president who later made similar claims in a rare appearance on Egyptian television. But other Egypt analysts said they viewed the Egyptian security official's comments as a ploy to try to peel off some protesters and buy time for the embattled regime.

Egypt’s newly appointed vice president, intelligence chief Gen. Omar Suleiman, and Egyptian Defense Minister Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi are working closely together to try to manage a transition from Mubarak’s rule, Middle East analyst Stephen P. Cohen said after speaking by phone with Suleiman Monday.

The assessment came as Egypt's army issued a statement Monday pledging that it will not fire on peaceful protesters, and a day after the Pentagon said Defense Secretary Robert Gates had spoken by phone with Tantawi, but did not provide details about their conversation.

It also came shortly before Suleiman himself made an unusual appearance on Egyptian state television Monday to say Mubarak has asked him to open talks with the Egyptian opposition and to start working "expeditiously" on drawing up a package of "constitutional reforms and legislation" -- claims some analysts greeted with frank skepticism.

...

The United States, which said Monday that it is sending former American diplomatic Frank G. Wisner as an envoy to Egypt, did not immediately offer a response to Suleiman's televised comments, as the motives for the Mubarak confidant's unusual charm offensive remained subject to debate.

...

That judgment is significant, Cohen said: “By saying that there cannot be a confrontation between the military and the demonstrators, they are basically telling Mubarak the game is over for him."

...

"From the perspective of Mubarak, Vice President Omar Soleiman, the chief-of-staff General Sami Annan and the others now clinging to power every day provides an opportunity to try to weaken the opposition and peel the less committed from the demonstrations," Cook wrote Monday. "Is it any wonder that Soleiman started talking about constitutional change today? The senior command believes they can save the regime. Delusional? Perhaps, but not surprising given their deep links to the regime."

While the Obama administration has said repeatedly that it wants an "orderly transition," U.S. officials have also expressed the concern that they don't want Egypt "to get just another military regime without Mubarak," agreed George Washington University Middle East expert Marc Lynch, who attended a meeting at the White House on Egypt Monday.

...

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 07:08

Behind the curtain: Egypt erupts in the WH

http://www.politico.com/blogs/lauraroze ... he_WH.html

The eruption in Egypt has dampened spirits in the Obama White House, where officials were having their best run in more than a year. “We’re struggling to figure all this out,” said a top official who spent much of the weekend on the crisis.

...

Those are the big-picture threats. More immediately, aides are debating how aggressively to prod President Mubarak to step down and/or get the ball rolling on free elections. Western diplomats are convinced Mubarak is UNLIKELY to survive in office. But stranger things have happened in that neck of the woods, so President Obama is being cautious, both to avoid a backlash if the U.S. is seen as trying to engineer a successor, and in deference to other Arab allies. “It's just a very tough line to straddle,” a senior administration official said. “If [Mubarak] guts this out and stays, we're going to continue to need him and work with him, and he might not appreciate that we pushed. Bottom line, Egypt's destiny is Egypt's to decide, and we'll work with whoever emerges or is left standing.”

Moreover, administration officials confess that they are uncertain who should replace him. “There’s no horse to bet on,” said a Democrat with intimate knowledge of the conversations. “There’s no opposition leader to get behind.” So the government now is trying to parse the leaders of the revolt, to build an on-the-fly Who’s Who of potential post-Mubarak powers. The top official added: “There isn’t a natural successor. And if we were to embrace a particular person, it does more harm than good. It’s a classic dilemma for America.”

...

THE ADMINISTRATION HAS DEVELOPED A 4-PART MESSAGE: “First, the Egyptian security forces must not use violence against peaceful protestors. At the same time, of course, those who are protesting have a responsibility to do so peacefully, and the looting must cease. Second, we support the universal human rights of the Egyptian people, including the right to freedom of expression, of association, and of assembly, as well as freedom of the press, to access information, and to communicate. These are human rights and the United States stands up for them everywhere. Third, we support an orderly transition to a government that is responsive to the aspirations of the Egyptian people. … Fourth, this is about more than just Egypt. The people of the Middle East, like people everywhere, are seeking a chance to contribute and to have a role in the decisions that will shape their lives.”

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 07:11

Inside the White House-Egypt experts meeting

http://www.politico.com/blogs/lauraroze ... owwow.html

They rolled key ideas around and know there is no quick reform package that really works with Mubarak, he summarized.

While the administration is considering various options -- including the possibility of at some point telling Mubarak privately it's time to leave -- "I don't think they are there yet," he assessed.

"They know there has to be a transition, but what is striking to me is how little beyond that" they've decided on, another analyst said of the current administration Egypt debate. "What are the next steps."

"Basically, they are hoping the Egyptian people solve the problem for them," he added.

"They know they are behind the eight ball, there's so much moving, and they are trying to get clarity of message," a third expert who attended the meeting said. But a key principle driving the administration's thinking, he said, "This is about processes and institutions, not about people. They do not want to make this about Hosni Mubarak but about how democracies do things."

"The fear is, Mubarak will go but the dictatorship could survive with a new boss," he added.

...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 07:21

I guess they need to look up Egyptian history. It always was a military ruled state. One saying grace is unlike in TSP, the military does no wear uniform once they take power.

The message is clear. Egyptian military did not want dynastic succession. And allowed the protests which had many reasons.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 01 Feb 2011 07:25

^^ The Us had Sadat if Nasser popped...They had Mubarak when Sadat popped..Mubarak has been around for so long that I guess they got too complacent!

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 07:27

White House prepares for life after Mubarak

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts ... er_mubarak

The National Security Staff discussed how the Obama administration might approach a future Egyptian government if President Hosni Mubarak steps down with a group of foreign policy experts in a White House meeting on Monday morning. But the Obama administration believes that Washington's fingerprints shouldn't be seen anywhere near what they increasing expect will be the end of Mubarak's rule.

...

All three participants who spoke with The Cable said that the meeting was intense and constructive, that a real debate over the path forward for U.S. policy ensued, and that the White House staff leading the meeting indicated -- but did not say outright -- that they believed Mubarak was on his way out and that the administration was preparing for what comes next.

"We can't be seen as picking a winner. We can't be seen as telling a leader to go," said Rhodes, according to one of the expert participants. The Obama team has not told Mubarak either publicly or privately that he must step down, but has been constantly and consistently giving the embattled Egyptian leader direct and honest messages about what the U.S. expects, the White House staffers told the experts.

Multiple attendees said the White House staff expressed skepticism that newly minted Vice President Omar Soliman would emerge as the next leader of Egypt, but acknowledged that he would be influential during the transition process. "Transition" apparently is the new message word for the administration, allowing them to position themselves on the side of the protesters without throwing Mubarak completely under the bus.

...

"The White House's position has improved on the issue but they're ducking the difficult question about whether they have to say anything publicly or privately about whether Mubarak needs to go," Dunne said.

...

Although the NSS staffers in the meeting held their cards close, another attendee said the impression was clear that the administration was now focusing on a post-Mubarak Egypt.

"There was no narrative of change or reform that can involve Mubarak," this attendee said. "They see Soliman as their guy for now, but there's also doubt about Soliman's ongoing legitimacy to be a caretaker for an orderly transition. There's also doubt about what an organized process would be."

The attendees reported that the White House staff did not indicate any specific entity or person they would back as the jockeying for power plays out. There's a realization that overt American support for any group could actually harm that group's standing. There's also a realization that the Muslim Brotherhood is likely to have an increased role going forward and that the administration had better start thinking about how to handle that eventuality.

...

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 07:33

Also chatterati are talking about reviewing the ~$1.3B aid that Egypt gets from US. They dont seem to know its related to Camp David accords.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 07:34

A realist policy for Egypt

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/201 ... _for_egypt

...

That caveat notwithstanding, I want to offer a realist interpretation of what these events mean for the United States, along with the basic prescription that follows from that analysis. And though it may surprise some of you, I think realism dictates that the United States encourage Mubarak to leave, and openly endorse the creation of a democratic government in Egypt.

Realists are often caricatured as being uninterested in democracy or human rights, and concerned solely with the distribution of power and a narrowly defined national interest. It is true that realists tend to see calculations about power as the most important factor shaping international politics, and they often see sharp tradeoffs between strategic interests and moral preferences. Yet domestic considerations-including human rights-can be relevant for realists, particularly when thinking about one's allies.

To maximize their own security, states want allies that are strong, stable, and that do not cause major strategic problems for them (i.e., by getting into counterproductive quarrels with others). Other things being equal, states are better off if they don't have to worry about their allies' internal stability, and if an allied government enjoys considerable support among its population. An ally that is internally divided, whose government is corrupt or illegitimate, or that is disliked by lots of other countries is ipso facto less valuable than one whose population is unified, whose government is legitimate, and that enjoys lots of international support. For this reason, even a staunch realist would prefer allies that were neither internally fragile nor international pariahs, while recognizing that sometimes you have to work with what you have.

Accordingly, far-reaching political reform in Egypt is an objective realists should support. Even if Mubarak manages to cling to power, his regime has been fatally compromised. If he uses massive force to suppress the popular movement, it will be damaged even more.

...

In fact, this is one of those fortunate moments when the United States does not face a clear tradeoff between its moral sympathies and its strategic imperatives. For starters, Egypt is not a major oil producer like Saudi Arabia, so a shift in regime in Cairo will not imperil our vital interest in ensuring that Middle East oil continues to flow to world markets. By itself, in fact, Egypt isn't a critical strategic partner. Yes, military bases there can be useful transit points when we intervene in the region, but the United States has other alternatives and military intervention isn't something we should be eager to do anyway (remember Iraq?). Egypt is not as influential in the Arab world as it once was, in part due to the social and economic stagnation that has characterized the Mubarak era, and its recent efforts to mediate several on-going disputes have been unsuccessful. Furthermore, U.S. support for dictators like Mubarak has been one of al Qaeda's major reasons for targeting the United States, as well as a useful recruiting tool (along with our unstinting support for Israel and our military presence in the Gulf). It is also one of the main reasons why many Arabs have a negative view of the United States. Viewed strictly on its own, the U.S. alliance with Egypt has become a strategic liability.

As a number of commentators have emphasized, the real reason the United States has backed Mubarak over the years is to preserve the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, and to a lesser extent, because Mubarak shared U.S. concerns about Hamas and Iran. In other words, our support for Mubarak was directly linked to the "special relationship" with Israel, and the supposedly "strategic interest" involved was largely derivative of the U.S. commitment to support Israel at all costs. For those of us who think that the "special relationship" is bad for the U.S. and Israel alike, therefore, a change of government in Egypt is not alarming.

In fact, change in Cairo might not threaten Israel's interests significantly, and might even help break the calcified diplomatic situation in the region. For starters, a post-Mubarak government is unlikely to tear up the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, because such a move would immediately put it at odds with both the United States and Europe ...

...

Of course, if the Egyptian government becomes more responsive to its population, we can expect it to be more critical of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians and its refusal to accept a viable two-state solution. It will also be less willing to collude with U.S.-backed policies such as the counter-productive and cruel siege of Gaza. In other words, we may be witnessing the birth pangs of an Egypt that it is a more like contemporary Turkey: ...

...

To be specific, this crisis in Egypt is an opportunity for the United States to rethink the underlying principles of the Pax Americana that Washington has sought to maintain in the Middle East for decades. That arrangement rested on three pillars: 1) unconditional support for Israel, 2) denying or discounting Palestinian rights, and 3) support for and collusion with various "pro-Western" leaders whose legitimacy was always questionable. Though this policy had occasional moments of success-such as the 1979 peace treaty between Egypt and Israel and the 1991 Gulf War -- it was always a long-term loser. Unconditional U.S. support removed any short-term incentive for Israel to cut a fair deal with the Palestinians, and collusion with leaders like Mubarak made the United States even less popular on the Arab street.

In short, this as a moment when Barack Obama needs to be on the right side of history. And that means openly supporting the forces seeking democratic change in Egypt, not hanging back and losing the moment.

...

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 07:52

The Egyptian military calculus

http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/ ... _interests

...

A common refrain was that the military would even support the Muslim Brotherhood if it were to win a free and fair election. While Egypt's elections have been neither free nor fair for some time, the sentiment was clear enough -- these officers envisioned themselves as guardians of the Egyptian people -- not the regime.

Military officers share the Egyptian people's frustration with the Mubarak regime. As a Fulbright Fellow in Egypt researching the U.S.-Egypt strategic relationship, I interviewed active and retired military officers who expressed resentment that military courts were being used to prosecute the regime's political enemies. They were also quick to distance themselves from the Ministry of Interior and lament the brutal tactics of the Central Security Forces. They indicated that the situation was unlikely to improve under the current political leadership.

But the military was not supposed to get involved. Presidents Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak isolated the armed forces from domestic affairs to prevent prominent officers from emerging as political rivals. This isolation has made the military an infrequent but critical player in Egyptian politics. Because it enters the fray only in times of crisis, and then in a "national guard" capacity, it maintains great credibility with the Egyptian people. Ironically, by withdrawing from politics, the military now is in a position to usher in new political leadership.

However, doing so comes at personal financial risk. Senior military officers are believed to benefit handsomely from the revenues generated by military-owned corporations, private contracts with foreign companies, and post-retirement postings in the private and public sectors. General Ahmed Mohamed Shafik, former head of Civil Aviation and now Egypt's new Prime Minister, is the most prominent example. During my research in Cairo, foreign diplomats told me that Egyptian military officers regularly supplemented their incomes by receiving cash for routine military services, including Suez Canal passage. Some of those funds are believed to be held in Switzerland, where General Magdy Galal Sharawi, head of Egypt's Air Force from 2002-2008, currently serves as Ambassador. An accurate calculation of these activities is difficult to quantify, but they are systemic. We can assume that military officers are thinking about how the current crisis might affect their own livelihoods.

...

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Feb 2011 09:01

Posting in full:
Egypt: How India should respond

As a general rule, it is advisable in diplomacy to be cautious in responding to events in foreign countries, especially when they occur in faraway places about which we may not be fully in the picture or where we may not have too many interests. There are occasions, however, when too much caution would not be necessary and might not be helpful in safeguarding and furthering our current and future interests. Silence might indicate not just caution but lack of clarity in our thinking. The evolving situation in Egypt is one such occasion. We ought to have expressed sympathy and support for the people of Egypt in what is undoubtedly their great moment in history.

It has been obvious, certainly from the second day of the protests in Egypt, that this was a genuinely people's movement, not engineered by external elements such as the Al Qaeda, nor by the Muslim Brotherhood, let alone any foreign government. It has also been clear that as and when the revolution reaches its denouement, President Mubarak, if he manages to survive in office, will no longer be able to continue to exercise unfettered power, as he has done for 30 years, that the people will have to be empowered in some way and that it would simply not be possible to restore the status quo ante in the political governance of the country. While the ‘jasmine' revolution in Tunisia might have provided the immediate spark, the spontaneity and scale of protests suggest that the Egyptian people have been nursing their grievances and rage for a long time. People from all strata of society, rich and poor, young and old, have been on the streets, demanding reforms and ouster of Mr. Mubarak. Modern means of communication such as facebook, internet and twitter have greatly facilitated the launching and sustaining of the revolution.

India is not, and must not be, in the business of promoting democracy abroad, either by itself or in association with anyone else. We have rightly taken the position that it is not up to us to tell others what type of government they should have; we will deal with whichever government is in power and is able to take decisions on behalf of their people, decisions that the government concerned is able to implement. This does not mean, when genuine democratic impulses propel a people to take to the streets in a peaceful manner that we should not respond to them positively. There would be absolutely no risk in doing so, especially if our assessment suggests, as it ought to have in this case, that there was no question of things going back to what they were earlier and that in the end, Egypt will end up having more democracy.

India is and must remain a strong votary of the principle of non-interference and non-intervention. Expression of support for the demonstrators will not amount to interference in Egypt's internal affairs. In any case, the principle of non-interference has to be superseded by the principle of national interest. It is obviously in our interest to be on the right side of the new forces that will emerge to prominence in Egypt when all this is over. They will remember who supported them in their hour of history and who sat on the fence. This is a good example of a situation when principle and national interest coincide.

Why should we be ‘concerned' at what is happening in Egypt? How should it bother us if the people of Egypt want democracy? Are we worried that Muslim Brotherhood will come to power? Even if that were to happen, why should that frighten us in India? Firstly, there is no evidence to suggest that the Brotherhood is behind the protests in the sense of having instigated them. They have been, on available information, cautioning the demonstrators not to indulge in violence. Since the protesters do not appear to have organised leadership, the Brotherhood, with its cadres and well-established cells, will certainly try to fill the vacuum and assume leadership role. However, most analysts, who have a better grasp of the internal situation in Egypt that this writer, suggest that the Brotherhood's support base is not as large as it would like to claim. The Brotherhood has declared itself as being opposed to violence, though it is true that it is an Islamist movement. But is it any more Islamist than the regimes in some countries which have been the source of most of the funding of institutions abroad that have been the single most important breeding ground of extremists? It is not an extremist movement and has many intellectuals and professional among its ranks. In any case, we with our firmly entrenched tradition of democracy, have nothing to fear from such a development. At least we Indians must not make the mistake of shunning whatever government comes to power in Cairo through a peaceful, democratic process. Governments around the world will have to deal with it since it is not Gaza strip that can be ignored.

Hamas won in a free and fair election which was monitored by the international community but was denied legitimacy and was ostracised by the world under pressure from the Americans and Israel. The result was that Hamas, a 100 per cent Sunni movement, was pushed in the embrace of a motivated Shia Iran. It was also not wise to shun the Hizbulla in Lebanon which has now the prime ministership of that country. (When this writer had gone to Beirut after the assassination of Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, he had on his own initiative met Sheikh Hassan Nasrulla; the Israeli embassy in Delhi had protested, but happily the then secretary in MEA, Rajiv Sikri, had dismissed the protest.) Is there any doubt in the minds of our officials that the Americans have their lines of communication with both the Hamas and the Hizbulla (as well as with Iran)?

Egypt is one of the most important Arab countries. Its influence in the region is because of what it is and will not diminish if there is a change of government in Cairo. It is very likely that the emergence of a new dispensation will have at least short term consequences for the peace process between Israel and Palestine. It will be certainly be more representative of the true feelings of the Egyptian people and more supportive of the Palestinian aspirations. In any case, the peace process has long been dead and will not revive until Mr. Obama's second term.

It is natural for us to be concerned about the safety of our nationals in Egypt. But there is no reason to believe that the demonstrators will specifically target the Indians, unless the protesters come to the conclusion that India's government is silently supporting Mr. Mubarak. An expression of support for the people is likely to be remembered by them positively, just as we did when some governments came out on the side of the freedom movement in Bangladesh in 1971-72.

Muhammad Baradai, who seems to be positioning himself as a consensus candidate for presidency, does have some credibility, since he returned to his country to lead a reform movement long before the present unrest exploded. However, responsible Egyptian sources suggest that Mr. Baradai cannot be the answer to the present turmoil, which is likely to continue for some time. General Omar Soleiman, whom this writer has met several times during his visits to Cairo in his capacity as special envoy, was well regarded domestically and is well disposed towards India, but his nomination as Vice-President is too little, too late.

The government should issue another statement in which, at a minimum, we should express understanding for the demands of the protesters for reform and our expectation that there will be no use of harsh measures and that the government in Cairo will respond early and positively to these demands so that the country and the region can become stable once again.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 09:49

U.S. Scrambles to Size Up ElBaradei

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/world ... radei.html

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 01 Feb 2011 09:53

Egypt’s Economy Is Near Paralysis

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/world ... onomy.html

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 01 Feb 2011 09:57

Abhishek When you post articles from FP magazine can you preface it so there is no mistaking it for Indian source?
----------

Look at the nerve of the foolbright scholar. He wants the Egyptian military to be part of the solution and bad mouths them with being corrupt! Or is he threatening them to fall in line?

As for the realist guy so long as he doesn't acknowledge the roots of US Middle East policy to FDR and the Ibn Saud meeting in middle of WWII, he is still a dreamer.

---------------

Chinmaya Gharekhan already sized up El Baradei as non-player. Watch for Gen Suleiman.