The rioting taking place in Cairo’s Tahrir Square has much to teach about politics in the Arab order. The crowds are not there by accident. For some past days the protesters appeared to have everything their own way. Actually President Mubarak was biding his time and weighing the balance of forces. He wins who mobilizes superior force. Opposition leaders including Mohamed El Baradei and the Muslim Brothers appeared to have mobilized that superior force. Capable operators, they also appeal unanimously to the Western media. Western reporters one and all interpret what they see in terms with which they are familiar at home. So anti-Mubarak good — pro-Mubarak bad, and besides, hasn’t a chance.
How taken aback the media are that Mubarak is mobilizing his defenders, and timing it to maximum effect. Thousands turn up to counter-balance the protesters. The consequent rioting looks frightening, but the arrival yesterday of the tourist camel from the pyramids and some tourist ponies gave away the element of theater. Nobody resorts to firearms that would clear the area immediately. The fact that dozens of tanks all around could have stopped the rioting, but do nothing, means that what is going on is the equivalent of a poll to determine who has the numbers. Somewhere in the background are the generals who can swing it, as they have been doing since the days of Gamal Abdul Nasser and the Free Officers in the 1950s. And the force is going to rise until it becomes clear who really does have the numbers. It looks a fair bet right now that Mubarak will stay in office until the September election, which gives him time to organize the succession for his new vice president and companion in arms Omar Suleiman and assure continuity.
When President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron and their spokesmen come out with denunciations of Mubarak, threaten to cut off aid, and speechify about “orderly transition” as though it were some Holy Grail, they are taking the events unfolding before them at face value. Their haste to jump to conclusions that don’t correspond to the situation is partly the fault of the Euro-centric perspectives that the media pump up, and partly stems from ignorance about the invisible springs of action in the authoritarian Arab state. These Western leaders look like earning the contempt of those in power and those seeking to wrest power. A remarkable achievement.
I here propose a constitutional amendment that would require all stat department officials to read David Calling every day and to spend a few minutes thinking about each post. So much mischief and craziness would be avoided.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs there a typo in the penultimate sentence?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't understand what the Obama Administration is doing. I see several outcomes; almost all of which are worse than the status quo ex ante. (1) The military manages to clamp down on the protests and another Egyptian general eventually governs the country. He will remember that the U.S. did not stand with Mubarak during his time of need. (2) The rioters eventually win and Egypt becomes a theocratic state along the same lines as the current Iranian government. The new people in charge remember that the U.S. did not stand by Mubarak during his time in need, and also blame the U.S. for keeping Mubarak in power for 30+ years. (3) The rioters eventually win and there is something more akin to what is now happening in Tunisia than instituting a new theocracy. This would be the best outcome for Egypt but the U.S.-Egyptian relations would still be worse for the next decade or two than they are today because the new government will remember that the U.S. did not support Mubarak in his moment of need and that we helped keep him in power for 30+ years.
I think the Egyptian generals remaining in power has somewhere around a 75% chance of happening. I view a new theocracy as somewhere around a 20% probability and the Tunisian scenario as approximately 5%. The smart move would have been to either do nothing like President Obama did during the recent Iranian rioting, or to quietly stand by the most important ally the U.S. has in the Arab world. The rest of the world is watching as the U.S. treats Mubarak so shabbily while it wines and dines the leader of the Communist Chinese who massacred their own people in Tiananman Square, and the people who are in power in every third world country will also remember what the U.S. did regarding Zelaya in the Honduras, and its failure to act in Iran. The obvious conclusion is that it is better to be an enemy of the U.S. than its friend.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe US should not support a government that oppresses its people. It is appalling that the US gives billions to Mubarak. By doing that, we unintentionally became an oppressor and an enemy of freedom and democracy. What a pity for the people of Egypt that they cannot look to us to offer leadership and speak up for their rights.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse