Obama's lost moment and failure in Egypt

This will be very difficult for Obama supporters to accept, but the violence in Egypt is due in part to disastrous American foreign policy. Recent US administrations have little if any sense of what the feeling of the street has been in Egypt; and because Mr. Mubarak was happy with his 1.3 billion dollar bribe each year, the administration naively assumed the street was happy. During the past few administrations there has been a cleansing within the state department, and anyone who showed sympathy for either the growth of democracy in Egypt, or sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people, has been driven from the state department by forces loyal to Israel, who only see the Middle East from an Israeli perspective. The end result is the US had no real “ears on the ground” in the streets of Egypt, and the Obama administration was caught flat footed and surprised at the rapid demise of Mr. Mubarak.

When the masses took to the street, the same folks in the state department continued to look at things from the perspective of Israel, and therefore were reluctant to jump on the bandwagon of democracy. Israel is frightened of democracy in Arab countries, because they fear the masses will not support the starvation of Gaza, or be as willing to take their cues from Israel and the US. When the revolt became widespread, and hatred for dictatorship became evident, with a protest of over 2 million in Tahrir Square, Obama and the state department began an exercise in doublespeak. Hillary Clinton’s language toward the revolt can best be described as “cowardly”, and the President took the political “fence position” by trying to play both sides. An opportunity to show true leadership by aggressively supporting the movement for democracy was lost, and so was the reputation of the US. Once again the hypocrisy of the administration’s constant rhetoric about the spread of democracy was exposed by inaction and unwillingness to really stand for democracy in Egypt. Some argue that Obama’s position pleased no one at all.

The Obama administration had many effective cards to play, but chose to bluff with inaction and useless rhetoric. He could have immediately called for the resignation of Mubarak, which would have been admired by the street of every Arab nation in the Middle East, but he chose rhetoric. Another option might have been to announce that all aid to Egypt was immediately suspended, and would not be resumed until Egypt had a fair and democratic election, as certified by an organization such as Jimmy Carter’s. He choose not to do this either.

Instead the President seemingly followed the orders of Mr. Netanyahu, who urged him not to say anything derogatory about Mr. Mubarak, fearing comments would undermine what authority Mubarak had left. Clearly Israel was quite content with the dictator Mubarak, for he took US money and towed the line of both Israel and the US. A democratic Egypt might not be so subservient.

A game changing moment in history was lost by Obama’s unwillingness to get behind the movement for democracy, as he had done in places such as Iran. Comparing Obama’s enthusiasm for the street protests and demonstrations against the Iranian government, with his lack of support for protestors seeking democracy in Egypt, speaks volumes.

Now it appears the peaceful protests have turned ugly, and violent forces have emerged as things dragged on, and the Mubarak forces have regrouped.
The President bears some responsibility for this violence, for his inaction was interpreted as tacit support for the dictator. His hesitancy allowed the Mubarak forces to retaliate. Had the president acted decisively, by immediately calling for Mubarak to leave, the issue would have been pretty much resolved, for Mubarak could not survive withouy US support. The kind of government that would have emerged after the fall of Mubarak was the unknown that frightened the president to inaction. Someone must have calculated it was better to stand by the puppet dictator, than to risk getting a government that would be unwilling to do our bidding, or the bidding of Israel.

It now is apparent that the reason for the stalling and inaction was purposeful. The administration has been secretly jockeying for position in selecting the next leader of Egypt. Sources say the administration is pushing for the newly appointed Vice President of Egypt, who formerly was the Director of Egypt’s Intelligence Directorate for ten years. Suleiman, the Vice President, the torturer in chief for ten years, is also very close to the army, and has established ties to the US and the CIA; and indeed some suggest that the US is merely trying to substitute one dictator for a new one.

It is entirely possible that there will be massive violence with things spinning completely out of control, and it would not be a surprise to see the mysterious “suicide bombers” emerge in Egypt, as they have in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Unfortunately a moment in history was lost by a President who appeared to be like the proverbial deer in the headlights, and many in the Arab world continue to see the US as strong on the rhetoric of democracy, but very weak on actions to promote true democracy anywhere in the Middle East.