US duplicity in Egypt

While extolling democracy the Obama administration tiptoed through the struggle for democracy in Egypt trying not to offend anyone, but creating the appearance of supporting dictatorship in Egypt. He justified his lack of action by saying we did not want to interfere in Egyptian affairs, a specious argument because the US has been interfering for the past thirty years by propping up Mubarak and his military. We supported a brutal and murderous dictator for the past 30 years who could not have survived one minute without US backing, and to now argue that we did not want to interfere is disingenuous.

While praising the virtues of democracy in Egypt, at no time did the administration support the protests of millions and join the chant: “He must go”. Instead Obama repeatedly called for a “gradual transition” and suggested that Egyptians were incapable of setting up a fair election in 60 days. At no time did Obama, or anyone in his administration, call for a cessation of US aid to Mubarak pending a fair election certified by Jimmy Carter’s international organization.Indeed, some in the administration including Hillary Clinton called for US support of Mubarak even after the revolt had begun. Robert Fisk, journalist for The Independent, and generally recognized as one of the best journalists in the world, said: “Obama Administration Has Been Gutless and Cowardly in Dealing with the Mubarak Regime”1 and he described Hillary Clinton’s language regarding the rebellion as “cowardly.

Two nations in the world who did not like the happenings in Egypt were Israel and the US, with Netanyahu urging support of the Mubarak “regime” in Egypt, and urging Obama not to be too critical of Mubarak in the first days of the rebellion, for fear of undermining him. While stalling for time, the US held a series of talks and negotiations behind closed doors. Apparently we wanted to delay in order to secure the position of Suleiman in the next government. Because he was formerly a tool of the CIA , received military training in the US, was a lifelong friend of Mubarak, was the director of Egypt’s secret police for 10 years, worked with the US in carrying out our rendition program, is very close to the Egyptian military, is nicknamed the “torturer in chief” because of his brutal background, and most of all because Wikileaks cables indicate that was he was man that Israel wanted to emerge as the new “dictator”, we got behind him in the back rooms of closed door negotiations.

Israeli fondness for Suleiman is evidenced in headlines such as: London: Omar Suleiman, the new vice-president of Egypt, told the Israelis he wanted to start "cleansing the Sinai" of Palestinian arms smugglers, according to leaked cables.2
And this one: WikiLeaks: Suleiman vowed to prevent Hamas rule in Gaza. 3 Suleiman, long a quisling of the US and Israel, was being “set up” behind the scenes, as the next dictator of Egypt.

Adam Shatz in the London Book of Review article After Mubarak said:
Mubarak, when he stands down, is not likely to be missed by many people in Egypt, where he has pledged to spend his last days, but he will be missed in Washington and, above all, in Tel Aviv. Mubarak and Omar Suleiman, now the interim vice president, worked closely with Israel on everything from the Gaza blockade to intelligence-gathering; they allowed Israeli warships into the Suez Canal to prevent weapons smuggling into Gaza from Sudan, and did their best to stir up tensions between Fatah and Hamas. 4

Further proof of Israel’s dismay is reported by New Zealand’s Scoop Independent News in Franklin Lamb’s article: As Tahrir Square goes so goes the Middle East? which states: Former Israeli Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer has defended Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, saying his collapse will be a “tremendous loss” for Israel. The former army general praised Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak for supporting Israel for thirty years, Israel's Arutz Sheva newspaper reported. 5

The New York Times on February 4, 2011 in its article U.S. Trying to Balance Israel’s Needs in the Face of Egyptian Reform stated the obvious by saying: The Israelis are saying, après Mubarak, le deluge,” said Daniel Levy, a former Israeli peace negotiator. And that, in turn, Mr. Levy said, “gets to the core of what is the American interest in this. It’s Israel. It’s not worry about whether the Egyptians are going to close down the Suez Canal, or even the narrower terror issue. It really can be distilled down to one thing, and that’s Israel.” 6

So once again, following a tradition of history, the US will support a dictator in Egypt, not of course because it does anything good for the US, but because that’s what Israel wants, and most observant folks have come to realize it’s the tail wagging the dog.

Time will tell how this will play out, but make no mistake about it, we will do our very best to insure it is not good for the Egyptian people nor the American public.


1 http://iranian.com/main/news/2011/02/03/robert-fisk-obama-administration-has-been-gutless-and-cowardly-dealing-mubarak-regim

2 http://www.zeenews.com/news686373.html

3 http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4027149,00.html

4 http://www.lrb.co.uk/v33/n04/adam-shatz/after-mubarak

5 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL1102/S00040/as-tahrir-square-goes-so-goes-the-middle-east.htm

6 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/world/middleeast/05israel.html?_r=1