US 'Orderly Transition' in Egypt Really 'Business as Usual' in Disguise

[Better Believe It]

US 'Orderly Transition' in Egypt Really 'Business as Usual' in Disguise
The Fake Moderation of America's Moderate Mideast Allies
by Asli Bali and Aziz Rana
Asli Bâli is acting professor of law at UCLA School of Law and an editor at Middle East Report and Aziz Rana is assistant professor of law at Cornell Law
February 4, 2011

As the Mubarak regime turns to violence in a vain attempt to repress the peaceful protests that have swept Egypt's streets for over ten days, the risks associated with current U.S. strategy for Egypt and the wider region continue to grow. In its response to the events, the Obama administration has subtly shifted its message, incrementally increasing pressure on the regime over the last week. But the more important story is the remarkable continuities reflected in the administration's approach.

Indeed, Washington's response has departed little from its original script. This script involves repeatedly invoking the language of "moderation" and order and stability. Such language defends a wait-and-see approach and encourages protesters to accept incremental reforms in place of the peaceful democratic revolution that ordinary Egyptians have created and, against all odds, sustained. The call for orderly transition and managed reform is, in fact, a call for more of the same.

This approach - including any U.S. backed effort to remove Mubarak while retaining the larger regime through the new Vice President Omar Suleiman - is no longer viable. Nor is a belated demand for an end to violence sufficient. A definitive break from the scripts of stability and moderation and a reorientation of American policy toward Egypt -and the broader region - around the democratic aspirations of protesters is the only way forward.

Resort to the language of order, stability, incrementalism, and moderation is hardly new and existed well before the events of last week. Not only is it consistent with the basic stance that the Obama administration has taken toward the Middle East from the very outset, but it reflects the long trajectory of American practices in the region, which have depended on shoring up Arab authoritarians who are willing to serve in an American "axis of moderation." The members of this axis -- Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan -- have displayed little in common other than a commitment to sustaining current U.S. foreign policy priorities - on Israel/Palestine, the containment of Iran, and access to oil. What they pointedly do not share is any tangible commitment to actual moderation - understood as an internal project of democratization or political openness. This latter fact has been powerfully exposed by the nonviolent demonstrations across the region, and, as in the case of Egypt, the increasingly brutal response such protest has elicited from "moderate" allies.

Read the full article at:

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/02/04-1


Chief of Protocol Capricia Marshall waits for the arrival of President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt on the South Portico of the White House, Sept. 1, 2010.


President Barack Obama listens to President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt during a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office, Sept. 1, 2010.


Prior to the start of their working dinner with President Barack Obama, President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, and President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority check their watches to see if it is officially sunset, in the Blue Room of the White House, Sept. 1, 2010.

[Inuca]

1. Sure. Because a disorderly

chaotic transition is so much better.

[Democrats_win]

2. sorry, dupe.

[Democrats_win]

3. Men on horses attacking people is orderly?

I would agree that a chaotic transition is probably not that good. Nevertheless, a chaotic transition isn't something we should be afraid of. That is, unless one happens to be part elite in Egypt or own stock in a crooked Fraud Street company. We need to become more radical. Anytime the rich get screwed, it's a good time.

[Inuca]

6. No, men on camels :-)

Seriously now, this is obviously NOT what I was talking about. To the contrary.

[sufrommich]

9. "a chaotic transition isn't something we should be afraid of"

Who is this "we" of which you speak? Easy to say from the comfort of your home in the US. I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of Egyptians would prefer an orderly transition to democracy as opposed to chaos.
More proof that arrogance crosses all political lines.

[EFerrari]

13. No, because this orderly transition isn't really a transition

just a personnel change.

[justiceischeap]

4. I really hate to use Iraq as an example but

with the help of Egypt's military a new government could be put in place if the entire Mubarak regime left. I'm not suggesting war but it IS possible to create a new government out of thin air.

[tekisui]

5. You aren't using Iraq as an example, you are using it as a warning.

The US lost Iraq when we disbanded the Iraqi military, leaving the security vacuum. Egypt's army is the only source of security and should maintain the security while an interim government is installed and elections are organized and held.

By force, if needs be, the military should oust Mubarak and his cronies.

[Inuca]

7. I completely agree

But hey, it's not pure enough, therefore it's bad.

[justiceischeap]

8. People forget how bloody our democracy was. (eom)

[Better Believe It]

10. And what about the political and economic justice demands of the protesters?

It's not just all about a democratic election of a new President.

Democracy goes way beyond that single demand.

[tekisui]

11. I agree. The political and economic demands will have managed and implemented by someone.

An interim leader can help frame that. It should be someone (several someones) who is a part of the democratic movement.

I am saying Mubarak, the VP and the PM all have to go. I think the only way for that to happen is by the military taking the side of the people and ousting them. But, the people don't want to live under military rule. The military has to provide security and protect the people and the leader(s) determined to usher in the changes and the election.

[chimpymustgo]

12. Excellent post. It's time for a new world order. Power to the people.

[Better Believe It]

14. Omar Suleiman: The Torture Career of Egypt's New Vice President

January 31, 2011

Omar Suleiman and the Rendition to Torture
The Torture Career of Egypt's New Vice President
By STEPHEN SOLDZ

Katherine Hawkins, an expert on the US's rendition to torture program, in an email, has sent some critical texts where Suleiman pops up. Thus, Jane Mayer, in The Dark Side, pointed to Suleiman's role in the rendition program:

Each rendition was authorized at the very top levels of both governments....The long-serving chief of the Egyptian central intelligence agency, Omar Suleiman, negotiated directly with top Agency officials. Walker described the Egyptian counterpart, Suleiman, as "very bright, very realistic," adding that he was cognizant that there was a downside to "some of the negative things that the Egyptians engaged in, of torture and so on. But he was not squeamish, by the way" (pp. 113).

Shortly after 9/11, Australian citizen Mamdouh Habib was captured by Pakistani security forces and, under US pressure, torture by Pakistanis. He was then rendered (with an Australian diplomats watching) by CIA operatives to Egypt, a not uncommon practice. In Egypt, Habib merited Suleiman's personal attention. As related by Richard Neville, based on Habib's memoir:

Habib was interrogated by the country’s Intelligence Director, General Omar Suleiman.... Suleiman took a personal interest in anyone suspected of links with Al Qaeda. As Habib had visited Afghanistan shortly before 9/11, he was under suspicion. Habib was repeatedly zapped with high-voltage electricity, immersed in water up to his nostrils, beaten, his fingers were broken and he was hung from metal hooks.

That treatment wasn't enough for Suleiman, so:

To loosen Habib’s tongue, Suleiman ordered a guard to murder a gruesomely shackled Turkistan prisoner in front of Habib – and he did, with a vicious karate kick.

http://www.counterpunch.org/soldz01312011.html

[EFerrari]

15. This article echos a worry that has been nagging for a week now.

If you try to look through all the hype, two constants emerge, maybe three. One, the people of Egypt are out in the street. Two, our SecDef is in talks with the Egyptian Def Minister. Three, the rhetoric from the WH and other leading political venues is mostly empty.

For this to be anything more than a personnel change, there must at a minimum be physical safety for those who speak for the opposition. There isn't, afaik.

[Better Believe It]

16. Will the secret police be disbanded during this "transition"?

Will the freedom of the press be guaranteed for both domestic and foreign journalists and who will protect them?

Will all political parties, labor unions, religious groups and community organizations be immediately legalized and freedom of assembly be respected?

Will the meetings and discussions among participants in a trasitional regime be transparent and will participants be free to discuss those meetings in public?

Will the governments emergency decree be lifted?

Lots of questions and no answers so far.

[EFerrari]

17. I don't see how there can be even a discussion of a "transition"

if one side is physically at risk. :shrug:

I keep asking the question, who is guaranteeing their safety and no answers so far. Until that guarantee is in place, I assume this "process" is bullshit.