Showing posts with label ElBaradei. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ElBaradei. Show all posts

Sunday, February 06, 2011

If the Obama administration fails to back a transition to a National Unity government before elections democracy protesters may be jailed and tortured

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statement of support for Mubarak’s chosen successor – former Intelligence chief Omar Suleiman – risks throwing away any prospect of real democratisation in Egypt and the pro-democracy protesters being jailed and tortured one by one as they return home if protests start to grow smaller (1). The fact that this will happen away from the television cameras will not make it any less horrific than the televised attacks and injuries we have seen recently.

A change of who is heading the regime is not a change of regime. Former Bush (senior) administration member Peter Galbraith has written of being told by the US National Security Council at the end of the 1991 Iraq war that “Our aim is to get rid of Saddam, not his regime” (2). It looks depressingly like the Obama administration has the same position on Egypt, though I hope they prove me wrong on this and make US aid to the Egyptian government conditional on an end to the banning of opposition parties and to the jailing and torture of government opponents.

This is especially sad as the Obama administration’s position before this had moved from support for Mubarak towards greater support for the demonstrators – and this certainly seemed to help prevent Egyptian military attacks on protesters and to help end the attacks by plain clothes police and hired mobs on them.

Failing to back the pro-democracy protesters will also weaken moderates who want a transition to democracy and strengthen the arguments of extremists who see force as the only way to overthrow the dictatorship – making a Sunni version of the Iranian revolution and a government deeply hostile to the US more likely in the long run.

The arguments for backing the dictatorship are empty – even an Islamic state like Iran couldn’t be any more brutal than Mubarak’s (and Sulieman’s) police torturers; no Arab state will go to war with an Israeli military so much stronger than them that it could swat them all simultaneously like flies; there are plenty of democrats among the protesters and every possibility of a transition to democracy.

As the US ambassador to Egypt wrote in 2006 ‘We do not accept the proposition that Egypt's only choices are a slow-to-reform authoritarian regime or an Islamist extremist one; nor do we see greater democracy in Egypt as leading necessarily to a government under the MB [Muslim Brotherhood]’ (3)

The US government should not be backing Suleiman but the National Unity government of all opposition parties proposed by ElBaradei and the protesters to organise free and fair elections. Even a compromise involving some of the more progressive members of Mubarak’s NDP party along with all opposition parties would be a big step forward and ensure the NDP could not have the pro-democracy protesters arrested one by one.


(1) = Guardian.co.uk 06 Feb 2011 ‘Egypt protests: Hosni Mubarak's power fades as US backs his deputy’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/06/egypt-protests-hosni-mubarak-sulieman

(2) = Galbraith, Peter W. (2006) ‘The End of Iraq’, Pocket Books, 2007, Ch4, page 46

(3) = Guardian.co.uk 06 Feb 2011 ‘WikiLeaks cables: Egypt's Omar Suleiman demonised Muslim Brotherhood’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/06/wikileaks-egypt-omar-suleiman-muslim-brotherhood

Saturday, February 05, 2011

Why Arab dictatorships are not preventing war on Israel – they stopped fighting it because it’s military has always been stronger than all of theirs

One of the arguments given as an excuse for US support for dictatorships is that these dictatorships have supposedly prevented war with Israel and that Israel could be “threatened” by a possible Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt. This argument makes no sense because the same dictatorships went to war with Israel repeatedly in 1948, 1967 and 1973 – and only stopped after that because they realised that even all of them combined had no hope of defeating Israel’s much stronger military (see e.g Israeli historian Avi Shlaim’s ‘The Iron Wall’) and do not want to risk a nuclear counter-attack (Israel having had nuclear weapons for decades) or the US military joining any war on the Israeli side if an Israeli defeat looked possible.

Mubarak’s predecessor Sadat only decided to make peace with Israel after the Arab states were decisively defeated for the third time in their third war with Israel in 1973. (In those negotiations full recognition of Israel was not made a precondition for talks the way it has been with Hamas, as Israeli professor Yossi Alpher has pointed out.  Sadat was subsequently assassinated after Islamic clerics placed a fatwa on him and replaced by Mubarak (1).

Since then the gap in military strength between Israel and it’s Arab neighbours has only grown greater, due partly to US military aid from 1967 on and partly to Israel strengthening it’s economic base and so it’s military research and production programmes by using US aid and the profits from tourism and from annexed agricultural land and water supplies in the West Bank. Egypt under Mubarak has had significant military aid and arms sales from the US, but not nearly as much as Israel.

SIPRI statistics show Israel’s military spending  in 2009 was over $14 billion, compared to under $4 billion for Egypt – and Egypt has the strongest military of any Arab country. Israel’s annual military spending has consistently exceeded that of all it’s Arab neighbours – Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt – combined (CSIS 2009 page 32 = (2)).

It also has more operational high quality combat aircraft than it’s four neighbours combined (CSIS 2009 page 24, Fig 15 = (3)) Israeli air superiority was decisive in the 1967 and 1973 wars.

 The spending gap doesn’t show how great the gap in military strength is either because the Israeli military has far more advanced military technology, both that provided by the US and the tech it’s developed itself.

So there is no reason to believe that elected governments in Arab states would be any more suicidal than their unelected predecessors – and so they would no more likely to let themselves in for certain defeat, humiliation and large numbers of deaths by going to war on Israel.

They would certainly be unlikely to continue the dictatorships’ alliances with Israel, but that is a long way from them being a “threat” to it. Even governments which are hostile to one another – like the US and Venezuela, continue large scale trade in oil – and even Iran has been keen to continue trading with the US. US firms have likewise continued to trade with Iran through subsidiaries to avoid US sanctions (including subsidiaries of Cheney’s Halliburton even as he was calling for war on Iraq and Iran).

As Mohamed ElBaradei has said “a durable peace can only be between democracies and not between dictators.” (4).

The military aid given to Egypt supposedly “secures peace” and that given to Israel similarly supposedly ensures it is safe against threats.

The reality is that military aid to Egypt is primarily about propping up a dictatorship that largely does as the US government tells it, combined with a US government subsidy to their own arms companies – as most of the military aid is spent on buying US arms.

Military aid and arms sales to Israel are similarly a subsidy to US arms firms – and also due to the strength of the Israel lobby in the US.

They most certainly don’t encourage peace though, as the main cause of most wars is not that Israel is weak and threatened, but that it’s military is stronger than those of the rest of the Middle East combined, encouraging it’s governments to launch full scale wars on the Palestinian Authority and Lebanon and to refuse to make any concessions whatsoever in negotiations with the Palestinians.

Photo at top of blog - Israeli Air force F15s from Machine Wrench blog

(1) = Forward 20 Oct 2006 ‘Preconditions for a Problematic Partner’,http://www.forward.com/articles/5948/

(2) = Cordesman, Anthony H. , Burke, Arleigh A. & Nerguiziam Aram  29 Jun 2010 ‘The Arab Israeli Military Balance’, Center for Strategic Studies and International Studies (CSIS) 2010,http://csis.org/files/publication/100629_Arab-IsraeliMilBal.pdf , page 32

(3) = As (2) above, page 24, Figure 15

(4) = Independent 01 Feb 2011 ‘Mohamed ElBaradei: The man who would be President’,http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/mohamed-elbaradei-the-man-who-would-be-president-2200155.html

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

Egyptians don't trust Mubarak to oversee transition - and even if the Muslim Brotherhood took power they couldn't be worse than the dictatorship

Egyptians couldn’t be worse off under the Muslim Brotherhood than they are under Mubarak – and the Brotherhood may well neither form a single party government, nor be extreme in government.

They are not the only opposition in Egypt either – Mubarak has targeted trade unionists for opposing him – and was so afraid of Ayman Nour -  a liberal candidate in the last (rigged) Presidential elections he had him jailed to ensure he couldn’t win the election.

Mubarak's recent statement is unlikely to be accepted by the opposition (1). As their spokesman Mohamed ElBaradei had said before it “The American government cannot ask the Egyptian people to believe that a dictator who has been in power for 30 years would be the one to implement democracy. This is a farce.”(2)

Photo: Mohamed ElBaradei - photo from The Independent

The widespread view that Egyptians might be worse off if Mubarak’s dictatorship is overthrown and the Muslim Brotherhood come to power is misplaced. Reports by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International show that under Mubarak for 30 years the Egyptian people have been jailed without trial, tortured by beatings, electric shocks and sexual violence. The victims include many children (3) – (4).

So even if the Muslim Brotherhood were to come to power in Egypt and turn into a Sunni equivalent of Iran’s semi-theocratic government, Egyptians would be no worse off than they have been under dictatorship – just as Iranians are no worse off (though little better off) under the semi-theocracy they have now than they were under the Shah’s dictatorship – and Mubarak’s past actions show he sees liberals and trade unionists as just as much a threat to his rule as the Muslim Brotherhood.

Propping up Mubarak’s dictatorship will not make it less likely that they will come to power either – just as President Carter backing the Shah’s dictatorship in Iran in 1979 to the last moment did not prevent Khomeini coming to power (5) – (6).

In fact a peaceful transition to democracy, with Mubarak persuaded to step down, would make it less likely that any one faction or party could exclude others from Egyptian politics.

Both Professor Fawaz A. Gerges in his book ‘The Far Enemy’ and ‘Self Inflicted Wounds’, a report produced for the US military, found that the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic political parties are enemies of Al Qa’ida and other Jihadist terrorist groups, who consider them to be apostates for taking part in what the Jihadists see as the western system of political parties and elections (7) – (9).

Professor Fawaz Gerges of the London School of Economics, expert on jihadist terrorist groups

The same sources found that the Brotherhood broke with the extreme teachings of Qtub long ago (10).

Other Islamic parties elected to power around the world have shown themselves to be no friends of Al Qa’ida and not nearly so extreme as the Taliban. Hamas after winning the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections have fought gun battles against allies of Al Qa’ida in the Gaza strip (11). The AKP Islamic party government in Turkey has won two elections, governed for 8 years, continued to hold free and fair elections and accept their results even when it lost many seats in local elections ; and has been no more extreme than European Christian Democrat parties. After Al Qa’ida bombed the British consulate and banks in Turkey, the AKP government arrested, tried and jailed those responsible (12) – (14).

Even the Afghan Taliban has distanced itself from Al Qa’ida after the latter brought a US invasion down on their heads (15).

No doubt the Brotherhood would be a major political force in Egypt after Mubarak. There is no way to know whether they would win elections as the sole governing party, by part of a governing coalition or become the main opposition party – but that is because many Egyptians support them.

Propping up dictatorships has only strengthened fundamentalist parties and much worse terrorist groups.

If we want to weaken Al Qa’ida and reduce fundamentalism then allowing a transition to democracy in Arab countries is the way forward.

The Brotherhood are not the only political force in Egypt either. There are socialists, trade unions, liberals, greens and even conservatives and nationalists who oppose the dictatorship (16) – (18).

In the last Egyptian Presidential elections (rigged as usual) in 2005 the candidate Mubarak feared most was not the Muslim Brotherhood’s (which he banned), but Ayman Nour of the liberal El Ghad party, who he had jailed during the election and then tried and convicted on trumped up charges after it, to ensure he couldn’t lose the election to him (19) – (22).

Ayman Nour of the liberal El Ghad party was jailed for standing against Mubarak in the 2005 presidential elections and only released in 2009 - photo - Time magazine

 All these groups, along with the Brotherhood, have accepted former UN IAEA head Mohamed El Baradei, a liberal rather than an Islamic fundamentalist, as the chief spokesperson for all of them (23).

Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Kamel el-Helbawy hardly talks like a new Khomeini either, having recently said

“A new era of freedom and democracy is dawning in the Middle East and Arab world. That's more important than declaring that a 'new Islamist era is dawning', because I know Islamists would not be able to rule Egypt alone. We should and would co-operate – Muslims, leftists, communists, socialists, secularists…. …….Dictators like Mubarak have always told the west, wrongly, there is no difference between Islamists like the Brotherhood and some violent groups who are real fundamentalists………The west is always afraid that if the Brotherhood came to power it would end freedoms or do something [negative] with Israel. But I stress that the Brotherhood are among the people who defend democracy in full, and like to see democracy prevailing, because democracy gives them some of their rights." (24)

Kamal Helbaway of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood

So, whether Helbawy means what he says or not, if the worst case scenario happens and the Brotherhood take power in Egypt, Egyptians will no worse off than they were under Mubarak – and the worst case scenario may not happen – they may end up much better off in a democratic system that includes the Brotherhood as one political party among many.

The Guardian also reports that “The Brotherhood has said it would put the Camp David peace accords with Israel to a referendum if it took power.”(25)

The Brotherhood are also criticised for the threat they supposedly pose to Israel and their links to Hamas, whose armed wing has been involved in terrorism against Israeli civilians.

The problem with this argument is that Mubarak has links to the Israeli government, which is involved in ordering and authorising the killing of Palestinian civilians on a daily basis (26) – (30).

The US government both funds much of the Israeli occupation and has been involved in it’s own war crimes including targeting civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan (31) – (32).

So the Brotherhood’s critics really don’t have a leg to stand on on this issue – if it was close to Hamas it would be doing nothing they themselves don’t do on a larger scale.


(1) = BBC News Middle East ‘Huge protests fan Egypt unrest’, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12307698

(2) = Reuters 30 Jan 2011 ‘ElBaradei urges U.S. to abandon Mubarak’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/30/us-egypt-usa-elbaradei-idUSTRE70T30920110130?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

(3) = Human Rights Watch 25 Feb 2004 ‘Egypt’s Torture Epidemic’, http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2004/02/25/egypt-s-torture-epidemic

(4) = Amnesty International World Report 2010 – Country Report – Egypt,http://report2010.amnesty.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa and http://report2010.amnesty.org/sites/default/files/AIR2010_AZ_EN.pdf#page=77

(5) = Lawrence Freedman (2008) ‘A Choice of Enemies’, Weidenfield & Nicolson, London, 2008, Chapter 4, especially pages 64 - 72

(6) = Kenneth M. Pollack ‘The Persian Puzzle’, Random House, New York, 2005, chapters 4 – 6

(7) = Fawaz A Gerges (2005) ‘The Far Enemy – Why Jihad Went Global’, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005, pages 9 -10 (on torture and dictatorship radicalising people into terrorists and jihadists), pages 110- 116 – on Jihadist/terrorist groups and Islamic fundamentalist political parties hating and despising one another (and Bin Laden’s deputy Zawahiri hating the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood); pages 93 -4 on torture of Zawahiri by Egyptian dictatorship leading him to join Al Qa’ida to build organisation to take revenge

(8) = Assaf Moghadam & Brian Fishman (editors) 16 Dec 2010 ‘Self-inflicted wounds : Debates and divisions within Al Qa’ida and it’s periphery’, Harmony Project, Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, http://www.ctc.usma.edu/Self-Inflicted%20Wounds.pdf ; see especially pages 158 - 162 - or 168 to 173 if looking at the pdf browser's page count

(9) = Loretta Napoleoni (2005) ‘Insurgent Iraq’ Constable & Robinson, London, 2005, Chapter 3 (pages 61 – 62 of paperback edition)

(10) = See (5) to (7) above

(11) = Observer 16 Aug 2009 ‘Hamas destroys al-Qaida group in violent Gaza battle’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/15/hamas-battle-gaza-islamists-al-qaida

(12) = Justice and Development Party (Turkey), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_and_Development_Party_%28Turkey%29

(13) = BBC News 30 Mar 2009 ‘Turkish PM's party slips in polls’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7970448.stm

(14) = Guardian 17 Jan 2007 ‘Turkey jails al-Qaida cell for consulate bomb’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/17/turkey.alqaida

(15) = CNN 06 Oct 2008 ‘Sources: Taliban split with al Qaeda, seek peace’,http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/10/06/afghan.saudi.talks/#cnnSTCText

(16) = Wikipedia list of Egyptian political parties,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Egypt#The_known_parties_of_Egypt

(17) = Amnesty USA 27 Jan 2011 ‘Egyptian Protests Day 3: Next Steps’, http://blog.amnestyusa.org/middle-east/egyptian-protests-day-3-next-steps/ - ‘This was a protest that crossed class, ideology and religion’

(18) = Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 17 Feb 2010 ‘Labor Protest Politics and Worker Rights in Egypt’, http://www.carnegieendowment.org/events/?fa=eventDetail&id=2816

(19) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_Nour

(20) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El-Ghad_Party

(21) = Human Rights Watch Sep 2005 ‘From Plebiscite to Contest? Egypt’s Presidential Election’, http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/mena/egypt0905/egypt0905.pdf

(22) = Human Rights Watch 6 Dec 2005 ‘Egypt: Ayman Nur Trial Badly Flawed’, http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2005/12/06/egypt-ayman-nur-trial-badly-flawed

(23) = Reuters 30 Jan 2011 ‘ElBaradei urges U.S. to abandon Mubarak’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/30/us-egypt-usa-elbaradei-idUSTRE70T30920110130?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

(24) = guardian.co.uk 30 Jan 2011 ‘Egypt protests: Cairo prison break prompts fear of fundamentalism’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/30/muslim-brotherhood-jail-escape-egypt

(25) = See (22) above

(26) = See page link below and sources listed for it,http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/Israel-Palestine/notdemocratsversusterrorists/

(27) = See page link below and sources 21 to 45 listed on ithttp://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/sevenliesthatkill/index.html

(28) = Amnesty International 2010 annual report – Israel and the occupied territories,http://report2010.amnesty.org/sites/default/files/AIR2010_AZ_EN.pdf#page=129

(29) = Times 29 Jul 2008 ‘Palestinian child shot dead by Israeli soldiers’,http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4425395.ece

(30) Herald (Scotland) 14 Feb 2009 ‘Long-term truce for Gaza near agreement, says Hamas’,http://www.heraldscotland.com/long-term-truce-for-gaza-near-agreement-says-hamas-1.902709In the West Bank city of Hebron, staff at a local hospital said a teenage boy was killed by Israeli army fire during a clash between troops and stone-throwing Palestinian youths…Doctors at Alia hospital named the dead boy as Izzadine Jamal, 14. They did not know if he was among those attacking the Israelis….The army said dozens of Palestinians hurled stones at a military guard tower next to an Israeli settlement and a soldier shot the ringleader.’

(31) = See links below and sources listed on them on war crimes including targeting civilians in Iraq,http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/who%27s_right_on_Iraq/bothsides/ and http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/replytogray/Iraq/

(32) = See links below and sources listed on them on similar actions by US forces in Afghanistan,http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2010/03/one-more-push-for-what-in-afghanistan.html and http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2010/08/killings-of-civilians-by-nato-forces-in.html

Sunday, January 30, 2011

Egypt : Four Good Reasons why Obama should be backing El Baradei and the Protesters and dropping Mubarak's dictatorship


Obama is risking making the same mistake Carter did during the Iranian revolution in 1979 by continuing to back Mubarak’s dictatorship in Egypt to keep right wing members of his own party and the Republican opposition happy. This ensured the transition was chaotic, allowing Khomeini and extreme fundamentalists to crush the liberals and socialists among the opponents of the Shah’s dictatorship. To minimise the chances of the same happening in Egypt, Obama should tell Mubarak, his NDP party and the Egyptian military to stand down and allow a National Unity government , as demanded by Egyptian protest leader and former IAEA head Mohamed El Baradei , allowing a peaceful transition to democracy. He should also tell Egypt’s  government and military they won’t get a penny more in military aid  till this happens. As El Baradei says US government “life support to the dictator” must end (1).

El Baradei, the protest leader in Egypt, could not be more different from Ayatollah Khomeini, the senior protest leader in Iran in 1979. He is no Islamic fundamentalist and no potential dictator or theocrat.

There is no guarantee what the new government in Egypt will be, whatever Obama does, because Mubarak’s time is running out just as the Shah’s was in 1979. So Obama would be better dropping him to get some influence with the new government – and help ensure the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t freeze out other opposition groups entirely - than alienating opposition groups who may soon be the new government.

Even if the Muslim Brotherhood come to power through elections – like the AKP Islamic government in Turkey and Hamas in Gaza – these precedents suggest they will not be as extreme as the Taliban, nor are they likely to support Al Qa’ida. They will fight them instead, as Hamas do in order to avoid giving the US any excuse to target them. Zawahiri and most armed jihadists or terrorists hate Islamic political parties like the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood that seek political power through the ballot box – and are in turn hated by them.

Every expert on jihadist terrorist groups like Al Qa'ida - like Fawaz A. Gerges, has found that torturing dictatorships churn out recruits for them them like factories

Many people are claiming Obama and the US government face a dilemma on Egypt – that if they don’t keep backing Mubarak’s dictatorship the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood could take power and form a government hostile to the US, or even friendly to Al Qa’ida. The same people have tried to re-write history to claim the Shah was overthrown in 1979 due to Carter not backing his dictatorship strongly enough.

The last Shah (king or emperor) of Iran - dictator of Iran from 1953 to 1979 - US President Carter's administration backed him to the last moment against a revolution involving socialists, liberals and Islamic fundamentalists which was hijacked by Ayatollah Khomeini and the fundamentalists

What we know about Egypt today and the similarities with (and differences from) the events of the 1979 Iranian revolution show that Obama faces no such dilemma though – because backing the dictatorship is even more likely to allow a more extreme Muslim Brotherhood government to come to power.

In 1979 Carter continued to support the Shah’s dictatorship and urge him not to step down or go into exile even after the Iranian army and SAVAK secret police had shot hundreds of unarmed protesters dead and dragged thousands away to torture.  Soon the Iranian army couldn’t stomach facing killing thousands of their own people; and as the demonstrations grew bigger and bigger the military refused to fire on the demonstrators and some began to join them. Carter’s adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski favoured moving from a civilian fronted monarchical dictatorship to a military government, but was over-ruled. His plan was irrelevant anyway as the majority of the military weren’t willing to kill for the Shah anymore (Brzezinski has improved with age and experience – now calling for negotiations with Hamas). The Shah fled into exile and in the chaos Khomeini and the Islamic fundamentalists among the revolutionaries were able to eliminate the socialists, liberals and others (2) – (3).

The strategy of backing a dictatorship did not prevent an Islamic fundamentalist theocracy hostile to the US and Israel, but created one. This was due both to decades of US backed torture and killings by the Shah’s dictatorship and due to Carter’s decision to back it to the last rather than help encourage an orderly transition to democracy and support the more democratic elements of the opposition.

There is a situation in Egypt today which is similar in some ways but very different in others.

Demonstrators fill Tahrir Square in Cairo

The pro-democracy demonstrations were begun by (mostly secular or moderate Muslim) students and trade unionists, are backed by liberals like former UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Mohamed El Baradei and according to Amnesty and International ‘‘This was a protest that crossed class, ideology and religion, and that is what scares the government.’(4) The Muslim Brotherhood have since joined the protests, but are not leading them. So while, as in Iran in 1979, the opposition includes Muslim fundamentalists along with socialists and liberals, the balance of power among them is different.

Photo: Demonstrators and Egyptian soldiers smile at one another - from the Sunday Herald

Human Rights Watch’s were reporting as of yesterday at least 83 people killed so far in Egypt, mostly by soldiers and both uniformed and plain clothes police shooting them with live ammunition or rubber bullets.

They “confirmed at least 33 dead in Alexandria and heard plausible reports of at least 50 to 70 dead at a single morgue in Cairo.” (5)

Reuters similarly reports over 100 dead and 2,000 injured, based mostly on Egyptian doctors and hospitals’ reports (6).

Amnesty International reports over a thousand protesters have been beaten and dragged away by police to join the many prisoners the dictatorship had already jailed (7)

According to a 2004 Human Rights Watch report and Amnesty International’s 2010 annual report on Egypt, adults and children arrested in Egypt are often tortured by methods including “beatings with fists…batons… sticks…and electric cables…suspension in…painful positions…electric shocks” and “sexual intimidation and violence” including sexual abuse of children. Many victims of torture are beaten to death (8) – (9). No wonder the Egyptian people won’t tolerate a government that does this to them and their children. How can the US government justify continuing to support it?

There are conflicting reports about whether “looters” and killers are “thieves” and “Muslim brotherhood” or plain clothes (and fancy dress) secret police (10).  Many Egyptians suspect the latter . Police have certainly done nothing to stop the looters – with ordinary Egyptians organising to defend themselves from them - which makes it likely the dictatorship hope allowing chaos will let them dishonestly pose as the only thing preventing chaos (11).

 The Algerian military have a longstanding practice of dressing up as Islamic fundamentalists, complete with fake beards, to carry out massacres of civilians and blame them on Islamic fundamentalist groups in order to allow their dictatorship to pose as defending the people against Islamic fundamentalists. (though some massacres were also carried out by fundamentalist terrorist groups) (12)

The soldiers and police responsible for the killings in Egypt are heavily funded and armed by the US government. The Obama administration has so far provided Mubarak’s dictatorship with $1.3bn a year of military aid (a 25% increase on the amount provided by the Bush administration), plus arms sales  (13) – (14).

The US government initially provided statements of support for the dictatorship even after the shooting had begun. Though some of it’s statements have been more critical since, they have stopped well short of calling for Mubarak and his NDP party to stand down and allow a peaceful transition to democracy.

US Secretary of State (i.e foreign minister) Hillary Clinton on Thursday described Mubarak’s regime asstable” and said that it was attempting to meet the legitimate needs of it’s people – claims met with well deserved scorn by El Baradei (15).

US Vice President  Joe Biden double standard has lead him to claim that Mubarak, as “ a good friend and ally of the United States” is not a dictator, even though he is having his own people shot dead for protesting democracy, has rigged elections, banned opposition parties and jailed the Presidential candidates even of those parties he hasn’t banned – plus jailing thousands of people without fair trial and tortured them (16) – (17).

The marginally tougher line taken from Friday the 28th on rapidly became vague and self-contradictory. This may be due to splits in the Obama administration, or might be an attempt to send mixed messages in the hope of satisfying both supporters and opponents of backing Mubarak in the US.

US officials first said they were “reviewing” (not suspending) military aid to Egypt – and that the future of it would depend on Mubarak “addressing the legitimate needs of the Egyptian people” and on the behaviour of his government and the Egyptian military. Clinton then  reversed this – saying there isno discussion as of this time about cutting off any aid”  to Egypt, adding “we always are looking at and reviewing our aid” (18) – (19).

(This echoes the US administration’s and the EU’s dissembling on the 2009 military coup in Honduras  , which they responded to by allowing it (despite having US troops and bases in the country)  and by recognising sham elections taking place under conditions of opponents of the coup makers being tortured and killed  and a boycott by the elected government’s supporters.)

British Foreign Minister William Hague has parroted Clinton almost word for word on Egypt, with the same lack of any call on the dictator to stand down and the same call on the dictatorship and the people to both avoid violence – as though the unarmed pro-democracy protesters fighting back against armed police with armoured cars are equally to blame for it (20) – (21).

Israel’s government, as usual hypocritically condemning dictatorship in Arab countries while simultaneously allying with the dictators, has made statements supportive of Mubarak, saying it’s confident his government will weather the storm (22).

Calls from the US  and UK governments to address the “legitimate needs of the Egyptian people” are too vague – and calls to avoidviolence or provocations that could cause violence” are fence-sitting between the dictatorship and the people. The vast majority of violence by the protesters has been by the dictator’s police firing on or dragging away unarmed demonstrators (23).

Photo: Mohamed El Baradei makes a speech to protesters in Tahrir Square

The main protest leader Mohamed El Baradei couldn’t be more different from the 1979 Iranian revolution’s main spokesman Ayatollah Khomeini. He is no Islamic fundamentalist, nor a potential dictator or theocrat. El Baradei is a well educated Egyptian and Nobel peace prize winner who lost his position as UN IAEA nuclear watchdog head after the Obama administration succeeded where Bush had failed in having him replaced because of his refusal to do US governments’ bidding in hyping Iraq’s non-existent nuclear programme in 2002-2003, or in exaggerating Iran’s nuclear programme (24) – (28) . This will not have won him many friends at the top levels of either main party in the US – whose government under Bush tapped his phone to try to get ammunition against him (29). His criticism of the Iraq war and of  the Bush and Obama administration’s for backing dictatorships like Mubarak’s won’t have won him many either (30). (Baradei’s successor as IAEA head has assured US officials he’ll do as the US government tells him (31) – (33) However Baradei publicly praised Obama’s change of policy on Iran compared to Bush – and the neo-cons of the Bush administration are no friends of Obama, so he personally and politically may not be entirely hostile to Baradei (34). His high international profile makes it more difficult for Mubarak to jail or kill Baradei and boosts the protesters’ media profile. He’s also a very eloquent spokesman.

As Baradei has saidThe American government cannot ask the Egyptian people to believe that a dictator who has been in power for 30 years would be the one to implement democracy. This is a farce.” (35)

Bush spent 8 years telling us Mubarak was implementing reforms and moving towards democracy. It never happened (36). It won’t happen under Mubarak or his cronies now either.

Fence sitting by the Obama administration on Egypt is due to the right of the Republican and Democratic parties (along with the ever present Israel lobby) criticising them for supposedlytaking the side of the demonstrators” and risking a US and Israeli allied government  being replaced by a neutral or hostile Muslim Brotherhood one (37).

A peaceful, orderly transition would give the best chance for a multi-party democracy, which would be a much better result for everyone than an Islamic revolution – but that peaceful transition is unlikely unless Mubarak is persuaded to stand down and go into exile.

Islamic Parties in government (and in opposition) are enemies of Al Qa’ida and other Jihadist terrorists, not their friends –including the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood

In Turkey the AKP Islamic party (‘Justice and Peace’ party) led by Prime Minister Tacip Erdogan has been much more moderate than the extreme nationalist military dictators who preceded it. It has not meekly deferred to the US or stayed allied with Israel on foreign policy – refusing to allow US troops to invade Iraq from it’s territory in 2003 and clashing with Israel over the Israeli military attack on the civilian Gaza aid flotilla, but neither has it been actively hostile to either – and only placed restrictions on trade with Israel after the attack on it’s citizens in the Gaza flotilla. The AKP has certainly not had any links to Al Qa’ida or similar groups – instead jailing Al Qa’ida members for bombings of the British consulate and banks in Turkey (38).

According to experts, such as Fawaz A. Gerges and  Loretta Napoleoni, Islamic parties in the Middle East are frequently targeted by armed jihadist groups as “collaborators” for taking part in elections and hate one another. In fact Gerges found that Zawahiri (Bin Laden’s Egyptian deputy in Al Qai’da) hates and despises the Muslim Brotherhood for trying to get power through peaceful political campaigns (39) – (40). Hamas in Gaza, far from allying with Al Qa’ida or other international Jihadist groups have fought and killed Al Qa’ida linked groups and anyone allied to them in order to ensure the Israeli government cannot tar them with the Al Qa’ida brush (41).

So it’s quite possible that even if the Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt through elections (As opposed to taking power by force) that it would be considerably more moderate than the Taliban and no ally of Al Qa’ida.

Allowing them to take part in elections is likely to make them more moderate by strengthening the hand of those who prefer the peaceful political route and weakening that of those who say force is the only thing that can succeed. Banning them from participating in elections will increase recruitment to armed jihadist and terrorist groups.

There is no way to know what the results of democratic elections would be – but that is the whole point of democracy - to let the people of a country decide their own government. The Muslim Brotherhood would certainly get a significant number of votes and seats, but whether they would be the sole governing party, part of a coalition government, or the main opposition party can’t be known. While we can hope the Muslim Brotherhood don’t win elections, no-one has any right to tell the Egyptian people who they can or can’t vote for.

Once again, backing the dictatorship will not guarantee the Muslim Brotherhood will be excluded from power either. It makes it more likely that when the regime does fall it will do so in chaos that could allow the Brotherhood to seize power by force rather than a National Unity government allowing a transition  to democracy, as proposed by El Baradei.

This is not about getting Mubarak or else an Egyptian Taliban

We should also be sceptical of our governments using the excuse that they have to back dictatorships for fear of Islamic fundamentalists, given that they arm and support the Saudi dictatorship, who, even according to Clinton’s private admissions, provide the largest haven for funders of terrorism in the world; whose religious police force schoolgirls back into burning buildings to die rather than allow others to see them “improperly dressed”; and whose government backed the Taliban (42) – (44). The US government also continues to arm and fund Pakistan’s military, who have always funded and trained jihadist terrorist groups in India, Kashmir, Afghanistan – and in Pakistan itself, to intimidate the military’s secular civilian and moderate Muslim rivals for control of Pakistan’s government, public funds and foreign aid (45).

As El Baradei has saidThis is what the regime ... sold to the West and to the U.S.: 'It's either us, repression or al Qaeda-type Islamists.” (46). The reality is that is not the only choice – and even if it was, it would be the choice of Egyptians. No-one else has the right to deny them the same democratic rights and freedoms they enjoy, to tell them they and their children must accept a corrupt government that tortures, kills and even rapes them and their children.

Time for the US government to stand for the freedom and democracy it claims to support

As El Baradei saysWhen you see today almost over 100,000 young people getting desperate, going to the streets, asking for their basic freedom, I expected to hear from secretary Clinton stuff like 'democracy, human rights, basic freedom' – all the stuff the US is standing for” (47)

 


Sources


(1) = Reuters 30 Jan 2011 ‘ElBaradei urges U.S. to abandon Mubarak’,http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/30/us-egypt-usa-elbaradei-idUSTRE70T30920110130?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

(2) = Lawrence Freedman (2008) ‘A Choice of Enemies’, Weidenfield & Nicolson, London, 2008, Chapter 4, especially pages 64 - 72

(3) = Kenneth M. Pollack ‘The Persian Puzzle’, Random House, New York, 2005, chapters 4 – 6

(4) = Amnesty USA 27 Jan 2011 ‘Egyptian Protests Day 3: Next Steps’, http://blog.amnestyusa.org/middle-east/egyptian-protests-day-3-next-steps/

(5) = Human Rights Watch 29 Jan 2011 ‘Egypt: End Use of Live Fire at Peaceful Protests’,
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/01/29/egypt-end-use-live-fire-peaceful-protests

(6) = Reuters 29 Jan 2011 ‘Death toll in Egypt's protests tops 100: sources’,http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/29/us-egypt-dead-idUSTRE70S3ZM20110129

(7) = Amnesty International 28 Jan 2011 ‘Egyptian authorities urged to rein in security forces’,
http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/egyptian-authorities-urged-rein-security-forces-2011-01-28

(8) = Human Rights Watch 25 Feb 2004 ‘Egypt’s Torture Epidemic’,
http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2004/02/25/egypt-s-torture-epidemic

(9) = Amnesty International World Report 2010 – Country Report – Egypt,http://report2010.amnesty.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa and http://report2010.amnesty.org/sites/default/files/AIR2010_AZ_EN.pdf#page=77

(10) = See (3) above

(11) = Al Jazeera 29 Jan 2011 ‘Looting spreads in Egyptian cities’,
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/01/2011129175926266521.html

(12) = Justice Commission for Algeria Nov 2004 ‘The Massacres in Algeria 1992-2004’, http://www.algeria-watch.org/pdf/pdf_en/massacres_algeria.pdf

(13) = Washington Post 09 May 2009 ‘Obama Picks Egypt as Speech Venue’, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/08/AR2009050803843.html

(14) = Christian Science Monitor ‘$50 billion later, taking stock of US aid to Egypt’, http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0412/p07s01-wome.html(15) = guardian.co.uk 27 Jan 2011 ‘Egypt braces itself for biggest day of protests yet’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/27/egypt-protests-biggest-day-yet

(16) = Christian Science Monitor ‘Joe Biden says Egypt's Mubarak no dictator, he shouldn't step down...’, http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Backchannels/2011/0127/Joe-Biden-says-Egypt-s-Mubarak-no-dictator-he-shouldn-t-step-down

(17) = Go to the web page linked below and see sources (28) to (34) on it,
http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/sourcesofstability/

(18) = Guardian 29 Jan 2011 ‘White House warns $1.5bn aid to Egypt could be withdrawn’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/29/white-house-aid-egypt

(19) = BBC News 30 Jan 2011 ‘Egypt protests: Hillary Clinton urges 'orderly transition’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12319445

(20) = BBC News 27 Jan 2011 ‘Hague: Egyptian protests 'legitimate'’,http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9377000/9377641.stm

(21) = BBC News 29 Jan 2011 ‘Foreign Office warns against travel to parts of Egypt’,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12310266

(22) = Time 28 Jan 2011 ‘Israel Has Faith Mubarak Will Prevail’, http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2044929,00.html

(23) = See (19) above

(24) = guardian.co.uk 07 Oct 2005 ‘UN nuclear watchdog wins Nobel peace prize’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/oct/07/energy.nuclearindustry

(25) = Guardian 15 Sep 2006 ‘IAEA says Congress report on Iran's nuclear capacity is erroneous and misleading’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/sep/15/usa.iran

(26) = Reuters 19 Sep 2007 ‘Rice swipes at IAEA, urges bold action on Iran’,http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/09/19/us-iran-usa-rice-idUSN1822732020070919

(27) = guardian.co.uk 30 sep 2009 'No credible evidence' of Iranian nuclear weapons, says UN inspector’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/30/iranian-nuclear-weapons-mohamed-elbaradei

(28) = guardian.co.uk 31 Mar 2010 ‘Cautious reports on Tehran nuclear programme 'were framed to avoid war',http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/31/iran-nuclear-programme-cautious-language

(29) = Washington Post 12 Dec 2004 ‘IAEA Leader's Phone Tapped - U.S. Pores Over Transcripts to Try to Oust Nuclear Chief’, http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57928-2004Dec11?language=printer

(30) = guardian.co.uk 31 Mar 2010 ‘Mohamed ElBaradei hits out at west's support for repressive regimes’,http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/31/mohamed-elbaradei-tyrants-support-militants

(31) = guardian.co.uk 30 Nov 2010 ‘Julian Borger : Nuclear Wikileaks: Cables show cosy US relationship with IAEA chief’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/julian-borger-global-security-blog/2010/nov/30/iaea-wikileaks

(32) = guardian.co.uk 02 Dec 2010 ‘US embassy cables: New nuclear chief a 'once-a-decade' chance to shake up UN bureacracy’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/215499

(33) = guardian.co.uk 02 Dec 2010 ‘US embassy cables: UN nuclear chief promises to take a low-profile role on Iran’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/216128

(34) = Washington Post 01 Feb 2009 ‘A Conversation with Mohamed ElBaradei’ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/30/AR2009013003085_2.html

(35) = Reuters 30 Jan 2011 ‘ElBaradei urges U.S. to abandon Mubarak’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/30/us-egypt-usa-elbaradei-idUSTRE70T30920110130?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

(36) = See the page linked below under Sub- heading ‘Mubarak and Son – a Family Dictatorship’ and sources 28 – 42 on it, http://www.duncanmcfarlane.org/sourcesofstability/

(37) = The Daily Beast ‘Obama's Risky Path in Egypt’, http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-01-27/obamas-support-for-egypt-protesters-risks-a-key-ally/

(38) = Guardian 17 Jan 2007 ‘Turkey jails al-Qaida cell for consulate bomb’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/feb/17/turkey.alqaida

(39) = Fawaz A Gerges (2005) ‘The Far Enemy – Why Jihad Went Global’, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005, pages 9 -10 (on torture and dictatorship radicalising people into terrorists and jihadists), pages 110- 116 – on Jihadist/terrorist groups and Islamic fundamentalist political parties hating and despising one another (and Bin Laden’s deputy Zawahiri hating the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood); pages 93 -4 on torture of Zawahiri by Egyptian dictatorship leading him to join Al Qa’ida to build organisation to take revenge

(40) = Loretta Napoleoni (2005) ‘Insurgent Iraq’ Constable & Robinson, London, 2005, Chapter 3 (pages 61 – 62 of paperback edition)

(41) = Observer 16 Aug 2009 ‘Hamas destroys al-Qaida group in violent Gaza battle’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/15/hamas-battle-gaza-islamists-al-qaida

(42) = guardian.co.uk 05 Dec 2010 ‘WikiLeaks cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/05/wikileaks-cables-saudi-terrorist-funding

(43) = BBC News 15 Mar 2002 ‘Saudi police 'stopped' fire rescue’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/1874471.stm

(44) = Rashid , Ahmed(2001) Taliban Tauris, London ,2001

(45) = See post linked below and sources for it, http://inplaceoffear.blogspot.com/2009/10/use-bushs-methods-get-bushs-results.html

(46) = Reuters 30 Jan 2011 ‘ElBaradei urges U.S. to abandon Mubarak’, http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/30/us-egypt-usa-elbaradei-idUSTRE70T30920110130?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

(47) = guardian.co.uk 27 Jan 2011 ‘Egypt braces itself for biggest day of protests yet’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/27/egypt-protests-biggest-day-yet