LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
May 27, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     robert scheer     barack obama     gay marriage     ndaa     chris hedges
Most Read

Say 'Hi-Ho!' as They Strip-Search You

TED: 'A Money-Soaked Orgy of Self-Congratulatory Futurism'

I Can't Hear Myself Think

A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Children Slaughtered in Government Attack on Syrian Town

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Why Bain Questions Matter
OSHA Struggles When Tower Climbers Die

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Better Than We Found It
The Good-Natured Dictator

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

Push Has Now Come to Shove

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Feb 1, 2011

By Eugene Robinson

The Obama administration has done a creditable job of gently edging Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak toward some sort of gilded exile. Now it’s time to push. Hard.

Cherished ideals of democracy and cold exigencies of realpolitik both demand that U.S. officials do whatever is in their power—which, frankly, may not be much—to hasten Mubarak’s departure. Help him fuel the presidential jet and load the gold bullion, if necessary. Send him a postcard from the French Riviera saying “Wish you were here.”

The administration’s gradually toughening rhetoric has been appropriate, for the most part. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s initial assessment that the autocratic Egyptian government was “stable” and Vice President Biden’s refusal to call Mubarak a “dictator” were obviously wrong, yet it’s easy to understand why they would have trouble believing that popular protests might actually bring down such a durable and ruthless regime.

On Friday, President Obama still sounded as if he expected Mubarak to survive in power, calling on the Pharaonic strongman to “take concrete steps” toward democratic reform. By Sunday, Clinton was calling for a “peaceful, orderly transition” in Egypt; Obama, after speaking to several world leaders by phone, also used the word “transition” in a statement.

That’s exactly right—as long as the administration isn’t using “orderly” to mean “gradual” or “drawn out.” The longer the advent of democracy in Egypt is delayed, the more likely it becomes that the White House will be confronted with a worst-case scenario.

Advertisement

The administration’s nightmare is that the Arab world’s most populous nation—in many ways, the keystone of U.S. policy in the Middle East—would be ruled by an Islamist regime headed by the Muslim Brotherhood. Such a government would be much more hostile toward Israel, and friendly toward groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. A key pillar of stability in the world’s most dangerous region would have been toppled, with uncertain, perhaps truly awful, implications.

Such an outcome, I believe, is far from inevitable. But it becomes more likely if the broad-based popular yearning for the Mubarak regime’s immediate demise is unrequited.

A face-saving solution, in which Mubarak holds on until elections are held in September, is clearly not what the Egyptian people want. The sweet, optimistic fervor that we’ve seen in those amazing pictures from Tahrir Square would have months to sour and curdle—and the Islamist movement would likely be the ultimate beneficiary.

The Muslim Brotherhood is the best-organized opposition political force in the country, but it has been relegated to the margins of the popular uprising. So far, this is a secular revolution. A post-Mubarak Egypt whose foundation is laid now would include the Brotherhood but not in a central role. If Mubarak were to hang on until September—and the multitudes in the streets went glumly back to their everyday lives—the purposeful and tenacious Brotherhood would end up playing a much bigger role in charting the nation’s future.

Already, demonstrators have noted that the rubber bullets and tear gas canisters fired by Mubarak’s hated police are stamped “Made in the USA.” It is true that Mubarak has been a useful and fairly reliable ally for three decades. But it is also true that cold-eyed analysis would conclude that the 82-year-old Mubarak’s day is done, that the clamor for democracy in Egypt has reached a point of no return, and that it is better for U.S. interests to be on the right side of history.

The United States will in any case retain some influence in Egypt, if only because of the $1.3 billion in aid we give annually. It would be good if we retained some moral influence as well—but we won’t if the administration is seen to back a corrupt dictator whose mandate is utterly expired.

There’s another reason to give Mubarak a mighty shove: We believe in freedom and democracy. We really do.

It is thrilling to watch as Egyptians assert the rights that we hold to be inherent and universal—to assemble, associate and speak freely, to give their consent to be governed, to withdraw that consent when it is abused.

We can’t take the position that democracy is good only when we approve of the leaders who are elected. We’d never convince the Egyptians that this was anything but rank hypocrisy. We’d never even convince ourselves.

Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.
   
© 2011, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.

By cruxpuppy, February 2, 2011 at 10:05 pm Link to this comment

“We believe in freedom and democracy. We really do.” And yet we support dictatorships around the globe and provide them with all the weapons they need to stay in power, always have.

Obama is no champion of democracy, not the black Bush 2. What Israel wants, Obama will provide. The Israelis are scared shitless of the Egyptian public. They would prefer to see 100,000 Egyptians murdered in the street than to see Mubarak driven out. Obama is going to push hard in the name of freedom & democracy? In your schizoid dreams, Gene!

Report this

By chelseagirl, February 2, 2011 at 4:18 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I think Eugene likes President Obushma.

Report this

By clearwaters, February 1, 2011 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment

“There’s another reason to give Mubarak a mighty shove. We believe in freedom
and democracy. We really do.” Who are you trying to convince, the Egyptians or
yourself? We are the ones who have abdicated our freedoms and the democratic
process to the international corporate powers. 
“We can’t take the position that democracy is good only when we approve of the
leaders who are elected. We’d never convince the Egyptians that this was anything
but rank hypocrisy. We’d never convince ourselves.” That cat has long been out of
the bag. Given our track record in (pick your continent), we have never allowed our
“...belief in freedom and democracy.” to stand in the way of our economic
“national interest”. There is no self respecting intelligent Egyptian who will be
looking at the USofA for the proper way to do democracy.

Report this

By GoyToy, February 1, 2011 at 2:35 pm Link to this comment

Nice to see that Eugene Robinson is now an expert on U.S-Egyptian relations. I needed the laugh, Eugene.

Report this

By mgruba, February 1, 2011 at 12:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The only times the United States has stood for democracy and freedom were when people stood up against the prevailing government, much like the Egyptians are doing now.  The country was founded on terrorism and sabotage: events such as the Boston Tea Party of old.  The civil rights movement, which is now so celebrated by our politicians, was not at all encouraged by the leaders of the day. 

This article seems to assert that the United States will be cleared of all its wrong doing in Egypt by simply switching sides mid-way through the game.  But the crisis in Egypt will just add to the list of failed dictatorships that had been forcibly instituted by the U.S.

Perhaps the Brotherhood wouldn’t be such a threat to the US if the US would stop forcing itself upon the Muslim world.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, February 1, 2011 at 12:31 pm Link to this comment

What the U.S. wants in Egypt is what it wanted in Iran.

Good luck with that.

Report this
Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.