Team Obama Divided on Egypt Approach
Maybe you've noticed that the Obama administration's strategy with regard to the ongoing Egyptian uprising has lacked a certain consistency That's partly because of divisions within the president's closest circles about how to deal with the crisis and its various factions (more).
Maybe you’ve noticed that the Obama administration’s strategy with regard to the ongoing Egyptian uprising has lacked a certain consistency. That’s partly because of divisions within the president’s closest circles about how to deal with the crisis and its various factions, and as the L.A. Times reported Wednesday, something like harmony has recently been achieved, but it may not last long. –KA
WAIT, BEFORE YOU GO…Los Angeles Times:
After sending mixed signals, the administration has appeared to settle on supporting a measured transition for easing Mubarak out of power. That strategy, which remains the subject of vigorous debate inside the administration, calls for a Mubarak crony, Vice President Omar Suleiman, to lead the reform process.
[…] But that position has been harder to defend as Suleiman and other Mubarak allies appeared to dig in, refusing the administration’s entreaties to undertake swift reforms such as scrapping the country’s longstanding state of emergency. On Wednesday, Suleiman warned ominously of a coup unless the unrest ended. That prompted White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to fire back that the Egyptians should “expand the size and scope of the discussions and the negotiations and to take many of the steps that we outlined yesterday — one of which is lifting the emergency law.”
[…] The White House declined to elaborate on the positions staked out by Obama’s advisors, though they acknowledged a robust and ongoing debate. But aides have revealed some of the disagreements in group meetings and one-on-one discussions with experts, including former U.S. diplomats.
The current situation reflects Obama’s decision-making process as president. On key issues, he has encouraged open-ended debate, preferring to ponder all sides of the argument before, sometimes slowly, choosing a position in the middle ground. In deciding whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, for example, his decision reflected a compromise between his military advisors and those like Vice President Joe Biden, who argued that a swift drawdown was needed.”
If you're reading this, you probably already know that non-profit, independent journalism is under threat worldwide. Independent news sites are overshadowed by larger heavily funded mainstream media that inundate us with hype and noise that barely scratch the surface. We believe that our readers deserve to know the full story. Truthdig writers bravely dig beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that tells you what’s really happening and who’s rolling up their sleeves to do something about it.
Like you, we believe a well-informed public that doesn’t have blind faith in the status quo can help change the world. Your contribution of as little as $5 monthly or $35 annually will make you a groundbreaking member and lays the foundation of our work.
Politics
Obama's only takeaway from the Syria episode was to never again seek Congressional approval for military action.
Politics
Cautionary politics lost them the majority a decade ago. It’s taken that long to reboot.
With his nonstop barrage of lies, the president has degraded our electoral system to the point that any result will feel illegitimate.
The class war that gave rise to his campaign is the fault of a long line of corporate Democrats like Joe Biden, and voters know it.
A revealing new study finds the Justice Department charged just 359 such criminals in January—a decline of 25% from five years ago.
A closer look at the Trump administration's agreement with the Taliban reveals all the president's concerned with is bragging rights.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.