Can Egypt hold it together? President's son, family flee to Britain

[Earnie Shavers]

There's absolutely no chance of the US sending troops into Egypt. It just wouldn't/couldn't happen. And the Egyptian Army is fine to take control - or at least turn the temperature down - whenever they feel its necessary. It seems they're starting to do that today.

Mubarak just wants to hold on. He's stoking the imagery and the message to play both public opinion (locally and globally) and the US govt as best he can, so he can hold on. He is personally trying to look reasonable and calm and orderly, giving concessions and making promises, while he's trying to make the streets look like everyones worst post-Mubarak fears. He's not trying to piss the US off, he's just trying to make it look like him staying is the only safe option.

[solemole]

Soooo... whatever ends up happening in Egypt... is up to those in Egypt.

It doesn't matter whether Mubarak stay in power or the revolution succeeds (because the U.S. can't get directly involved)... it's a new relationship between Egypt and U.S. in any case.

.... And the U.S. could do nothing but watch the events in Egypt and adhere to the "Prime Directive" (Star Trek ref.) and all?

[mama cass]

ahh of course, it's the US and the ROW, Global Policeman and all that, i nearly forgot

[Earnie Shavers]

I'd think that the US is all over it privately. It's the military that has the ultimate power, and they're tight as hell with the US (and in the end, the $2 billion a year ends up with them.) No problems there.

It's just about management, both of the behind the scenes reality and the public reality and imagery. Trying to not let one get ahead of the other, or one opposing the other. Mubarak wants to hold on and thats difficult. It's not just one man. Whole chunks of society are tied to him and the gravy train, and they're influential, so behind the scenes there would be a lot going on there. The people want him and everyone else related to him gone - now - and thats understandable. But that poses its own problems - leaves an immediate vacuum. The military seem to want this shit sorted in an orderly way, and thats sensible, but its not known how they think that should be - Via Mubarak extension and 'orderly transition'? Via his new VP and 'orderly transition'? Neither are cool with the people. Via this loose forming coalition? Might not seem stable or strong enough to them, too much risk that if it can't hold, back to square one, or worse. Or rule overtly via them (ie overt military rule for a while?) Egyptian public trusts them a lot, but it flies against 'democracy - now'.

The ultimate outcome the US wants would be pretty much the same as the military, but the US of course has to also remain looking 'good' to the Egyptian public (and wider global public - particularly elsewhere in the Mid East) and has to be seen to be a champion for democracy above all else. So they have to dance a little bit, and be very careful about what buttons they push, and when. They have to push the right buttons at the right times in regards to sending a 'message' to the protesters, and wider Middle East in regards to their support for democracy, but have to make sure they're pushing them at times that are suitable to the behind the scenes stuff as well. Which would be really, really, really difficult.

But in the end, it's the military with the ultimate say, and you could bet that the US govt are 'all in' with them.

[mama cass]

update on the military...

1.19pm: Hopes that the army would intervene on behalf of the anti-Mubarak protesters have been dashed, according to some people in and around Tahrir Square.


@estr4ng3d

Military COMPLETELY siding with Mubarak now. Personnel at checkpoints search for foods, med supplies & arrest or send people back #jan25

2.33pm: My colleagues Peter Beaumont and Jack Shenker in Cairo send the following about the role of the army in Tahrir Square today:

They were barely visible at first, a glimmer of tan clothing among the ranks of pro-Mubarak fighters lined on a low overpass above the entrance to Tahrir Square. It was from here that rocks, petrol bombs and bullets had been raining down on the anti-regime opposition defending their barricades below.

At 9am first one, then a second, and then dozens of Egyptian army soldiers – the same military forces who had stood back and watched as last night's bloodshed unfolded – finally appeared at this key strategic flashpoint and began driving back those on the bridge. Before them lay a no man's land carpeted with broken bricks and burnt out vehicles that spoke of the extraordinary violence that had played out in the darkness. This was the morning after the night before.

It was the beginning of a day of to-and-fro street clashes in the densely-populated neighbourhoods surrounding the square, as anti-Mubarak protesters fought close-quarter battles to hold Tahrir and, in a hail of warning shots and automatic gunfire, the army sporadically attempted to establish buffer zones.

One thing was clear after a night of fighting that left over 1,000 injured and several dead from gunshot wounds. That is that despite the denials of Egypt's government and interior ministry who claimed these events were not state-orchestrated, all the evidence strongly suggested otherwise.

I'll post the link to the full version as soon as we have it.

[Bonoa]

If the US or EU send troops to Egypt then they might as well hand over power to the Muslim Brotherhood, that's for shure.

Originally Posted by solemole

Soooo... whatever ends up happening in Egypt... is up to those in Egypt.

[Canadiens1131]

Anderson Cooper Just Got Beat Up By Pro-Mubarak Thugs in Cairo

They fucked with Anderson.

Shit just got real.






Somebody call the President.

[AliEnvy]

Mrs Springsteen

However un-PC it may be, that makes me laugh in evil anticipation of the next "Cooperson Fletcher" segment on This Hour Has 22 Minutes.

YouTube - Cooperson Fletcher in Somalia

[MrsSpringsteen]

Ok, I am seriously not ok with that When I saw the video of the first attack and one guy had a knife..that's very scary. I know they shouldn't be in the middle of those mobs but it's still not right.

Anderson Cooper has been attacked for the second day in a row in Egypt. On Thursday, Cooper tweeted: "Situation on ground in #egypt very tense. Vehicle I was in attacked. My window smashed. All ok."

[BoMac]

imgur: the simple image sharer

Yup. What's going on now is definitely the doing of the Muslim Brotherhood.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by BoMac

imgur: the simple image sharer

that's really beautiful, actually. let's hope that this image is a glimpse of a secular future.

[U2Fanatic4ever]

from @Reuters:

FLASH: #Mubarak says he fears that if he steps downnow, #Egypt will sink into chaos: ABC

the man is delusional! He created the chaos.. This is exactly the plan he had in mind when he sent his thugs out there to cause all this shit!

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by BoMac

imgur: the simple image sharer

Amazing. And its also amazing that there are people who seriously believe Egypt's Christians and Muslims don't get along.

[Earnie Shavers]

Wonder if/when the US would dare pull the $$$ card over the military?

[yolland]

Originally Posted by Earnie Shavers

Wonder if/when the US would dare pull the $$$ card over the military?

Don't hold your breath.

Foreign Policy, Feb. 2

Last fall, a bipartisan group of senators led a months-long drive to pass a resolution calling for greater freedom and democracy in Egypt. The resolution died last December due to a fatal mix of divided loyalties, lobbying influence, and secret Senate holds.

Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) led the effort to press Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to move toward more free and fair elections via a Senate resolution which called for "supporting democracy, human rights, and civil liberties in Egypt." First introduced last July, the resolution quickly gained the support of a range of senators, including Al Franken (D-MN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), and Sam Brownback (R-KS). The resolution's supporters tried several times to bring it up for a Senate vote, once before the August congressional recess, again before the Egyptian parliamentary elections in November, and then again during the post-election lame-duck session. But due to the objections of two key senators and secret holds by two other senators, the resolution never saw the light of day on the Senate floor. "It's too bad; it was blocked by members on both sides of the aisle and the administration opposed it too. It was not helpful; it sent all the wrong signals to Egypt," McCain told The Cable on Tuesday in an interview. "We called for observers to monitor the elections, and we got no support from the administration on that either."

In addition to calling for election monitors, the resolution urged Mubarak to fulfill his promise to lift the emergency law in Egypt, release political prisoners, and respect human rights. It also would have called on the Obama administration to emphasize political reform and human rights in its dealings with the Mubarak regime.

According to three senior Senate aides who worked on the issue, the two senators who were most active behind the scenes to prevent the resolution from moving forward were Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Roger Wicker (R-MS). Feinstein, as head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, had concerns about the resolution's effect on the US relationship with the Mubarak regime and worried that it would jeopardize US-Egyptian cooperation on a range of sensitive national security issues. Wicker, these three Senate aides said, worked against the resolution's passage in part due to his long-standing relationship with a top Washington lobbyist, Wicker's former House colleague Bob Livingston (R-La.), whose firm was being paid by the government of Egypt under a years-long lobbying contract. Livingston's firm makes up one-third of the entity known as the PLM Group, a lobbying entity created to advocate on behalf of the Mubarak regime. The firm also includes Tony Podesta and former Democratic Congressman Toby Moffett. According to the Washington Post and disclosure filings, Mubarak has paid PLM over $4 million since 2007. While PLM was lobbying against the resolution, Livingston personally called Wicker to ask him to do what he could to stall the measure. When asked by The Cable on Tuesday about his opposition to the resolution, Wicker said, "I would have to refresh my recollection."

...It's true that during the lame-duck session, when a pared-down version of the resolution was being circulated for the third and final time, neither Wicker nor Feinstein formally objected to it. But they didn't have to. In November, two unnamed Democratic senators placed secret holds on the resolution, preventing it from being brought up by unanimous consent and effectively killing its chances of moving forward. None of the Senate aides who spoke with The Cable know which two Democratic senators secretly held up the resolution in the end. But for the resolution's supporters, the episode is a stark illustration of how Washington policy over Egypt was caught in a tangled mess of competing interests and how broad bipartisan efforts can be torpedoed by a small number of lawmakers.

I hate to say it, but I suspect the main reason the Administration's shown even the (tepid) support for the protesters it has thus far is because a continuation of the (pro-US) military-first model still looks possible without Mubarak.

[Moonlit_Angel]

Last fall, a bipartisan group of senators led a months-long drive to pass a resolution calling for greater freedom and democracy in Egypt. The resolution died last December due to a fatal mix of divided loyalties, lobbying influence, and secret Senate holds.

*Drops head on desk* That is some hilariously awesome/sad irony there, that is.

I also get a kick out of the striking difference between the reasons Feinstein and Wicker each apparently had for opposing the resolution.

Originally Posted by Irvine511

that's really beautiful, actually. let's hope that this image is a glimpse of a secular future.

Hear, hear. Thanks for that link, BoMac. Nice to see a moment of good amidst the chaos.

Really scary to hear that about Anderson being attacked, by the way. Yikes.

Angela

[Earnie Shavers]

I can't think of what they can be offered (the military, I mean.) But if its not sorted in maybe a maximum of the next 48 hours, it locks in a course for one of the several worst case scenarios, and locks out perhaps the best, or only, chance of actually getting an organic, genuine democracy in the Arab world. For some time anyway.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Earnie Shavers

I can't think of what they can be offered (the military, I mean.)

From my (albeit limited) understanding, the military, or at least the ranking officers, live rather well in Egypt and are definitely part of an upper class. Part of the US military subsidies has always gone to bolstering their salaries, assigning them with very nice homes in nice areas and so on. You can probably exploit their desire to maintain this lifestyle during and after a transitional stage by offering financial incentives, etc. I am not sure that this is in fact a good idea at all, but I am rather sure that in a part of the world where people are genuinely hungry, money goes a long way.

[Earnie Shavers]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

that's really beautiful, actually. let's hope that this image is a glimpse of a secular future.

I've seen a number of protesters wearing a t-shirt that has both crescent and cross on it. It's got something written in Arabic across the top - have no idea what it says, hopefully its something along the coexist lines. Or "Fuck you Glenn Beck!" would suit me too. Anyway, look out for it, you'll spot it in a number of photos if you're paying attention, but probably more from the earlier student-heavy days of the protests. Black t-shirts, big white crescent/cross side by side. Lots of them.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Pearl

Amazing. And its also amazing that there are people who seriously believe Egypt's Christians and Muslims don't get along.

They believe it because there have been documented tensions/clashes between entities on those two sides. So it isn't a completely crazy notion, but it certainly isn't what Glenn Beck is suggesting, either.