Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

[Allegro]

You're very welcome. I also appreciate the chance to shout over the wall. I really do.

Alice, Thank You for shouting over the wall.

~ A.

[AlicetheKurious]

I have some questions. The people in the video are exactly like those who ruled Egypt for a year, with the full support of the West and its allies Qatar and Turkey and the European Union. They came to power via elections that were rigged in every way possible. The Egyptian people, around 90% of whom are Muslims, most of them devout, felt sick. They feared that these strange people, with their alien and ugly thinking, would kill Egypt if they weren't stopped. The Egyptian nation gathered its strength, and heaved and heaved and spewed them out. Since then, all we've heard from the US and its allies is threats and attempts to blackmail us into "including" and "integrating" them in the planning of our nation's future. Delegation after delegation, from the US and the European Union, has arrived in Egypt to meet with representatives of these people, and emerged from these meetings wielding more threats (veiled and open) and then holding 'private' meetings with individuals at all levels of our government, and others who are writing our new constitution, leading religious authorities (Muslim and Christian), and leaders of various political parties. Some of them emerge from these meetings seeming shaken and intimidated. This outrages the Egyptian people, who smell something rotten being cooked up for them.

Catherine Ashton, Baroness Ashton of Upholland, PC (born 20 March 1956) is a British Labour politician who in 2009 became the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy for the European Union. Under the Treaty of Lisbon, this post is combined with the post of Vice-President of the European Commission. Link

Lady Catherine Ashton is in Egypt right now, doing just that. With every visit, the crazies visibly take heart, issuing declarations like yesterday's, from a Salafist preacher/terrorist: "We will defeat the constitution of atheists and homosexuals in the referendum." He is referring to a constitution that actually enshrines the core principles of Islam as enshrined in the Quran (justice, equality, religious freedom, intellectual inquiry, obligation towards the vulnerable, respect for human dignity, etc.) as the basis for Egyptian law. It's a constitution that is being written with the input of a wide range of Egyptians, representing a variety of interests and points of view. This enrages them. They and their supporters abroad cynically use the language of 'human rights' and the various freedoms in their relentless campaign to break Egypt and the Egyptians. Here, they use the language of Islam as a threadbare cloak for their treason and corrosive hatred for Egypt.

It's not working here. We've rejected their bullying hatred and ignorance, and their bizarre and malicious caricature of Islam. In fact, their attempts to hold similar marches in Egypt are met with insults and sometimes even violence by ordinary people, so that they are often chased out and forced into hiding. My questions are: why are British people (as in this video) tolerating this kind of abuse, and why is their government trying so hard to force it on us? Who are these people, what do they do for a living, whose agenda do they really serve, and who do they really work for?

[Carol Newquist]

Who are these people, what do they do for a living, whose agenda do they really serve, and who do they really work for?

Great questions, Alice. I think we know the answer, but let's just say, Obama's mother was one of them in her day....and George Bush Sr. was one of her bosses, or in the least, the boss of her boss's boss. Also, people tend to forget this, but Mohamed Morsi was employed by NASA. This shit goes so deep that your name and a certain hole come to mind.

[slimmouse]

Presenter and Producers Wanted for The People's Voice Middle East Programme.





The two-hour show will be aired on Sunday afternoons and tell the truth about Middle Eastern and Near Eastern events and people with interview links to Gaza and other countries.

Please contact us as soon as possible at phonein@thepeoplesvoice.tv

Personally speaking I can't imagine a better kind of Middle East expert than Alice.

[bluenoseclaret]

Carol Newquist

"...This shit goes so deep that your name and a certain hole come to mind"

.

Mods...

Is this latest troll welcome.?

Anjem Choudary....looks like state to me.

[seemslikeadream]

[Carol Newquist]

Mods...

Is this latest troll welcome.?

Is this not against the rules?

[seemslikeadream]

[Carol Newquist]

The situation in Egypt, at least in a general sense, reminds me of what played out in Iran during its revolution. Many don't know or realize this, but the revolution began, was the brainchild of, the far-Left Marxists in Iran, but they knew they couldn't pull it off, overthrowing the military dictatorship disguised as a Monarchy, without the aid of the Islamists as muscle. Just like the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. I know, the MB in Egypt pretty much forced itself on the scene and usurped the movement to its own ends, but in effect, that's what the Islamists in Iran did and the Left stood by, weak and feckless in the face of the budding of another tyranny. When displacing a power, it's crucial to take into account the power vacuum that follows. Forces know of it, and position themselves to fill that vacuum they've helped create whilst the rest celebrate a victory that's not yet complete.

Here's an excellent article on the Iranian Revolution and the mistakes made by the Left. The authors are not optimistic. It is their contention that the Left seems incapable of learning from these mistakes bu they ofer this sage advice nonetheless.

http://archive.workersliberty.org/wlmags/wl102/iran.htm

Defending unconditional democratic freedoms, even of one's opponents, is for the left a central task for all times. The populist left placed a Chinese wall between the struggle for democracy and that against imperialism. Indeed one was subordinated to the other: fighting imperialism took priority. And anyway the 'anti-imperialist Imam' was doing this so well. The battle for freedoms in the streets, in the universities, in the factories - which was a battle against the Islamic rulers - was distracting, nay obstructing, the anti-imperialist struggle, so the argument went. We were to sacrifice everything to a bogus anti-imperialist struggle conducted at the top by the Islamist rulers of Iran.

But even those who did not subscribe to this thesis, in practice, downplayed the democratic struggle. So it was that when women marched in their thousands on that first post revolutionary International Women's Day (March 1979) against compulsory hejab (Islamic covering) for entering government office, the left turned its face away: after all these were 'perfumed' women from the more affluent suburbs. The left was again silent when a few month later thugs ransacked the offices of the daily paper Ayandegan. It was 'liberal' - nothing to do with us. Within a year progressive newspapers such as the Bakhtar-e Emruz were also shut. And finally the left underground press was annihilated. The Iranian press scene went into total darkness for 15 years.

The left saw political democracy as belonging to the bourgeoisie. At best the era of 'bourgeois revolutions' was a ladder to socialism. Personal freedoms, such as the freedom of expression, were 'liberal' demands, either to be ignored or tolerated - for the time being - but not high on the agenda. Indeed liberal was used as a pejorative term, a swear word. The 'anti-imperialist' mullahs were far preferable. It was thus that the left dug its own grave.

Democracy and political freedoms, including individual freedoms, is the air the left breathes. This air is as necessary while building socialism as when fighting for it 3. This debate is not confined to Iran. The European left and the left in the Middle East should take heed. Many so-called 'bourgeois' freedoms would not have been achieved, nor sustained, without the struggle of the working class. Democratic rights are also a product of the era of proletarian revolutions. As such they form the struts of the future socialist society, to be expanded upon and deepened, not discarded.

A most important element in these freedoms is the freedom to associate. Here too the record of the Iranian left was disastrous.

[American Dream]

http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/14 ... rrested-in

At Least Fifty-Three Dead, Four Hundred Arrested in Sunday Clashes

Oct 07 2013
by Mada Masr


[27 January 2011, protester running from tear gas fired by the security forces.
Image originally posted to Flickr by Ramy Raoof]


Clashes broke out in several areas around Cairo as mass marches of protesters chanting against military rule were stopped from entering Tahrir Square, where thousands of others had gathered early in the morning to celebrate the anniversary of the 1973 October 6 War.

By the evening, the Health Ministry reported that at least fifty-three were killed and more than 270 injured nationwide during the day's bloody events. The state-run Middle East News Agency also reported that at least 400 protesters were arrested across the country pursuant to the clashes.

In the early evening, clashes broke out in Ramses Street in downtown Cairo, a short distance away from celebrations in support of the Armed Forces taking place in Tahrir. According to the state news agency, protesters burned tires and closed off the main road to traffic in the area.

Security forces fired tear gas in an attempt to disperse the demonstrators, who reportedly retaliated with Molotov cocktails.

Within a couple of hours, security forces reportedly pushed the crowd back towards Ghamra and nearby side streets, and out of the central Ramses Square.

By late Sunday afternoon, the heaviest clashes seem to be concentrated in the Dokki neighborhood, where protesters battled with residents and security forces. A front line appeared to have formed on Tahrir Street, the main thoroughfare in the neighborhood.

A Mada Masr reporter in the vicinity witnessed Molotov cocktails being thrown, but it was unclear who was throwing them. Constant gunfire could be heard around the area of protests.

Witnesses reported seeing armed, plain clothed men descending from a Central Security Forces truck. Armed men were also arriving at the scene in an unmarked car with red license plates — a sign that the vehicle belongs to the governorate.

These men demanded that no one film the clashes, and chased protesters down neighborhood streets, sometimes detaining them, witnesses said.

A Mada Masr reporter described a “nightmarish scene” with tear gas and gunfire, civilians beating up protesters they’ve captured, and protesters responding with fireworks. Plain clothed men could also be seen walking around with light weapons, including a hooded man clearly brandishing a knife.

Many of the protesters were marching in support of the now-criminalized Muslim Brotherhood and deposed President Mohamed Morsi. Eyewitnesses say protesters chanted "Allahu Akbar" (God is great) as they marched, and residents of the area took to the streets to protect their neighborhood.

Protesters in the Dokki march shouted at passersby, “We are not real … All this is photoshopped," as they gestured towards a seemingly endless crowd of demonstrators.

Eyewitnesses said dozens were arrested by Central Security Forces, and that local residents were also detaining some protesters.

Rasha, a female demonstrator in Dokki, told Mada Masr, “Look, I’m not veiled and I’m a liberal. Not all those protesting are Brotherhood like people insist. The people want freedom and democracy. We elected a president for the first time in years, and we are here to defend this principle. We [don’t believe in] removing a president by force.”

“When we say ‘down with military rule,’ we are talking about the army generals who work for their own interests ... We are not against the military as an institution, they are our family,” she clarified.

As guns fired in the background, she said, “We are peaceful and unarmed. They want us to be quiet, but we will never be quiet again.”

Violence was also reported down on the Nile Corniche in Garden City, where security forces reportedly used tear gas to push back a march of thousands coming from Manial.

The anti-regime protests were organized by the Anti-Coup Alliance, comprising supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, political forces calling for Morsi's reinstatement, and citizens that oppose the army-backed legitimacy of the interim government.

The Anti-Coup Alliance called on supporters to gather at several spots around Cairo and head to Tahrir Square on time for afternoon prayers, amid heightened security at major squares around the country as Egypt celebrates national Armed Forces Day.

Starting on Sunday morning, protesters gathered in Giza’s Mohandiseen district. More than 2,000 demonstrators set off towards Tahrir.

Protesters chanted against the military and carried the yellow hands with four fingers to signify Rabea el-Adaweya, where hundreds of Morsi supporters were killed on 14 August when security forces violently dispersed their sit-in.

Mohamed al-Bagoury, a thirty-seven-year-old marketing executive from Giza, took part in the Mohandiseen march.

“It’s not about Morsi anymore. What I care about is legitimacy. We elected a civilian president in free and fair elections. I want our constitution, an interim government and legitimacy. What we conducted a referendum on our constitution. Morsi is a symbol of legitimacy,” he told Mada Masr.

“I’m protesting to get my rights and the rights of those that died in Rabea, Nahda and the Republican Guard [clashes]. This new government is a coup, this is not democracy,” he added.

Asked why protesters were headed to Tahrir given the likelihood of clashes breaking out with the crowds assembled there to celebrate the army, Bagoury answered, “Going to Tahrir is the spirit of the revolution. This is known globally as the place where the January 25 revolution took place.”

The state news agency said that the march left from Mahrousa Mosque in Mohandiseen, but was stopped when trying to ascend the May 15 Bridge, and instead took Sudan Street heading to Tahrir Square.

Elsewhere in Egypt, at least one protester was killed in clashes with security forces in Minya’s Delga village on Sunday, security and medical sources told Reuters.

Reuters reported that clashes erupted near a police station in Delga when protesters threw stones at police, who responded with live fire. It was not immediately possible to verify what provoked the violence.

Protesters attempting to rally at Alexandria’s Al-Qaed Ibrahim Mosque were also stopped by security forces, and some were arrested for distributing leaflets that called for civil disobedience, according to the state news agency.

[American Dream]

http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/14 ... d-to-egypt

The Moral Ambiguity of United States Aid to Egypt

Sep 09 2013
by Frida Alim



[28 June 2011, a protester holding tear gas canister the Arabic on his arm reads:"I love Egypt".
Image originally posted to Flickr by lilian Wagdy]

On the heels of the violent dispersal of pro-Mohamed Morsi sit-ins, US military aid to Egypt is now the center of political discussions on the nature of the US-Egyptian relationship. Internationally, academics, politicians, and protesters have fervently debated the word “coup” as a term to classify the events following the 30 June uprising against former President Morsi. The arguments for and against the term “coup” have analyzed cultural, political, and historical markers in Egypt, and yet a striking degree of disagreement still exists over the proper classification. Some have termed Morsi’s ouster a “coup,” and have called for an end to the annual 1.3 billion US dollars in United States military aid to Egypt, particularly after the violent dispersal of pro-Morsi protesters. Abd al-Ghani Sayyid has argued that there are key similarities between the January 25 Revolution and the 30 June uprising, including the protesters’ demands for the military’s assistance and its subsequent intervention—adding that categorization of the events as a coup or revolution can only occur after observing the long-term effects of the two uprisings. Others place the blame on the Muslim Brotherhood, arguing that Morsi’s inability to govern the country inclusively was one of many factors that led Egypt to this critical juncture.

In official US circles, classification of the uprising as a coup would require the cancellation of the annual provision of US military aid to Egypt. Given the official death toll of over 1,000 since the violent dispersal of pro-Morsi protesters on 14 August 2013, the United States is being pressed to defend its unwavering aid to the Egyptian state. Cairo has traditionally been a strategic geopolitical ally, and the Egyptian military is the second greatest recipient of US foreign aid after Israel. Yet Egypt’s military authorities have now strayed far from US requests to avoid bloodshed in resolving the political stalemate.

Republican Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham have called for the suspension of US military aid, describing the military and interim government as “taking Egypt down a dark path, one that the United States cannot and should not travel with them.” The senators echo a slew of US critics of continued military aid to Egypt. While President Barack Obama swiftly announced the cancellation of joint military exercises with Egypt next month, the annual pledge of 1.3 billion dollars remains untouched. Cutting it would reverse a decades-long policy that effectively armed authoritarian governments in an effort to promote “regional stability.”

Questioning US Military Aid Policy

The sudden critique of US military aid among US policy makers and political commentators marks a hypocritical shift in attitude toward the limits of unconditional military aid, following years of human rights abuses during the Hosni Mubarak administration that went unaddressed. History tells us that morality and human rights have traditionally played no part in the determination of the disbursement of US military aid.

Firstly, in the case of aid to Egypt, it has represented a political maneuver to secure Egyptian allegiance to US foreign policy objectives in the Middle East, as military aid has been linked to Egypt’s adherence to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty and regional security. According to a US embassy cable from March 2009 released by Wikileaks, military aid to Egypt is considered “untouchable compensation” for the maintenance of a favorable relationship with Israel:

President Mubarak and military leaders view our military assistance program as the cornerstone of our mil-mil (sic) relationship and consider the USD 1.3 billion in annual FMF as “untouchable compensation” for making and maintaining peace with Israel. The tangible benefits to our mil-mil relationship are clear: Egypt remains at peace with Israel, and the U.S. military enjoys priority access to the Suez Canal and Egyptian airspace.

Indeed, US naval vessels receive expedited access to the Suez Canal, a service that is extremely politically and economically valuable. The United States also benefits from access to Egyptian airspace. In this context, military aid is not a benevolent act, but rather payment for services rendered at all levels from the Egyptian government.

Secondly, the aid represents a business deal that strongly benefits the US arms industry by requiring that aid money be used to pay for contacts with US companies for the procurement of weaponry. Both of these aims transcend the political situation on the streets in Egypt. In fact, unconditional military aid has survived decades of political oppression at the hands of ousted President Hosni Mubarak’s administration.

Meanwhile, these factors have also transformed US-Egyptian relations into a patron-client dynamic. Traditionally, military aid has been one of the most effective ways for Washington to secure the allegiance of any incoming Egyptian administration. In his book Democracy Prevention: The Politics of the US-Egyptian Alliance, Jason Brownlee notes that some US officials advocated liberalizing reforms, while remaining wary that “a sudden opening of public participation could bring unknown figures to power and jeopardize strategic cooperation.” Opinion polls under the Mubarak administration showed an overwhelming rejection of US strategic proprieties; attitudes which could affect Egyptian foreign policy if they receive the endorsement of a new democratically elected government. By fostering the military’s vested interest in maintaining an amicable relationship with the United States, Washington ensures that an incoming administration is faced with an established military, firmly rooted in a US-Egyptian relationship.

This has multiple implications for Egyptian foreign policy and geopolitical alliances. While administrations come and go, the Egyptian military maintains its stoic role in Egyptian politics. A testament to the stability of the role of the military is the long-standing military leadership of former Minister of Defense and Military Production Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, who led the military for over twenty years until his forced retirement in 2012. The very static characteristic of the Egyptian military leadership has facilitated the preservation of a military aid agreement with the United States that stretches back decades.

The Nature of US Military Aid

Despite the highly secretive military budget, which the law protects from scrutiny, there are a few cases in which the public can glimpse the vast economic power contained by the Egyptian military. One such case is the economic-military agreement between the United States and Egypt. Between 1948 and 2011, the United States has provided Egypt with 71.6 billion dollars in bilateral aid. Since 1987, Egypt received approximately 1.3 billion dollars annually in military aid from the United States. The Obama Administration requested another 1.3 billion dollars for the 2012 fiscal year.

Under the banner of military aid, Egypt benefits from a cash-flow agreement, which some analysts estimate at two billion dollars. Military aid is divided into three main types: acquisitions, equipment upgrades, and support or maintenance contracts. Of the annual military aid, approximately thirty-five percent goes toward the purchase of new weapons systems from the United States as part of a defense modernization plan, thirty percent is earmarked for the acquisition and maintenance of US equipment, twenty percent goes toward the costs of program implementation, and fifteen percent is allocated for upgrading equipment that is in use, according to military analysts. Only a small fraction of military aid is given directly to the Egyptian military to run domestic military-related projects.

Egypt uses this cash-flow agreement to purchase military equipment exclusively from US defense contractors, buying items ranging from tear gas to F-16 fighter jets. In fact, this money never leaves the United States. As much as Egypt would suffer from a loss in fully subsidized military equipment, the disruption to the US-Egyptian aid agreement would also undoubtedly have serious financial implications for defense contractors that typically field orders to Egypt. Lockhead Martin, an US defense contractor, received 259 million dollars from defense contracts that included the provision of F-16s to Egypt between 2009 and 2011. While this number represents only a fraction of Lockhead’s contracts, small-to-medium sized contractors would suffer more from the reduction or cancellation of aid to Egypt.

Weak Strings Attached to Aid

According to the Congressional Research Service 2013 Report for Congress, US funds are only to be used under certain conditions. Firstly, the US Secretary of State must certify that Egypt is meeting its obligations under the peace treaty with Israel. Secondly, its authorities must be supporting the transition to civilian government by holding free and fair elections and by “implementing policies to protect freedom of expression, association, and religion, and due process of law.” However, these requirements can be waived “under certain conditions,” though these go unspecified in the report.

The only notable condition is thus maintenance of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty, and of security in the Sinai Peninsula, which have been pillars of the US-Egyptian relationship. Cutting military aid could have immediate repercussions for Egyptian up-keep of amicable relations with Israel; a prospect that the United States has never considered testing before. Considering the Mubarak administration’s poor track record with free and fair elections, it can be safely assumed that the other conditions, relating to the Camp David Accords and security in Sinai, have been adequately met for several years, thus allowing the flow of military aid despite a lack of progress in the field of democracy. In a joint press conference between Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and then President Hosni Mubarak in 2009, Gates remarked, “multiple American presidents and administrations have benefited from [Mubarak’s] wise counsel.” He also noted that while the US administration supports human rights, its position toward military funding is that the “foreign military financing that’s in the budget should be without conditions.”

Although progress towards democracy is considered a condition of military aid, the reality is that US arms have been used to suppress basic democratic freedoms in Egypt. In the 2011 Egyptian revolution, the extent of military aid from the United States became apparent when it was discovered that the tear gas being used on protestors was manufactured from Combined Systems International of Jamestown, Pennsylvania. In fact, US military aid survived a public relations disaster during the eighteen days of the January 25 Revolution, as Egyptian protesters held tear gas canisters stamped with “made in America” for international journalists to see. There still seems to be no accountability for the use of US arms on peaceful protests.

Domestic Corruption Pervades the Aid Relationship

The economic-military relationship between the United States and Egypt has sustained a great deal of corruption, not only in the use of weapons imported from the United States to deter or disperse protests before, during, and after the 2011 revolution, but also through the Egyptian military’s abuse of funding.

In 1986, the Egyptian military signed a contract with General Motors to manufacture passenger cars. USAID gave 200 million dollars from its budget to subsidize the project. While the project was later abandoned for both political and economic reasons, the army instead began assembling Jeep Cherokees through an agreement with the Chrysler Corporation. By entering into such agreements, the United States was legitimating domestic economic activity that strengthened the bureaucracy inherent in the military institution. The army would receive subsidies from the United States through US companies to create car factories, but profits from these projects would go directly to military accounts rather than toward the state.

In the 1990s, the Pentagon announced that it would provide tens of millions of dollars to help establish a 650-bed international medical center outside of Cairo, specifically for treatment of Egyptian soldiers. While the Pentagon maintained that the Egyptian military had paid for its creation, the US military aid program contributed 162.8 million dollars for equipment, operations and maintenance. Once this hospital was built, it became clear that it was being used for commercial purposes. The hospital was treating civilian patients, and offered a “lavishly furnished Royal Suite” for international patients. Even so, the Pentagon continued its forty-six million dollar contract to the Florida-based company TeKontrol to train hospital staff members for twelve months. When notified of these abuses, the Pentagon commented that termination of the contract “could potentially impact the desires of the Egyptian Ministry of Defense,” to win international accreditation for the hospital. Accordingly, it upheld the contract.

Reassessing US Military Aid

The recent bloodshed in Egypt cast new light on military aid in official US circles, which have opportunistically forgotten the many years of military aid during which illegal detentions, torture, and a state of emergency were common features on the Egyptian political scene. From 1987 to 2013, US military aid to Egypt proceeded virtually unchallenged and unquestioned. Not only was US military equipment used to suppress democratic rights in Egypt, it also contributed to a vast military industrial complex, whereby the Egyptian military owns pasta and car factories, retains a budget completely independent of the state, all the while benefiting from an US patron that fully subsidizes modern military equipment. The Mubarak regime was long portrayed as a stable and functioning state and police brutality was simply a price to pay for maintenance of that stability.

Amicable relations between the United States and the Muslim Brotherhood indicated that President Morsi had also bowed to the traditional US-Egyptian relationship. In November 2012, Morsi was seen as a major player in brokering a peace deal between Hamas and Israel. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton applauded the new Egyptian administration for “assuming the responsibility and leadership that has long made this country a cornerstone of regional peace and stability.” The United States could breathe a sigh of relief that the incoming administration had accepted the basic tenets of the traditional US-Egyptian relationship. However, in the aftermath of the 30 June uprising, the loss of another pliant administration again places the United States in an awkward position in anticipation of new elections that may bring in a new administration less friendly towards US geopolitical goals.

Now, the image of a new military-run regime has proliferated in US media as an anti-democratic force, entirely responsible for the recent bloodshed in Egypt. Western coverage of the events in Egypt has provided little reference to the key catalysts of the Tamarod movement. The concept that democracy comes through the ballot box is a narrative that cannot encompass the range of repertoires of public expression in Egypt, where streets and squares are regularly used to convey discontent and grievances. Coverage of bloody clashes between security forces and protesters has failed to give viewers a contextual understanding of Egyptian politics and domestic divisions—not to mention the US role in supporting the coercive apparatus that is leading these atrocities. It is the new image of Egypt, one that has been violent and oppressive, that has caused domestic uproar over the annual provision of military aid.

The Weakening of US Leverage

The Egyptian military, riding on wave of popularity following the 30 June uprising, has failed to heed recommendations from the United States. Despite frequent calls from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, and warnings from US Secretary of State John Kerry to “respect the rights of free assembly,” Egyptian authorities proceeded with a violent dispersal of pro-Morsi demonstrators. These incidents have been very public demonstrations of the Egyptian military’s ability to disregard US policy recommendations while retaining US military aid.

Yet while military aid continues to flow, it has drastically lost its value as the United States has failed to adjust it in line with inflation. Egyptian military officials have complained that Foreign Military Financing (FMF) has not risen to match the rising cost of weaponry in recent decades, resulting in a decrease in net assistance. Military aid has remained at a stagnant 1.3 billion dollars for several decades, defying inflation and the costs of modern military equipment. Indeed, as Zeinab Abul-Magd explains, it has thus depreciated from more than seventy percent of the Egyptian military’s budget to approximately thirty percent. With regard to weapons purchases, US military aid is estimated to cover eighty percent of the Defense Ministry’s weapons procurement costs. In the current transition of power, Egyptian leaders have willfully tested the limits of US aid by signaling at certain points that it is neither indispensable nor necessary. They have done so most recently by repeatedly defying official US public statements advising the Egyptian military on its political course after 30 June. Further compounding this crisis in US leverage on Egypt is the flow of financial support from Gulf States, which recently pledged billions of dollars in the form of no-interest loans, oil subsidies, and grants to Egypt.

For the United States, the question of cutting military aid to Egypt is not a question of democracy or human rights. It is a matter of repercussions for domestic defense contracts, as well as the destabilization of an important cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations, the Israeli peace treaty. The suspension of military aid would be futile, given that such a suspension would cut any remaining allegiance of the Egyptian government to the United States. Furthermore, if the United States cuts Egypt’s aid, it risks being replaced by a different player in regional politics, including Saudi Arabia, which has pledged billions of dollars in financial support to the Egyptian state.

With the aforementioned realities in mind, the debate on military aid in the United States has been quite ironic. The United States had been an ally of the Mubarak administration as well as the Morsi administration, each of which bore the same features that the United States now decries: namely, an aggressive security apparatus and sanctions on the freedom of speech. Fear of the retardation or termination of the democratic process in Egypt has been cited as a principal reason for resisting the change in the Egyptian administration following the 30 June uprising. Yet this newfound interest in democracy in Egypt is an argument that flies in the face of years of unchallenged aid to Hosni Mubarak’s twenty-nine year term as president of Egypt.

The violence against protesters in Egypt was so widely publicized as to necessitate the questioning of United States military aid by US policymakers in front of skeptical constituents. US politicians’ criticism of the Egyptian military, and their threats to withdraw aid, were simply knee-jerk reactions to images of the violent crackdown on pro-Morsi protesters. And just as quickly as these threats appeared, they soon dissipated. This is because, in the long term, changes to the military aid agreement would be detrimental to US privileges in Egypt and strategic interests in the Middle East.

To date, the debate on United States military aid is little more than political white noise that has had minimal bearing on the US-Egyptian aid relationship. While the debate has cast the US-Egyptian relationship as one that is founded on the promulgation of democracy and human rights in Egypt, the reality is that a policy of unfettered aid has fostered a relationship with the Egyptian military that fails to impose conditions or repercussions for any violations, be they misuse of funds or anti-democratic practices.

[bluenoseclaret]

Not totally sure what to make of the writer: Khaled Diab ..or Uncle $Khaled$ Diab..I don't know.

Egypt: out of the US news but under General al-Sisi's crackdown

Tahrir's hopes in ruins: my country has swapped a Brotherhood leader who risked being a new Mubarak for a military one who is.................

(Editor: this article was amended to remove an unintended first paragraph)....curious!

....No news is good news, the adage tells us. But just because something does not make it on to the evening news does not mean the situation has improved, as demonstrated by the US-sparked civil war in Iraq, which continues to exact a heavy toll.

Though the situation is nowhere near as bad, Egypt, too, has been eclipsed in the United States' and much of the western media by the ongoing carnage in Syria, and by the new Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's conciliatory gestures and charm offensive towards the west, not to mention the weekend's US raids in Somalia and Libya.

But it is still very much news for us Egyptians and those who take a deep interest in the future of the country. In fact, as my four-year-old and I embark on a trip home to his "fatherland", I am plagued by worries and dogged by questions.

How much further will the violence escalate? Where will the clash between pro-military jingoism and divine demagoguery lead the country?

Borrowing from the neocon American lexicon once so despised in Egypt, General Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi's "war on terror" has, like its US counterpart, mushroomed into a war of terror, as reflected in the death this week of at least 50 people during pro-Morsi protests.

That is not to say there hasn't been terrorism. There has been plenty of it. Not only have prominent Muslim Brotherhood members incited violence, but their sympathisers have torched churches across the country, and are mounting an insurgency in the already restive Sinai.

In addition, while pleading "legitimacy" and "democracy" abroad, Muslim Brotherhood leaders have falsely accused Christians of being behind Mohamed Morsi's downfall. This has fanned the flames of hatred towards an already vulnerable minority, leading even as far as murder.

But the Muslim Brotherhood does not have a monopoly on demonisation and false accusations. Though I am a secularist to the core and, being an "infidel", am vulnerable to the Islamist project, I have been distressed and alarmed by the fever pitch that mainstream hostility towards Brotherhood sympathisers has reached.

For example, the idea that they are all terrorists and that the Raba'a al-Adawiya protest camp was a terrorist den, which goes against the evidence of my own eyes, has gained a surprising amount of traction. Besides which, the situation in Sinai is far more complex than the official narrative allows. The local Bedouins have been sidelined, forgotten and neglected for decades, leading to a lot of grievances that Islamists can exploit; and the military has allegedly targeted civilians, not just militants.

Then, there are Egypt's rebels who lost their cause. The Tamarod movement did a great job of highlighting Morsi's loss of legitimacy and channelling public anger at his dictatorial ways. Yet, the movement today sounds like a cheerleading squad for the military and its man of the moment, al-Sisi – even going so far as to defend the military trials against civilians it once opposed.

Little wonder that the revolutionaries who have not taken leave of their senses and principles are despondent. As Ahmed Maher of the April 6 Youth Movement, one of the main driving forces behind the 2011 uprising against Mubarak, said:

We are at square one as a revolution.

What can America do, some might wonder? Probably not that much, in light of Washington's squandering – by propping up dictators and engaging in military misadventures – of what remained of the goodwill it once enjoyed long ago.

There is one trump card Washington holds, though. It can threaten to cut off military aid if the army does not end its crackdown, release political detainees, and implement serious reform rapidly. (In fact, I would argue that Washington should also make military aid to Israel contingent on reaching a peace deal with the Palestinians.)

But the truth is that the situation is in the hands of the Egyptian people.

At a certain level, I understand why Egypt has reached this point. For me and other desktop revolutionaries outside the country, it's easy to talk ideals when we're not confronted with the bitter daily reality. After nearly three years of revolt, with precious little to show for it, Egyptians are suffering a sort of revolution fatigue.

Nevertheless, if Egypt does not change course, all the blood, sweat and tears Egyptians shed in their quest for freedom may prove to have been for nothing. Morsi and the Brotherhood peddled the illusion that they had a divine, magical solution to all Egypt's problems. Instead, they proved to be a bearded version of the Mubarak regime. They talked democracy, but they walked theocracy.

But it is a grave error to believe that my enemy's enemy is my friend. The army may have learnt to speak democracy, but autocracy is still in its blood. Six decades of military dictatorship, a disastrous first transition following Mubarak's ouster and a campaign that seems bent of purging Egypt of the Brotherhood – which could push Egypt over the abyss into civil strife – are not promising signs.

More troubling still, al-Sisi has become a cult hero, with campaigns petitioning him to run for president and polls showing he would win, if he ran. Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he is a man of integrity, the temptations of excessive power and popularity could potentially doom Egypt to decades more of dictatorship.

For that reason, I hope Egyptians reject both the military and the Muslim Brotherhood, and reject violence, no matter whom its target is.

Comments:

sarka

...must say I blame the MB very much indeed for what has happened. They squandered the greatest opportunity in their history - the chance to become a leading political force in a stable,at least reasonably pluralist Egypt. Their habits of mind and organisation got the better of them - they couldn't bear real collaboration with other political forces and opinions. The US's greatest mistake in my view was in embracing them too naively, and so egging them on to overconfidence and intransigeance. Whatever one's view of Sisi, there are reliable reports that almost up to the last moment he was offering the MB government support if it would ONLY agree to consultation and concession and reverse some of the personnel and policy decisions that were causing so much resentment. Morsi (and I doubt Morsi was entirely his own man in the matter - he never looked like a man of real courage and independent political talent to me) mulishly refused.
Though Sisi seems to have some Nasserish ambitions, personally, I am not quite as pessimistic as you. At least I will wait to see whether and how elections (minus the MB) turn out, and if the more secularist and democratic political groupings can do better than in recent years in getting a solid and realistic show on the road. Furthermore, there has to be stability and economic creative thinking to get Egypt out of its economic hole - investment, getting the tourists back.
You once wrote, years ago, a rather depressive article about how Egypt's trouble was not simply Mubarrak, but millions of Mubarraks - i.e. people who might long for political change (whether Islamist or not), but in their heads, and in their micro-environments, thought and acted in authoritarian, intolerant and also croneyist ways. The Egyptian Revolution seemed at first to give that gloomy diagnosis the lie...but while it showed that not all Egyptians had Mubarraks in their heads, the course of events is showing sadly that the Mubarrak in the head (or the Morsi, or - as you fear - the Sisi), is still too prevalent, and it is this, rather than the Americans, or the Saudis, or the Israelis, or whoever outside, that is the main problem and needs to be defeated. - a long and painful process, but I am convinced that it will eventually succeed.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... -crackdown

Stll clear bias in favour of the MB on the BBC.

[Carol Newquist]

In official US circles, classification of the uprising as a coup would require the cancellation of the annual provision of US military aid to Egypt.

Well, of course, they could call it what they want to justify withholding military aid, but in actuality, it was no coup. Despite Morsi's election, it was always clear the military was in charge in Egypt...as it's been since Egypt's independence from Great Britain. Morsi pushed the envelope too far and they kicked his ass out to the curb. I'm surprised they allowed it to begin with.....the MB in power. I guess it shows just how desperate the Egyptian military is getting. They are standing on very tenuous ground.....but for now, they have the weapons until they don't.

http://www.icl-fi.org/english/wh/214/Egypt.html

Egypt under military rule

The upheavals in Tunisia and Egypt drew in virtually all layers of society, excepting only the upper echelons of the bourgeoisie closest to the regime. It is notable that despite the history of religious and ethnic conflict in the region the protests have centred on secular-democratic demands, spurred by the increasingly intolerable conditions of life. Workers are demanding bread and freedom. But the situation has also created an opening for the reactionary Muslim Brotherhood.

With the dictators overthrown what happens now? There is no automatic progression from these upheavals to a socialist revolution against the capitalist order. Winning the most fundamental necessities of life — decent jobs for all, healthcare and education — requires the working class to emerge as the leader of all the oppressed — the unemployed youth, the impoverished peasant masses, the urban poor and the women — and to fight for power in its own name. Our task as Marxists, through our propaganda, is to popularise the programme of socialist revolution, which alone can address the felt needs and aspirations of the masses. The fight for socialist consciousness, and for a programme that will achieve the emancipation of the workers and the oppressed in North Africa and the Near East, means overcoming many obstacles.

Chief among those obstacles today is pervasive nationalism as was seen in the large number of Egyptian flags on the protests. A key task of revolutionary Marxists is to combat nationalism, which is always antithetical to the interests of the workers. Nationalism is used by the bourgeoisie to obscure the class divide between the tiny layer of obscenely wealthy capitalist exploiters and the vast majority of impoverished workers and peasants.

Nationalism in Egypt is expressed in the belief that the army is the “friend of the people”. But whose army is it? The military regime has denounced workers strikes and told strikers to go back to work. Not surprisingly therefore, the army takeover has been supported by all wings of the bourgeois “opposition”, including the Muslim Brotherhood.

In all capitalist countries the army, along with the police, judges and prison guards constitute the core of the bourgeois state, an organ of class oppression to maintain through violence the rule of the exploiters. To win state power the working class will have to smash the bourgeois state apparatus, including by splitting the army along class lines — the conscripts versus the bourgeois officer corps — winning the soldiers to the side of the working class.

Illusions in the army are a deadly danger to the working people and the oppressed but they run very deep. Egyptian nationalism was born of British imperialist subjugation and humiliation — the British had occupied the country from 1882. In 1952, a group of military officers known as the Free Officers Movement, led by Gamal Abdel Nasser, overthrew the monarchy and ended the British occupation. Since that time the army has been viewed as a guarantor of national sovereignty, particularly against the Zionist state of Israel.

Nasser, a bourgeois nationalist, claimed to be leader of a mythical “Arab socialism”. His success in peddling this myth was aided by the treachery of the Stalinist Communist Party, which supported him. In fact Nasser aimed to crush the combative Egyptian working class and within a month of seizing power he delivered a massive blow to the workers movement. When a textile workers strike broke out in Kafr Al-Dawwar near Alexandria, Nasser had two strike leaders hanged on the factory grounds. The Communist Party was banned and strikes were outlawed. Undeterred by the murder and imprisonment of their own comrades, the Stalinists continued to support Nasser, finally liquidating into his Arab Socialist Union in 1965.

The role of the military in Egyptian politics has remained the same under the subsequent dictatorships of Anwar el-Sadat and then Mubarak. While Mubarak was hated and despised, there are considerable illusions even today in Nasserism, due largely to the betrayals of the left.

[coffin_dodger]

fwiw - couple of months old now...

Evidence could send Obama to prison – two sources already claim to have "Documents and Proofs"
Voice of Russia 22 Aug 13

Another Egyptian came forward claiming she had proof substantial enough for Obama to go to jail, and her credibility is very hard to question. Tahani al-Gebali, Vice President of the Supreme Constitutional Court in Egypt, said the time was nearing when all the conspiracies against Egypt would be exposed—conspiracies explaining why the Obama administration is so vehemently supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood, she said yesterday on Bitna al-Kibir, a live TV show.

This information was reported by Raymond Ibrahim via Jihad Watch – a translator form Arabic, who was the one to disclose the documents about Libyan intelligence report tying Morsi to Benghazi.

The first accusation toward Obama was voiced less than a week ago, when the son of imprisoned Brotherhood leader Khairat al-Shater, Saad al-Shater, has been reported to claim that Obama had dispatched a delegation to Cairo to get his father and other Brotherhood leaders from prison, as the President was threatened that sensitive documents would be disclosed implicating him and the United States in significant crimes.

The nature of those crimes is not specified nor is the evidence. Also it is not clear yet, as to whether the claim was valid.

According to the dcclothesline.com site, it might have everything to do with the tie between Obama, Mohamed Morsi and what happened in Benghazi.

Also, in her talk, Al-Gebali mentioned "documents and proofs" obtained by Egypt's intelligence services, saying it was high time to take the truth out in the open. During the discussion about the documents listing massive financial transactions between the Muslim Brotherhood and international organizations, she pointed out that "Obama’s brother is one of the architects of investment for the international organization of the Muslim Brotherhood."

Though she did not specify which brother exactly she meant, earlier reports on frontpagemag.com contained information about President Obama’s brother Kenyan half-brother, Malik Obama running an African nonprofit organization which had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Sudanese terrorist Omar al-Bashir.

Chances are very high that Malik Obama might end up to be a part of the Muslim Brotherhood, since he has already a lot to explain about his actions and liaisons.

Walid Shoebat, a former Palestinian Liberation Organization operative, reported in May he discovered that Malik Obama was the executive secretary of the Islamic Da'wa Organization, or ID. It was a group created by the Sudanese government, while Sudan is on the US' list of terrorist states. In 2010, Malik Obama attended an IDO-held conference in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital, which main goal was to seek out ways of spreading Wahhabist Islam in Africa. The conference was run by President of Sudan Omar Al-Bashir, who is an international criminal wanted by the International Criminal Court. With the above-mentioned evidence Shoebat concludes that Malik Obama is "in bed with terrorists, working in a terrorist state as an official of an organization created by terrorists."

Egypt crisis: Muslim Brotherhood might 'land Obama in jail'

The son of Egypt's jailed Muslim Brotherhood leader claims to have evidence that could "land Barack Obama in prison", the WorldNetDaily (WND) website reports.

In what may become Obama’s worst nightmare, the man accused him of paying a secret bribe of $8 million to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Saad al-Shater, the son of imprisoned Brotherhood leader Khairat al-Shater, told Turkey’s Anatolia news agency that Obama had sent a senior delegation to Cairo to get his father and other Brotherhood leaders out of prison in order to prevent the release of explosive documents that could incriminate both Obama and the United States.

Arabic-speaking former PLO member Walid Shoebat has translated the report by the Turkish news gency Anatolia as follows:

"In an interview with the Anatolia News Agency, Saad Al-Shater, the son of a Muslim Brotherhood leader, the detained Khairat Al-Shater, said that his father had in his hands evidence that will land the head of United States of America, President Obama, in prison.

Such documents, he says, were placed in the hands of people who were entrusted inside and outside Egypt, and that the release of his father is the only way for them to prevent a great catastrophe.

He stated that a warning was sent threatening to show how the US administration was directly connected.

The evidence was sent through intermediaries which caused them to change their attitude and corrected their position, and that they have taken serious steps to prove good faith.

Saad also said that his father's safety is more important to the Americans than the safety of Mohamed Morsi."

Several independent Arab sources confirmed the report.

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_2 ... oofs-3648/

[AlicetheKurious]

I'm sorry I haven't had the chance to post lately, despite (because of) the fact that so many things have happened and are happening. Despite the fact that she is a very busy person, my friend Aida is a better time manager than I am, and she's decided to start a blog, to share her viewpoint about events here with English readers. She's a good friend and someone I respect a lot, though before January 25th, 2011, she was one of the least politicized people I knew. As with so many Egyptians, that's changed a lot. She writes quite well. I thought some people here at RI would be interested, so here's the link to her latest entry:

Aida N. Awad's blog