I don't think anyone in Egypt driving this change sees his speech the way you do. The general view is that Obama came out and said "He said sorry, now give him a chance." I also don't think he meant what you are saying. I know that the 40-50 people I was with at a birthday party last night didn't see it as a show of support for democracy. Frankly, I'm just trying to avoid generalizing but my gut feeling is that no one close to this situation sees it that way, while there may be some who see it that way in America. Given that the audience for this speech is NOT meant to be Americans or America, I think the speech was a complete failure.
Let’s work this through then. What would you have liked him to say? Keep in mind that it’s in no one’s interest if Egypt descends into chaos, no one but the extremists that is. What would be the best approach to facilitating transformation rather than chaotic revolution?
I went to school with a dozen or so Egyptians (engineering) and although they didn’t like Mubarak they didn’t want him replaced. Their reasoning was that, “his pockets are already full”. They believed that if Mubarak wasn’t in power then some other dictator would be, and a new dictator comes in with empty pockets and then proceeds to extract wealth from the country until he and his family get their fill. I take that as a warning that if change in Egypt isn’t managed properly the end result could be a move backwards instead of forwards. The one thing Mubarak may not have at this point, for him and his family, is a place to go. This is where the US may have some legitimate leverage to use. They could say to Mubarak, “if you appoint a reform government and then back off and let them govern, then step down and hold true democratic elections in X years, then you and your family can come live in the US.” This kind arrangement could hopefully facilitate a transition to a true democracy with minimal unrest.
Frankly, for 99% of Egytians, it can't get worse. So I don't buy this "Mubarak is better than the alternative" argument. Egypt is rich with politicians, intellectuals, economists, doctors, engineers, etc, secular and non-secular. People have been led to believe Egypt can not find a stable government because Mubarak has politically murdered every possible opposition. He's too insecure to even have a VP. I would have liked Obama to say that he supports a true democracy and acknowledge that Mubarak is a tyrant. But that's a pipe dream, and frankly I don't think the US truly cares about democracy. Even more of a dream would have been for the US to admit that they are willing to oppress whole countries as long as it's in their interests. What I realistically would have liked him to say was something short and sweet which translates to: I hope the Egyptian people get what they want. Not through the current government's reforms, not from Hosni, just exactly what they want regardless of what that is. Exactly what he theoretically would want for his own people. Assuming he didn't say any of these things, it would have been nice if he just kept his mouth shut. I get the feeling you think the speech provides a neutral position. IMO it does not. It is a show of sympathy for Mubarak coupled with a request for patience from an Egyptian population that has been patient for 20-30 years. But more importantly, it's not about what I think or you think. We can discuss ad nauseum what he might have meant. What I'm relaying mainly is what oppressed Egyptians believe he said, and IMO he is complicit in them thinking what they do now. Unless Baradei steals the seat, Egypt will not be pro-America imo when all is said and done, whereas there was a chance of Egypt becoming pro-American prior to the words of Hillary, Biden, and Obama.
That's really embarrassing. I understand that the US can't exactly throw Mubarak under a bus, but it would probably would have been better to say nothing than to be so weasely about it.
Exactly. Obama is still an indecisive, political amateur. But, he can tilt his head up and read well from a teleprompter. That's our leader. Groan.
It could very easily get worse. At what point does the army decide that there’s been enough unrest and that it’s time to crack down? As a “concession” to the protesters I could see them removing Mubarak and replacing him with a general. The army could also make an offer to the US that it may not be able to refuse, “keep the money coming and we’ll keep the peace with Israel and the rest of the ME”. In this scenario the people of Egypt get no more democracy, but they do get a new de facto dictator. I get that there’s a lot of emotion right now, and that some people want everything to happen overnight, but that’s not realistic and pushing too hard at this point could easily backfire. This is a process that has to be managed by the leaders of the reform movement. What do the people who want Mubarak removed immediately think the army will do if this happens? Are they even thinking about that, or are they just reacting out of emotion?
Not to mention Mathloon, you can talk about how it's non-secular this thing in Egypt is all you want, but it was like that in Iran. We were more worried about a democratic Iran falling under Communist influence then we were about an Islamic thugocracy during their revolution, and we saw how that turned out. So no matter what really, there will always be significant concerns regarding Egypt and the Brotherhood. There's also the fact that given how things are developing, I am a bit skeptical that it will still be successful as you think it will be . Are there plans for a more general protest, such as a nationwide strike? That would be probably essential at this point.
This apparently happened yesterday... http://www.haaretz.com/news/nationa...gime-change-outside-egyptian-embassy-1.339816 Tel Aviv protesters demand regime change outside Egyptian Embassy Activists of various faiths demonstrated in solidarity with Egyptian protesters, calling for Hosni Mubarak to leave office. By David Sheen Demonstrators in front of the Egyptian Embassy in north Tel Aviv on Friday expressed support for the massive anti-government protests taking place in Egypt and demanded that President Hosni Mubarak resign immediately. A few dozen young people of various faiths carried Palestinian and Tunisian flags aloft, held signs in Arabic and Hebrew and chanted slogans denouncing the Mubarak regime. Israeli police kept a watchful eye from across the street but did not interfere. The last four days have seen throngs of Egyptians take to the streets in what observers are calling the largest protest movement to sweep the country in the last quarter-century. Egyptian security services have tried to stem the wave of unrest, to no avail. The Tel Aviv-area activists hastily organized the Egyptian Embassy protest over Facebook. Activist Muhammad Jabali said that the demonstration was held in solidarity with the people of Egypt and in support of democracy. The protests were touched off by a rash of self-immolations. Two weeks ago, three Egyptian men publicly set themselves on fire in three separate incidents to protest government indifference to rising food prices. Recent weeks have seen massive protests throughout North Africa and the Middle East, with demonstrators demanding lower food prices and an end to government corruption and political oppression. The first wave of protests began when a Tunisian man set himself on fire, exasperated that he could not feed his family. That act inspired multiple copycat immolations in other Arab countries, and ignited the ire of citizens from Algeria to Jordan. Demonstrations in Tunisia reached a critical mass and forced the ouster of President Ben Ali, who had ruled the country for 23 years. In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak has ruled for over 29 years, and analysts say that he is grooming his son Gamal to take over the reigns of power.
Lol! Oh you two deceivers. The US and the world can be very happy that there is an intelligent, competent, worldly, leader in the White House right now. Imagine what a bubbling backwoods hick like Bush would have done in this situation, a guy who’s barely been out of the US in his life. But that’s exactly what you and Basso would like, right? Bush would have had no clue what to do, and would most likely have backed Mubarak as a “friend of the US”. Like the two of you, Bush had no respect for freedom and democracy. He was all about doing favours for friends, and living off of favours from friends.
"There you go again." ( ) I would replace the word "shame" with "reality." I know it's a time of high emotions, but again, we have NO idea what was said between the two men. There is a tightrope to be walked, and it is important for those of us who support reform to support a democratic process, not a chaotic, irreversible transition to the next authoritarian regime that uses the word "democracy" but knows nothing about it. Mohamed ElBaradei has said as much.
lol. W's father was the head of the CIA and the president of the United States, the most powerful country on Earth. Yet you characterize him as someone who has barely been out of the US. AND, you view a political amateur like Obama differently, just because he lived as Barry Soetoro as a youth in Indonesia. You Canadians are a trip. You've created a vision of Obama that simply isn't grounded in reality.
I often think of the Utah Jazz when I see bigtexxx and basso posting the most predictable and repetitive spin of any situation as "Obama is horrible." It's like when the Rockets were once crushing the Jazz by 40 points (after a slew of Kenny Smith 3-pointers), the Jazz fans still wouldn't leave the building, and Stockton was still playing thug style in the fourth quarter. The problem with this analogy is that some of the Jazz players were talented at their craft. In this case, it's like the "team" is all Pace Mannions and Greg Osterflabs, positions 1-5 and the thin bench included. "Oh! I just flopped and drew a charge on an Obama comment taken out of context! MY LIFE IS COMPLETE!" Jazzers gonna Jazz, brah.
