Egypt Protests: America’s Secret Backing for Rebel Leaders Behind Uprising?
January 29th, 2011Yeah, well, I don’t know. Here’s the Wikileaks cable on which this article is based.
Is it possible that the U.S. is throwing one of its longest running client dictatorships under the bus? Sure, that’s very possible. Is that what’s happening in Egypt?
My guess is that the U.S. understands that Mubarak has outlived his usefulness and that the discontent was going to boil over, regardless. Maybe the U.S. is trying to direct the wave, but I don’t buy the argument that the U.S. is the source of the uprising on the street. Egyptians have been trodden upon by this regime for decades. The U.S. is the master of meet the new boss, same as the old boss, so watch as “democracy” goes on to be basically Mubarak by other means… Assuming that Mubarak goes, which I wouldn’t at this point. (Personally, I’ll be very surprised if the army isn’t deployed; soon.)
It seems to me that the U.S. is trying to play both sides of the fence to ensure that no wildcard outcome results from this.
I’ll recycle my commentary from the Tunisia situation. I think it applies to Egypt as well:
Come on, Kevin, why piss on the parade?
At times like this, it’s generally a good idea to keep a copy of The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives by Zbigniew Brzezinski handy:
As the imitation of American ways gradually pervades the world, it creates a more congenial setting for the exercise of the indirect and seemingly consensual American hegemony. And as in the case of the domestic American system, that hegemony involves a complex structure of interlocking institutions and procedures, designed to generate consensus and obscure asymmetries in power and influence. American global supremacy is thus buttressed by an elaborate system of alliances and coalitions that literally span the globe.
…
American supremacy has thus produced a new international order that not only replicates but institutionalizes abroad many of the features of the American system itself.
He writes that two steps are required for the, “Formulation of American geostrategy for the long-term management of America’s Eurasian geopolitical interests.”
First, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them; and to pinpoint the geopolitically critical Eurasian states whose location and/or existence have catalytic effects either on the more active geostrategic players or on regional conditions;
Second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above, so as to preserve and promote vital U.S. interests, and to conceptualize a more comprehensive geostrategy that establishes on a global scale the interconnection between the more specific U.S. policies.
In brief, for the United States, Eurasian geostrategy involves the purposeful management of geostrategically dynamic states and the careful handling of geopolitically catalytic states, in keeping with the twin interests of America in the short-term preservation of its unique global power and in the long-run transformation of it into increasingly institutionalized global cooperation. To put it in a terminology that hearkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together.
In this context, “democracy” needs to be an insidious sham that serves U.S. national interests. It makes for better public relations than ugly dictatorships.
—
Via: Telegraph:
The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change” for the past three years, The Daily Telegraph has learned.
The American Embassy in Cairo helped a young dissident attend a US-sponsored summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police.
On his return to Cairo in December 2008, the activist told US diplomats that an alliance of opposition groups had drawn up a plan to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and install a democratic government in 2011.
…
He has already been arrested by Egyptian security in connection with the demonstrations and his identity is being protected by The Daily Telegraph.
The crisis in Egypt follows the toppling of Tunisian president Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali, who fled the country after widespread protests forced him from office.
While a rude opinion, I think Zbigniew Brzezinski should be one of those persons treated similar to Bradley Manning. In my HMO one of the most evil persons to rise to the top of the Carter Administration.
His Grand Chessboard ideas are grand. Some have worded. Some have been flops. Latest flop is bankrupting the U.S. by endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yes, his policies of funding the insurgents in Afghanistan succeeded in bankrupting the Soviet Union in their never ending war there. Didn’t Brzesinski say that this was the gift to Russia equivalent to the U.S. in Vietnam?
Hah. So who gets the Christmas present of Iraq and Afghanistan? China? Certainly these wars are the cause of the bankrupt U.S of A. And in my HMO, all this bailout B.S, is because the banks funded the wars through these decripit mortgage instruments. Just like in previous wars, the banks have found a way to ante up and fund the wars. And when the banks want their due, the rest of the world goes into financial DEPRESSION, Inflation, whatever. The banks must be repaid.
Back on topic, Brzezinski belongs in a class of armchair theorists, or terrorists. Much like Alan Greenspan.
In legalese or in auditing, both these guys are way too Long on describing condition; way weak on describing CAUSE; and don’t own up to how their armchair theorizing EFFECTs humankind.
IMHO – Both Brzezinski and Greenspan should be in some kind of prison of their own mind making. Why the world has to suffer because of these two men and their actions in the war making and financial fronts; and are free to do their walkabouts without chains and irons on is beyond my ken.
It’s not too far fetched.
I hear that there is a ‘permanent’ staff at the State department who tend to be very smart, who can have a tendency to pursue their own objectives and programs with their country of focus. E.g. the White House and the president don’t have the time or capacity to understand the details of what is going on, and are only able to lay out major themes at the top such as fighting communism in Central America, or pursuing free trade agreements with superficial human rights stipulations. All the details of how this is implemented depends on the skill and decisionmaking of people at these agencies like State department and CIA.
Did they even report to the president (before or after the event) when major manipulation of governments occurs such as killing Lumumba, overthrowing Allende, supporting the dictator in Greece?
There is a strong pattern of supporting the dictator until the wind blows the other direction, and then quickly jumping to the other side of the fence issuing statements supporting the emergent democracy – this was done with South Africa, the Philippines etc. This is retroactively justified by claiming that it is more dangerous not to be allied with a country (like Saudi Arabia), or that the cold-war opposition party was more dangerous (Suharto killing the communists in Indonesia).
Chomsky
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi6huQfmtIg
So who knows where that places the Obama administration with regards to Egypt. Are they so sophisticated that they can carefully pretend to straddle the fence (in case Mubarak retains control of the army) while secretly supporting an opposition group…because payments to Egypt are getting expensive