Tuesday, 1 February 2011

Daniel Greenfield article:


Obama Loses the Middle East


Link to Sultan Knish



Obama Loses the Middle East

Posted: 30 Jan 2011 07:24 PM PST

It's no coincidence that major revolutions against Western backed governments have occurred under weak American presidents. The Iranian revolution against the Shah happened on Jimmy Carter's watch. The current violence in Tunisia and Egypt is taking place under Obama. And the timing is quite interesting. Revolts which coincided with a new opposition congress almost suggest that they were scheduled for a time when Obama would be at his politically weakest.

Additionally the 2010 defeats would have indicated to the Iranian regime that they might only have a 2 year window in which to act before Obama is replaced by an unknown, but probably more conservative politician. A "Now or Never" moment. The Iranian Revolution might never have happened under Reagan. But Carter's weakness, left wing politics and contempt for the very notion of defending American interests made it possible. Similarly despite attempts by some Bush advisers to take credit for Tunisia and Egypt, it is unlikely that they would have taken place on Bush's watch. Not because the Bush administration was so omnipotent, but because it had regional credibility. The general perception was that the Bush Administration was on alert and supportive of allies. That is not at all the regional perception of the Obama Administration which doesn't seem to know what an ally is.

Obama's mistreatment of the UK, Israel and Honduras, the alienation of Karzai and continuing humiliation at the hands of China and Russia through diplomatic insults, showed weakness and stupidity. The Iranian takeover of the region is premised on that incompetence. Lebanon was a test. The next step was Tunisia. Then Egypt.

Iran has three major obstacles to regional dominance. Egypt, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Of these three, Egypt with its radicalized population, great poverty and limited influence in Washington D.C. was the most vulnerable. Any overthrow of Mubarak will move the Muslim Brotherhood closer to taking power. But for Iran the priority is to take Egypt out of the game. Whatever happens in Egypt, it will weaken the country. And what weakens Egypt, only strengthens Iran.

Turkey and Syria are part of Iran's regional coalition. Jordan appears to be leaning that way. Lebanon has been taken over. Iraq is set to fall when America leaves. If Egypt falls, that just leaves Saudi Arabia and Israel in the way. The Saudis will face domestic unrest, possibly from that alliance with Al-Qaeda that Bin Laden originally rejected. And there's a nuke with Israel's name on it somewhere in Iran. All this has happened because the Obama Administration has been too weak, confused and incompetent to stand for anything.

Iran is showing us its cards now, knowing that there's very little we will do about it. Its plans are moving forward. Ours are not only going nowhere, but actually helping the enemy.

Why did the Second Iranian revolution fail, while the revolts in Tunis and even Egypt seem to be gaining some traction? One element is foreign backing. No one outside the country provided support to the Iranian protesters. But the revolts in Tunisia and Egypt have not only Iranian backing, but also Western support. We provided training and political support to the "liberal" Egyptian pawns of the Islamists like El Baradei. And even now we're on the verge of endorsing a provisional government under a man who is allied to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Iran's backers in Russia and China did not in any way indicate a loss of support during the protests in its cities. But Obama has made it muddily clear that he doesn't really support Mubarak, certainly not Ben Ali. Rather than endorsing one side or the other, he tried to play both sides. A non-committal statement that communicates that we will support whoever wins. Which means that unlike Russia and China, we don't support the current regime. That withdrawal of support from our allies, translates into a win for the opposition. It's a tacit boost to efforts to overthrow the government.

The key determinant of whether a revolution will succeed in ousting a government is its staying power. The key players who make or break a revolution rarely go out into the street waving banners, at least not until they have an armed escort and the foreign photographers who conveniently snap photos of their best side. Those key players are the power brokers, tribal leaders, heads of the army and the intelligence services and leaders of various influential associations who don't choose sides until they have a pretty good idea which side will prevail.

The game of revolution is really about two sides trying to tote up how much support they each have. One side is the government, the other side is usually a coalition of factions who are pooling their resources in order to overthrow it. That leads to odd alliances and strange marriages between leftists and Islamists. Once the government is out, then the process will begin again with the coalition members playing the same game against each other.

The game takes place on several levels. Violent street protests are a show of force. Their purpose is to demonstrate that the government is weak and cannot control or subdue their protests. The riot police display dominance by trying to drive them away. These displays are common enough in the primate kingdom, but here they are dressed up in self-righteous rhetoric and riot gear. Whoever wins scores dominance points. If the riot police succeed, then they show that the government retains control over the cities. If they fail, then the protesters show that the government has lost control.

It doesn't matter how ruthless the government crackdown is. Brutality may create more enemies in the long run, but if it succeeds in controlling the cities, then the revolution cannot move forward. The politicians associated with the protests (and they're always there) become impotent and irrelevant. Men and women who gambled on a revolt and lost. They may become martyrs or they may find a way back into the government, depending on their own principles and whether the government is willing to have them. But brutality is also a sign of weakness. A last resort to maintain control. But it is also a sign of strength. A government that unleashes total violence on its own people demonstrates that it has staying power.

If the riots continue, the next step in this chess game is to call for the restoration of order. The politicians attached to the protest movements will claim to be the only ones who can calm the public's anger and restore order. The government will step up enforcement to show that it is perfectly capable of restoring order. Foreign diplomats will counsel the government to negotiate with the politicians representing the protesters. This is usually the last step in the dismantling of the government.

A government with staying power will refuse to negotiate and play the waiting game. A revolution runs off the energy of ongoing protests and street violence. But that energy is not a perpetual motion machine. Even with new government outrages, keeping the protests going takes dedication and resources. Eventually the casual looters and bored teenagers who fuel such protests go home. The working class men go back to work in order to feed their families. This leaves the protest core of middle-class and wealthy students exposed. They are the educated core of the protest movements, the ones who actually seem to know what they want. But they are also much easier to scatter and break than their poorer compatriots. Occasional protests will still go on, inspired by the events of that month, they may in time succeed in toppling the government, but only if it weakens significantly.

That means Mubarak might still survive, but our influence won't. The endorsement of Suleiman means that we won't see a dynasty of Mubaraks, which is probably a good thing, but also means that Egypt's secret police will call the shots in the future. The Cedar revolution has been swallowed up by Hezbollah. Lebanon will almost inevitably see another civil war, along with ethnic cleansing and possibly genocide. Jordan is falling under the Iranian umbrella. The days of the Hashemite kingdom are numbered. Imagine a Gaza four times the size of Israel. That's what we're on track for now.

Once Israel is bracketed in by enemies, an Islamist Turkey, a Muslim Brotherhood run Egypt and a Palestinian Jordan, and Iranian dominated Syria and Lebanon-- the game will move into its final stages. Iran needs to destroy Israel in order to prove its right to rule the region, but Israel is also one of the few points of agreement between Sunnis and Shiites. Iran's real foe is Saudi Arabia, but it can't act directly against it without bringing America into the game. If Iran can take Mecca, its leaders become the supreme authorities of Islam. Shiite control over Mecca might trigger a global Muslim civil war. Or a global accommodation.

If Iran can checkmate America in an armed conflict, it may have a chance. So it will try to initiate a limited conflict on its terms, once it has a nuclear deterrent to prevent the United States from escalating the conflict. A likely scenario is a regional version of the Korean War in a divided Iraq or Afghanistan, in which Iran plays the China role, overwhelming an undermanned US presence with a show of force and then negotiating an armistice. The goal will be for Iran to inflict enough damage on the United States to gain credibility as the ultimate Muslim superpower. And that would lead to some of the bloodiest battles since the Tet Offensive, with a courageous showing by American forces acting under severely restricted rules of engagement fighting a war that their government has already decided it can't win. Even if Obama is not in office by then, whoever is would be faced with a choice or prolonging a conflict against the Taliban/Mahdi Army to reclaim territory that the United States has already withdrawn from. It's not an enviable decision.

That is the path that Iran's leadership is following. We are being maneuvered into a tighter and tighter corner, with fewer and fewer allies left. The Middle East is being lost. And it's happening on Obama's watch.



WND Exclusive

U.S. 'held secret meeting with Muslim Brotherhood



Discussed fall of Egypt with group dedicated to Islam's global spread


Posted: February 01, 2011
10:59 am Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WorldNetDaily


Barack Obama

JERUSALEM – The Egyptian government has information a diplomat at the U.S. embassy in Cairo secretly met yesterday with a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the nation's major Islamist opposition group, WND has learned.

The topic of the meeting was the future of Egypt following the "fall" of President Hosni Mubarak, an Egyptian intelligence official told WND.

Theclaimcomes amid charges from Cairo that the Obama administration has been encouraging the protests rocking Egypt and targeting the rule of Mubarak, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East.

The Egyptian intelligence official told WND his government has information of a meeting that took place yesterday between Issam El-Erian, a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Frank Wisner, a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt.

The Obama administration dispatched Wisner to Egypt this past weekend to report to theState Departmentand White House a general sense of the situation in the embattled country.

The Egyptian intelligence official speaking to WND said the meeting took place inside the American embassy in Cairo

The U.S.State Departmentwould neither confirm nor deny the report.

The Muslim Brotherhood seeks to spread Islam around the world, in large part using nonviolent means. Hamas and al-Qaida are violent Brotherhood offshoots.

Thelatestinformation is not the first charge by the Egyptian government that the Obama administration has beenworking withor encouraging the opposition to Mubarak.

Last week,a senior Egyptian diplomat stated the Egyptian government suspectselements of the current uprising there, particularly political aspects, are being coordinated with the U.S.State Departmentand Obama administration.

The senior Egyptian diplomat told WND the Mubarak regime suspects the U.S. has been aiding protest planning by Mohamed ElBaradei, who is seen as one of the main opposition leaders in Cairo.

ElBaradei, former International Atomic Energy Agency chief, has reinvented himself as a campaigner for "reform" in Egypt. He is a candidate for this year's scheduled presidential elections.

ElBaradei arrived in Cairo just after last week's protests began and is reportedly being confined to his home by Egyptian security forces.

He is seen as an ally of the Muslim Brotherhood.

This past weekend, theLondonTelegraph reported the U.S. embassy in Cairo in 2008 helped a young dissident attend a U.S.-sponsored summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police.

The Telegraph would not identify the dissident, but said he was involved in helping to stir the current protests. The report claimed the dissident told the U.S. embassy in Cairo that anallianceof opposition groups had a plan to topple Mubarak'sgovernment.

The disclosures, contained in U.S. diplomatic dispatches released by the WikiLeaks website, show American officials pressed the Egyptian government to release other dissidents who had been detained by the police.

The White House has been almost openly championing the unrest in Egypt.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called for an "orderly transition" to democracy in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood is the main opposition group.

Obama reportedly voiced support for an "orderly transition" in Egypt that is responsive to the aspirations of Egyptians in phone calls with foreign leaders, the White House said.

Deputy National Security Adviser Denis McDonough, speaking in a White House webcast, also urged the government and protesters in Egypt to refrain from violence.

Egyptian officials speaking to WND, however, warned the Muslim Brotherhood has the most to gain from any political reform.


Sponsored Link:Is this the End of America as we know it? Very few Americans are prepared for a day that will likely occur in the next 12 months, and will change our country forever. Eye-opening video explainsthe full story...

Related Offers:

Learn Islam's global agenda to secure all nations under its only religious law: Get "Islam Rising" on DVD

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades

The Islamic Antichrist (Autographed) (Hardcover)

The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism (Autographed) (Paperback)

Why We Left Islam: Former Muslims Speak Out - (Hardcover)

Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America - (Hardcover)


Previous stories:

'Something big' transferred to Gaza Strip

Worldwide Islamist revolution explodes

Egypt blames U.S. for fomenting uprising

Did 'successor' to Egyptian president flee country?

Islamists behind 'popular protests' topping Arab regimes

Canadians turn back Iranian demand to kill film

Cop, unprovoked, shoots Christian on train

Death sentences feared for Afghan converts

Muslims being 'appeased' by crackdown on Christianity

Analyst: Pakistani marked for death for support of Christian

Guess who leads surge in Christian persecution

No. 1 persecutor tests weapons on Christians

Behead a Christian, raise your rank

Iraqi Christians urged to return to homeland

Islamists drive Christians out of Nineveh

Mutilated Christian girl, 10, forgives attackers

Going rate to kill pastor: $250

Christians brace for gang-rape, slaughter

Christians brave horrifying massacres



February 1, 2011
"On the Edge"
Last Friday, a piece of mine on UNRWA went up on FrontPage Magazine. Please, take a look at it here:
~~~~~~~~~~
As I write, hundreds of thousands of people are congregating in the streets of Cairo, in response to a call for one million to come out for a protest march demanding that Mubarak resign.
While in Jordan, King Abdullah fired his government in response to street protests.
ordanian protesters hold a giant national flag.
~~~~~~~~~~
On the edge, indeed.
A detailed look at these events will wait until my next posting, when the air has cleared a bit. Just briefly here I will touch on a couple of points, and then move to some broader-based analysis.
* The Egyptian army has promised no violence against the people.
* Mubarak seems determined not to accede to the demands of the street and quit now. He has announced that he will deliver a speech tonight; according to Al Arabyia TV, he will say that he will remain in his position until the end of his term, and during that time will work to meet the demands of the protesters. The new prime minister, Ahmed Shafiq, also went on TV, to say he would like a chance to make changes in the country to benefit the people: "We will turn all of the citizens' demands into a reality sooner than they expect."
* Obama closely watching the street protests, has been slip-sliding towards that street and is now talking about "a peaceful transition of power." The message was carried to Cairo by professional diplomat Frank Wisner. According to the NYTimes, Mubarak's apparent decision not to run in the next election was made at the urging of Obama. There are reports that the US gov't has also had contact with El-Baradei, via the US Embassy in Cairo.
~~~~~~~~~~
I've encountered (at least) two serious thinkers who believe that Mubarak will prevail. It now looks a bit more like this might be the case than I would have thought just hours ago.
One of those analysts is Bret Stephens, writing in the Wall Street Journal. He makes some worthwhile points:
~~~~~~~~~~
The other analyst is Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum. But while Stephens is writing about Mubarak's situation, Pipes is also looking more broadly at issues such as the cultivation of democracy in the Middle East.
~~~~~~~~~~
There seems a myopia on the part of many people, especially in the US, when considering the situation in Egypt. Somehow the protests and demands of the crowds in the street are held to be synonymous with "democracy" -- will of the people and all that. Just grant the people free elections, it is assumed, and the process of democracy will be well on its way. (In fact the full quote from the Obama administration was actually: "Peaceful transition of power to democracy.") Except that it's not so. Pipes addresses this, and so does Carolyn Glick, whose very fine article I cite below.
Pipes believes the process of instilling the values of democracy in a populace takes decades, at best, and the error is in believing it can be instituted over-night. Democracy must be founded on certain liberal civic values -- human rights, dignity of the individual, basic freedoms, etc. -- that are lacking within the Arab/Muslim societies where an attempt to foster democracy is being made. Glick is even more cynical on the subject.
~~~~~~~~~~
The fact of the matter is that to a large degree the populace in that Cairo street isnot conversant with those liberal civic values. Even those who are not Islamists tend to be secular leftists: They are anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic. And they are not adverse to certain sorts of repression, as long as the repression is of their choosing.
Glick writes that:
Indeed, their [the protestors'] character is a bigger problem than the character of the regime they seek to overthrow.

"According to a Pew opinion survey of Egyptians from June 2010, 59 percent said they back Islamists. Only 27% said they back modernizers. Half of Egyptians support Hamas. Thirty percent support Hezbollah and 20% support al Qaida. Moreover, 95% of them would welcome Islamic influence over their politics. When this preference is translated into actual government policy, it is clear that the Islam they support is the al Qaida Salafist version.

"Eighty two percent of Egyptians support executing adulterers by stoning, 77% support whipping and cutting the hands off thieves. 84% support executing any Muslim who changes his religion."
~~~~~~~~~~
Please also see the article on El-Baradei by Anne Bayefsky of "Eye on the UN":
"In the name of democratic reform, Mohammed ElBaradei is doing his best to appear as the anointed one to succeed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, should the government fall. In reality, ElBaradei has more in common with Iranian demagogue Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than anything remotely resembling democracy."
~~~~~~~~~~

© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner , functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution


A shocking admission from one of the world's top central bankers




Tuesday, February 01, 2011

From Sovereign Man:

Mervyn King is Britain's chief central banker and a key figure in the global financial system. Last week, after surprising reports surfaced that the British economy had once again contracted in the fourth quarter of last year, King delivered a stern, sobering message to his country:

- "In 2011, real wages are likely to be no higher than they were in 2005… One has to go back to the 1920s to find a time when real wages fell over a period of six years."

- "The squeeze on living standards is the inevitable price to pay for the financial crisis and subsequent rebalancing of the world and UK economies."

- Furthermore, inflation may rise "to somewhere between four per cent and five per cent over the next few months."

- "[U]npleasant though it is, the Monetary Policy Committee neither can, nor should try to, prevent the squeeze in living standards, half of which is coming in the form of higher prices and half in earnings rising at a rate lower than normal."

- "I sympathize completely with savers and those who behaved prudently now find themselves among the biggest losers from this crisis."

To summarize, one of the world's leading central bankers has looked his country in the eye and admitted that he is completely powerless
to prevent the inevitable decline in living standards that will result from years of reckless behavior.

It’s amazing that someone in his position would be so terse, so direct in his appraisal of the situation; by nature of their positions, central bankers are serial liars who must continually deceive the public in order to set expectations and carry out their agenda.

King’s statement may be a sign that England is finally on its last leg. Fiscally, the country is in a similar situation as the US and Europe– in debt up to its eyeballs, hemorrhaging cash, and quickly losing the confidence of the international community.

Unlike Europe, the US, and even Japan to a degree, England lacks reserve currency status in any measure that matters… so without a line of foreigners to buy its debt regardless of the fundamentals, the UK has been forced into its day of reckoning before the others.

Meanwhile, Europe and the US continue to spin unjustified confidence; Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy have pinkie-sworn that they will not let the euro fail, and Barack Obama’s State of the Union address provided a temporary ‘feel-good’ blip that the government is going to fix everything.

People should not be fooled, however, into thinking that the US, Europe, Japan (and those nations which depend heavily upon them) will fare any better than England.

Because of its place in the global pecking order, England has less control over its financial destiny and has had to face the music first, but it will not be the only member of the Western hierarchy to fall.

Europe is in a desperate situation to continue bailing out bankrupt members of the eurozone even though the price tag will soon become larger than the monetary union can possibly bear, all while stimulus pressures and strained pension programs create challenges even for the ‘healthy’ euro nations.

Meanwhile in the US, the government plans to continue running trillion dollar deficits for the next several years with no end in sight to runaway spending, not even considering the upcoming carnage that will occur when cities and states start to go bust, or social security runs out of money.

Japan is probably in the worst shape of all, simultaneously suffering both a fiscal and demographic crisis. Japan’s debt, well over 100% of its GDP, has already been downgraded by the rating agency monkeys, and its population is slowly disappearing due to low birth rates and inhospitable immigration policy.

The best case that these countries can hope for is to suffer the same fate as England: a significant reduction in standard of living.

There is an opportunity now, however, for everyone to assess their basic vulnerabilities and take steps to mitigate what may lie ahead. This may include seeking work overseas, expanding a business to broader services in new markets, moving assets to safer jurisdictions, reducing system dependency, etc.

Related Articles:


MEMRI - The Middle East Media Research Institute


MEMRI Daily – Crisis in the Middle East Series: February 1, 2011




The following is research published today from MEMRI’s Special Dispatch Series and the MEMRI TV Project.

Special Dispatch No. 3551—Egypt

The Middle East Crisis Part VIII - Egyptians Circulate Manual for Protesters

In the recent days, Egyptian activists have been circulating an anonymously written pamphlet titled" How to Protest Intelligently: Important Information and Tactics." The authors ask not to post the manual on Facebook or Twitter, which are monitored by the security forces, but to distribute it by e-mail or copy it and distribute by hand.

Following are details and excerpts:

The pamphlet, a tactical guide for individuals and small groups who wish to take part in the protests, is written in simple language and in secular (rather than Islamic) terms. The authors see themselves as representing "the Egyptian people" and identify the enemy as the Mubarak regime and the security forces. The general message is that the revolution must be carried out by peaceful means, through civil resistance and non-violent protest. The manual provides instructions for organizing protests and choosing their location, and on holding demonstrations and responding to various actions by the security forces. The text is accompanied by illustrations, satellite images (downloaded from Google Earth) and diagrams.

Diagram explaining how to hold a march: small groups start in different locations and converge

To read the full report, visit http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4964.htm.


Special Dispatch No. 3550—Egypt

The Middle East Crisis Part VII - Cartoons on Wave of Protest in Arab World

Cartoons published in the Arab press in response to the current wave of protests in Egypt and in the Arab world at large addressed the causes of the protests, the responses of the Arab leaders to them, and the anticipated fate of these leaders, as well as the reaction of the Americans to the protests and the key role played by the Internet in facilitating them.

The following is a sample of cartoons:

Unemployment, corruption, poverty, violence, ignorance, backwardness and oppression fuel unrest in the Arab street

Al-Arab
(Qatar), January 29, 2011

A desperate Arab world puts itself on fire

Filastin
(Gaza), January 30, 2011

To read the full report, visit http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4963.htm.

Special Dispatch No. 3549—Egypt/Kuwait/Inter-Arab Relations

The Middle East Crisis Part VI - Kuwaiti Newspaper Editor: Iran, Hizbullah Are Supporting the Unrest In Egypt

In a February 1, 2011 in the Kuwaiti daily Arab Times, titled "Not This Way," Ahmad Al-Jarallah, who is editor-in-chief of the paper and also of the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa, discussed the events in Egypt.

The following is his article, in the original English.

"Asking Egyptians to organize peaceful demonstrations to fight corruption and corrupt officials, as well as call for change in the government, is a constitutional demand, which usually happens in every part of the world. Citizens in democratic nations have right to freedom of expression. In advanced democratic settings, this right is often exercised in a peaceful and calm manner without violating the Constitution. This was the same pattern followed by the youth movement at the beginning of the demonstrations but everything has been blown out of proportion and surprisingly snowballed into an unprecedented breakdown in law and order."

To read the full report, visit http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4962.htm.

Obama Administration held secret meeting with Muslim Brotherhood,

planning post-Mubarak government

February 1, 2011


Yet more indication that Obama actively favors the Muslim Brotherhood's coming to power in Egypt. "U.S. 'held secret meeting with Muslim Brotherhood,'" by Aaron Klein for WorldNetDaily, February 1 (thanks to all who sent this in):

JERUSALEM - The Egyptian government has information a diplomat at the U.S. embassy in Cairo secretly met yesterday with a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the nation's major Islamist opposition group, WND has learned.

The topic of the meeting was the future of Egypt following the "fall" of President Hosni Mubarak, an Egyptian intelligence official told WND.

The claim comes amid charges from Cairo that the Obama administration has been encouraging the protests rocking Egypt and targeting the rule of Mubarak, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East.

The Egyptian intelligence official told WND his government has information of a meeting that took place yesterday between Issam El-Erian, a senior leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Frank Wisner, a former U.S. ambassador to Egypt....

The Muslim Brotherhood seeks to spread Islam around the world, in large part using nonviolent means. Hamas and al-Qaida are violent Brotherhood offshoots.

The latest information is not the first charge by the Egyptian government that the Obama administration has been working with or encouraging the opposition to Mubarak.

Last week, a senior Egyptian diplomat stated the Egyptian government suspects elements of the current uprising there, particularly political aspects, are being coordinated with the U.S. State Department and Obama administration.

The senior Egyptian diplomat told WND the Mubarak regime suspects the U.S. has been aiding protest planning by Mohamed ElBaradei, who is seen as one of the main opposition leaders in Cairo....

The White House has been almost openly championing the unrest in Egypt.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called for an "orderly transition" to democracy in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood is the main opposition group.

Obama reportedly voiced support for an "orderly transition" in Egypt that is responsive to the aspirations of Egyptians in phone calls with foreign leaders, the White House said....

Egyptian officials speaking to WND, however, warned the Muslim Brotherhood has the most to gain from any political reform.


Obama backs Muslim Brotherhood role in new Egypt government

Big surprise. He has behaved consistently all along, from his refusal to back the protesters in Iran, who were demonstrating against an Islamic Republic, to his backing of these protesters in Egypt, to whom he has just given a green light to establish an Islamic Republic.

In The Post-American Presidency, Pamela Geller and I profile Robert Malley, Samantha Power, and other fierce foes of Israel in the Obama Administration. In light of the information we reveal there, this comes as no surprise.

"U.S. open to a role for Islamists in new Egypt government," by Paul Richter and Peter Nicholas in the Los Angeles Times, January 31 (thanks to Benedict):

The Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.

The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said. But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such nonsecular groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis that has enveloped Egypt for the last week.

The statement was an acknowledgment that any popularly accepted new government will probably include groups that are not considered friendly to U.S. interests, and was a signal that the White House is prepared for that probability after 30 years of reliable relations with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

Monday's statement was a "pretty clear sign that the U.S. isn't going to advocate a narrow form of pluralism, but a broad one," said Robert Malley, a Mideast peace negotiator in the Clinton administration. U.S. officials have previously pressed for broader participation in Egypt's government.

The George W. Bush administration pushed Mubarak for democratic reforms, but a statement in 2005 by then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did not specifically address a role for Islamists.

"This is different," said Malley, now with the International Crisis Group. "It has a real political edge and political meaning."

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that a reformed government "has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors that give Egypt a strong chance to continue to be [a] stable and reliable partner." [...]

The National Security Council officials -- Ben Rhodes, Samantha Power and Daniel Shapiro -- were reluctant to discuss Mubarak's fate. The White House has settled on the message that it is up to Egyptians to choose their government and that the U.S. should not be seen as picking the country's leaders....


Israel shocked by Obama's betrayal of Mubarak

But they shouldn't be. Obama is behaving consistently. He declined to speak out in favor of the Iranian protesters who were demonstrating against an Islamic regime. He is now abandoning Mubarak in favor of protesters who will likely pave the way for an Islamic regime. "Israel shocked by Obama's 'betrayal' of Mubarak," by Douglas Hamilton for Reuters, January 31:

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - If Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak is toppled, Israel will lose one of its very few friends in a hostile neighborhood and President Barack Obama will bear a large share of the blame, Israeli pundits said on Monday.

Political commentators expressed shock at how the United States as well as its major European allies appeared to be ready to dump a staunch strategic ally of three decades, simply to conform to the current ideology of political correctness.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has told ministers of the Jewish state to make no comment on the political cliffhanger in Cairo, to avoid inflaming an already explosive situation. But Israel's President Shimon Peres is not a minister.

"We always have had and still have great respect for President Mubarak," he said on Monday. He then switched to the past tense. "I don't say everything that he did was right, but he did one thing which all of us are thankful to him for: he kept the peace in the Middle East."

Newspaper columnists were far more blunt.

One comment by Aviad Pohoryles in the daily Maariv was entitled "A Bullet in the Back from Uncle Sam." It accused Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of pursuing a naive, smug, and insular diplomacy heedless of the risks.

Who is advising them, he asked, "to fuel the mob raging in the streets of Egypt and to demand the head of the person who five minutes ago was the bold ally of the president ... an almost lone voice of sanity in a Middle East?"

"The politically correct diplomacy of American presidents throughout the generations ... is painfully naive."

Obama on Sunday called for an "orderly transition" to democracy in Egypt, stopping short of calling on Mubarak to step down, but signaling that his days may be numbered....


Obama encouraging Muslim Brotherhood to be part of post-Mubarak government

For those who missed my earlier post on the connection between the Muslim Brotherhood and Nazism, and between the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, please go back and read it before you read this post.

Ostensibly knowing everything I wrote in that post, the Obama administration is encouraging making the
Muslim Brotherhood a part of the post-Mubarak government in Egypt (Hat Tip: Gates of Vienna, who has lots more comments here).
The Obama administration said Monday for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.

The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said. But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such "nonsecular" groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis enveloping Egypt for the past week.
If those conditions sound familiar, they should. They parallel the conditions for acceptance of Hamas as a legitimate actor in the Israeli-'Palestinian' conflict (acceptance of Israel's right to exist, acceptance of past agreements, renunciation of violence). And they represent a radical departure from the United States' statement two weeks ago that it would cut off all assistance to Lebanon if a new government was formed by a Hezbullah-led block.

Furthermore, even if the Brotherhood accepted these conditions, why should they be believed? Hasn't the Obama administration heard of
taqiyya?

What the US should be doing is saying, "while we have no control over what the Egyptian people decide, we will not continue to financially assist a government which abrogates any of its treaty obligations with Israel, or which includes any Islamist or other repressive party." That would square with what the US has done (and should be doing) in Lebanon (with Hezbullah) and in Gaza (with Hamas).
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said a reformed government "has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors that give Egypt a strong chance to continue to be (a) stable and reliable partner."
If anything, the opposite is true. If a 'reformed government' includes certain non-secular actors - like the Brotherhood - there is virtually no chance that it will ever be a stable and reliable partner for anything.
The Muslim Brotherhood is the largest and best-organized Egyptian opposition group, with an estimated 600,000 members, many of them educated, middle-class men. It has disavowed terrorism and violence, but its inclusion in any government would likely be deeply controversial among U.S. allies, especially in Israel, because it advocates tearing up Egypt's peace treaty with the Jewish state.
So now we are expected to believe that there is a difference between the Brotherhood's 'political' and 'military' 'wings,' as some would have us believe aboutHezbullah? Maybe we can rename Hamas' Izzedein al-Qassam as the Brotherhood's 'military wing'?

What could go wrong?

Source: Obama Asks Mubarak Not to Seek Re-Election
President Obama has urged Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak not to stand for re-election this fall, Fox News has learned, as U.S. officials hold talks with both government and opposition leaders about what comes next after days of massive protests.

The message from Obama comes as Mubarak reportedly prepares to address his country. Al Arabiya reports that the 30-year ruler of Egypt will use the address to announce he will not run for another term.

Whether that will placate demonstrators remains to be seen. But the Obama administration has been holding talks to make clear Washington's desire for a peaceful transition, according to State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley. U.S. Ambassador to Egypt Margaret Scobey met with opposition leaderMohamed ElBaradei in Cairo to convey that message. Crowley described the meeting as "part of our public outreach to convey support for orderly transition in Egypt."

John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said the test for Egypt will be whether the Egyptian demonstrators accept Mubarak as their president through the end of the year. Otherwise, he said, the country could be thrown back into "crisis."

According to The New York Times, the message from Obama was delivered by former diplomat Frank Wisner.

And at the Pentagon, officials said Defense Secretary Robert Gates conferred by phone with his Egyptian counterpart, Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi.

Also Tuesday, the State Department ordered nonessential U.S. personnel to leave Egypt. The order replaces an initial decision last week to allow nonessential workers who wanted to leave the country to do so at government expense.

The department said it would continue to evacuate private U.S. citizens from Egypt aboard government-chartered planes.

The administration has thus far confined its public comments on the anti-government protests in Egypt to calls for restraint, reforms and a transition to a real democracy.

As the protests against Mubarak's three-decade rule escalated on Tuesday, the chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. John Kerry, a Democrat, gave public voice to what senior U.S. officials have said only privately in recent days: that Mubarak should "step aside gracefully to make way for a new political structure."

"It is not enough for President Mubarak to pledge `fair' elections," Kerry wrote in The New York Times. "The most important step that he can take is to address his nation and declare that neither he nor the son he has been positioning as his successor will run in the presidential election this year. Egyptians have moved beyond his regime, and the best way to avoid unrest turning into upheaval is for President Mubarak to take himself and his family out of the equation."

Egypt's army leaders are reassuring the United States that the powerful military does not intend to crack down on demonstrators, but is instead allowing the protesters to "wear themselves out," according to a former U.S. official in contact with several top Egyptian army officers. The Egyptians use a colloquial saying to describe their strategy -- that a boiling pot with a lid that is too tight will blow up the kitchen, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

That was always the argument that Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, who Mubarak tapped as his vice president on Friday, made regarding the handling of the Gaza border crossing point every time visiting U.S. officials asked their counterparts to stop the smuggling from Egypt to the Gaza Strip: that the best way to head off Gaza unrest is to allow a relief valve that permitted them to bring in supplies.

The Egyptian officers expressed concern with some of the White House statements that side with the protesters, saying that stoking revolt to remove Mubarak could create a vacuum that the banned but powerful Muslim Brotherhood could fill, the official said. While the Brotherhood claims to have closed its paramilitary wing long ago, it has fought politically to gain power, and more threatening to the Mubarak regime, has built a nationwide charity and social network that much of Egypt's poverty stricken population depends on for its survival.

Col. David Lapan, a Pentagon spokesman, said the U.S. military remains ready to help get Americans out of Egypt if asked but so far has received no requests.

On Monday, the U.S. evacuated more than 1,200 Americans from Cairo on such flights and said it expected to fly out roughly 1,400 more in the coming days. Monday's flights ferried Americans from Cairo to Larnaca, Cyprus; Athens, Greece; and Istanbul, Turkey. On Tuesday, the department expects to add Frankfurt, Germany, as a destination.

It also hopes to arrange evacuation flights from the Egyptian cities of Aswan and Luxor.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Here comes the Muslim Brotherhood: Mubarak to step down

MubarakStarofDavid.jpgHere comes the Brotherhood, and war with Israel


It was inevitable, and now it is about to happen -- after
an Obama envoy told Mubarak to go. Of course, he has named a successor and the old regime will try to continue, but its days are numbered. "Egyptian President Mubarak Will Reportedly Step Down," from Fox News, February 1:

CAIRO - President Hosni Mubarak is expected to say in a speech Tuesday night that he plans on stepping down at the next election scheduled in September, according to Reuters.

He does plan to stay in office until then to meet the demands of the protesters.

Al-Jazeera reports that the Egyptian Embassy in Tel Aviv is making preparations to welcome him into exile....