Rubin Reports: Egypt – Things to Think About as We Await the Presidential Election Outcome (JEWISH PRESS) By: Barry Rubin 06/17/12)
Source: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/analysis/rubin-reports/rubin-reports-egypt-things-to-think-about-as-we-await-the-presidential-election-outcome/2012/06/17/
JEWISH PRESS
JEWISH PRESS Articles-Index-Top
Publishers-Index-Top
While one can certainly sympathize with the idea of letting an
elected parliament being allowed to take office, that’s not
necessarily such a clear call in strategic terms. The parliament–
which will write the constitution and thus define the powers of the
president–is almost 75 percent rabidly anti-American and antisemitic.
(I don’t write that last word lightly but it is quite accurate.)
Imagine if this situation had arisen in Iran in 1979 with the Iranian
military refusing to turn over power to the forces led by Ayatollah
Ruhollah Khomeini. Would it have been wise for Washington to demand
that this be done as soon as possible?
Yet here is Defense Secretary Leon Panetta calling on Egypt’s
military in a manner that “highlighted the need to move forward
expeditiously with Egypt’s political transition, including conducting
new legislative elections as soon as possible.” Senator Patrick J.
Leahy has called for withholding U.S. aid to Egypt, saying, “I would
not want to see the U.S. government write checks for contracts with
Egypt’s military under the present uncertain circumstances.”
What circumstances are more appropriate for sending U.S. arms and
money? When the Muslim Brotherhood dominates parliament, the
presidency, has written a constitution mandating Sharia law, and
follows a policy of death to America and death to Israel? Who are you
going to cheer for if Islamists rebel against the regime?
Maybe now is a good moment for the U.S. government to remain quiet.
Is there a precedent for this? Yes. After the Algerian government
abrogated elections that it knew Islamists were going to win in 1991,
the U.S. governments of George Bush and Bill Clinton generally shut
up about it and let the French take the lead in helping the military
government, which won the civil war. In contrast, in 2007, a
misguided “democratic” impulse let President George W. Bush to stand
aside and let Hamas compete in Palestinian elections even though its
refusal to accept the Oslo peace process disqualified that radical
Islamist group. Today, the Gaza Strip lives under repressive Islamist
rule. The regime there has already launched one failed and costly war
against Israel and it is only a matter of time until it starts round
two.
While Egyptian Brotherhood leaders claim to be moderate when they
talk to Western audiences, that has nothing to do with what they say
to each other or to Egyptians. In May at El-Mahalla El-Kubra, at a
rally attended by Brotherhood presidential candidate Muhammad al-
Mursi, the main speaker, Sifwat Hijazi, said that when the
Brotherhood took power:
“Our capital won’t be Mecca or Medina, but Jerusalem, millions of
shahids [martyrs] will march on the city. The whole world should
know — and we say it clearly — our goal is Jerusalem, we shall pray
in Jerusalem, and, if not, we shall die as martyrs on its ruins.”
Another speaker added,“Tomorrow Mursi will liberate Gaza.” A singer
sang: “The Jews will not be able to sleep, come, lovers of martyrs,
you’re all Hamas. Take on arms, and prepare for prayer.”
Just words? Sure, like the words of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel
Nasser, Iranian spiritual guide Khomeini, Iraqi President Saddam
Hussein, Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat and many more. The Western
mass media, academic experts, and government officials may assure you
that the Muslim Brotherhood is really a moderate group and that
worrying about what it will do in power is silly. Pay no attention.
The Brotherhood daily makes clear what it believes and intends to do.
So does it make sense for a U.S. government to take up the doctrine
of “neo-conservative” naivete and demand a Brotherhood victory over
the army in Egypt? A proper U.S. government would — and I apologize
for the “amoral” requirements of realpolitik — secretly be backing
the military to keep the Brotherhood out of power. We now know that
President Harry Truman’s administration did certain things to ensure
Communist parties didn’t win power in France and Italy which would
not meet contemporary “ethical” standards of electoral results over
American national security interests. Thank goodness for that! (©
2012 JewishPress. 06/17/12)
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY