Yesterday's confrontation between Egypt's army and the Muslim Brotherhood may only be the beginning.
4:01 PM, Aug 15, 2013
• By LEE SMITH
This morning President Obama announced that he is cancelling this year’s joint military exercise with Egypt, Operation Bright Star.
It’s a symbolic gesture intended to show that, should the army continue
to pursue its present course, the White House may eventually decide to
suspend military aid. But cancelling Bright Star also underscores
American impotence. The administration reportedly warned
Egypt’s military regime against a violent crackdown, an admonition to
which, with 638 now confirmed dead after yesterday’s nationwide
confrontations with Muslim Brotherhood supporters, the army obviously
turned a deaf ear.
It’s true that American influence is limited. A
billion plus dollars doesn’t go as far as it did in the 1980s when Egypt
first allied with the United States, but the Obama White House has sold
American values cheaply. As Fouad Ajami writes
today: “When the Obama administration could not call the coup d'état by
its name, we put on display our unwillingness to honor our own
democratic creed...When our secretary of state opined that the army was
‘restoring democracy,’ we gave away the moral and strategic incoherence
of an administration that has long lost its way.”
Therefore, at this point Egypt’s de facto ruler,
General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, sees the United States as little more than
a prop, a rag with which he burnishes his reputation as a strongman, a
village mayor puffing his chest and boasting that he is unafraid of standing up to the Americans.
Sisi will no doubt use the cancellation to further enhance his domestic
prestige. Who knows but that his spokesmen aren’t already spreading the
word that it was Egypt who put off the joint exercises and Obama simply
wished to avoid being embarrassed by the patriotic army of the Nile?
The current military regime is coming to look less like Hosni Mubarak’s
and more like Gamal abd el-Nasser’s.
Yesterday, interim Egyptian president Adly Mansour imposed
a curfew on the country and, invoking law 162/1958, declared a state of
emergency that is scheduled to last for a month. First enacted under
Nasser in 1958,
the emergency law, among other things, suspended constitutional rights,
extended police powers and prohibited political activities. Aside from
an 18-month suspension in 1967, the law applied up until May 31, 2012,
when it was allowed to expire
in the middle of Egypt’s first, and perhaps last, free presidential
elections. Given that over the last half century the law has tended to target
the Muslim Brotherhood, it seems unlikely that it will be lifted as
long as the Brotherhood holds a vendetta against a military that has
slaughtered its rank-and-file in the streets. Thus having cashiered its
brief experiment in democracy, Egypt has swallowed its own tail—and, now
divided against itself, has spit it up again in revulsion. Egypt, what
Herodotus called the Gift of the Nile, is bathing in its own blood.
Credit Vice President Mohamed ElBaradei as one of
the country’s few political figures who has imagined what the near-term
future of his country looks like and wants no part of it. He resigned
yesterday in protest against the crackdown—an act of conscience which,
met by indifference in Egypt, only shows how far the former presidential
candidate is from the mainstream of his country’s political culture:
All the rest of Egypt welcomed the opportunity to express their
grievances in blood. Both the Brotherhood and the military have
understood since the July 3 coup against Mohamed Morsi that it was a
zero-sum game that would eventually have to be decided on the streets.
Curiously, it was the democracies that least
understood how the vote had changed the political equation in Egypt.
Western diplomats had urged the army to reconcile with the Brotherhood
and bring them back into the political process. This might have had some
chance for success had there not been an election that put the
Brotherhood in the presidential palace. But because there was, the
army’s outreach was a non-starter. From the Brotherhood’s perspective it
was like being invited back in to your own wedding after being thrown
out by the caterers to watch your bride married off to the bartender. To
participate in a political system stewarded by the institution that had
unconstitutionally removed its candidate from power would mean
providing the cover of legitimacy for an objectively illegitimate
process. The army knew it would have to put the Brotherhood down, and
the Brotherhood knew it was coming, sometime after Ramadan.
Yesterday’s showdown amounts to a draw. Yes, most of the casualties were Morsi supporters, but as Reuel Marc Gerecht wrote
recently, the Muslim Brotherhood will rise again. In the meantime, the
Brotherhood now has hundreds of martyrs in its column, and as the
victims of the army’s depredations has earned sympathy across the
world—in spite of the fact that Brotherhood supporters burned dozens of
Coptic Christian churches and attacked Copts throughout the country.
It is hard at this point to envision a future that does not entail more violence, engulfing everyone, including those self-described liberals
who, having demonstrated to bring down Mubarak, have now invested their
faith in Sisi to protect them from the Brotherhood. If they had an
ounce of intellectual honesty or moral integrity they’d petition Sisi to
free Mubarak, his family members and other regime figures presently in
jail or in exile, for it is they in their frenzy to destroy who helped
send them there. We will know that Egypt is on the right path when the
liberals and secularists now supporting the army make an act of
contrition and apologize to the old man, an Arab Lear betrayed by his
two daughters—the army and the secularists whose advancement was made
possible by the stability that he ensured for three decades. Since he
has no Cordelia, let Egypt build a statue for him, not colossal like the
sphinx and pyramids but on a human-scale befitting the stolid
president-for-life who, like he said, really did understand
Egyptians—not only the humor, earthy charm and sepia-tinted glamor of
his children, but also the horrifying levels of violence that they might
stoop to without someone to take the knives out of their hands.
There are many who believe that Sisi represents a
return to Mubarak. For instance, Israel’s former ambassador to Egypt,
Zvi Mazel, argues
that “the new Egyptian government is pro-West and will have decent
relations with Israel.” Perhaps the army will continue to have good
relations with Israel, but with a White House that’s turned its back on
the Middle East and incapable of projecting power to undergird the
relationship between Cairo and Jerusalem, it will be subject to the
whims of an Egyptian army that has repeatedly proven its incompetence,
especially in the Sinai. At present it is in the interests of Egyptian
national security to maintain good relations with Israel, but there are
other interests, too, like inter-regime struggles as well as domestic
and regional dynamics, that might someday override border issues and
maybe even the peace treaty. Moreover, it’s worth remembering that when
mobs overran the Israeli embassy
in September 2011 and Israeli officials called Cairo for help, the army
didn’t pick up the phone—and that’s when it was run by Mohamed Hussein
Tantawi, a bureaucrat with one eye on his retirement plan and not, like
Sisi, a man eager to see Egypt leading and likely himself leading Egypt.
As for the notion that Sisi is pro-West, even a cursory glance of his interview with the Washington Post
shows that this is a different cut of cloth. “You left the Egyptians,
you turned your back on the Egyptians, and they won’t forget that,” said
Sisi, adding that Americans need to pay up unless they want Egypt as an
enemy. “Where is the economic support to Egypt from the U.S.?” asked
Sisi “Where was the U.S. support to help the country restore its economy
and overcome its dire needs?”
These are threats, coming from the leader of a
country that has lived off the generosity of others for way too long.
It’s not just Egyptian bread and fuel that are heavily subsidized, for
so is Egyptian politics. For the last two-and-a-half years, Egyptians
have behaved like spoiled children, trashing what they like because
someone else will pay for it. Neither the United States nor Europe has
the cash on hand right now, so the Gulf Arabs—the very same people the
Egyptians typically blame for their problems with radical Islam—have
agreed to extend Cairo a large line of credit. But eventually the
Saudis, Emiratis, Kuwaitis and Qataris will tire of feeding 80 million
people who hold them in contempt. When Egypt becomes more importunate,
more tiresome, more dangerous, and the Arabs are no longer willing to
pick up the check, what happens?
What happens when the army proves that it is no
more capable of fixing Egypt now than it was in the brief period
following Mubarak’s exit? What happens when many now on the sidelines,
or even standing against the Brotherhood, demand the return and
resurrection of a political movement better organized and galvanized by a
vendetta that it has been nurturing against the many millions of
Egyptians who cheered to see their blood run?
No comments:
Post a Comment