Michael Totten At World Affairs: ‘Egypt Falls Back On The Military’

July 3, 2013July 3, 2013 / chr1 / 2 Comments

Comments are worth a read. The Army and President bluffing?

Stranger things have happened, but we are looking at country with grinding, nearly 3rd world poverty, in an economic spiral downwards.

Totten’s interview with a Muslim Brotherhood representative shows their rather nutty worldview and impracticality in the wake of Mubarak (not really people we can do business with), and any hope of stability is now being placed back upon the foreign-aid supported military.

The State Department and the Obama administration are still trying to convince the American people democracy has been brought to the Middle-East and be seen as having done so. True, these were ‘democractic’ elections, but the conditions for any kind of democracy or liberalism the West would recognize were never ripe for the serious business of a power vacuum and the failure of Egypt’s institutions and conditions on the ground.

Spengler At PJ Media: Egypt Falls Back On The Military:

‘There is only {one} reason the military might do a better job than the Muslim Brotherhood or the liberal opposition, and that is because Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states (besides tiny Qatar) might decide to provide funding for a military regime that suppressed the Muslim Brotherhood, which the Saudi regime rightly fears as a competitor to its medieval form of monarchy’

Adam Garfinkle’s Adbel Fattah al-Sisi-Memorize That Name:

‘This drama has never been about the fate of democracy or liberal attitudes and institutions. That was our passion play, not Egypt’s. This drama has always been about the fractionation and dissipation of traditional sources of social authority in a country that has tried and failed now at least three times since Napoleon’s 1799 invasion to come to terms with the press of modernity – ‘

From Abu Muqawama: ‘Mubarak And Me’…From Michael Totten: ‘The New Egyptian Underground’…Michael Totten At The American Interest: “A Leaner, Meaner Brotherhood”

From Via Media: ‘Morsi Calls Referendum, Egypt’s Liberals Helplessly Protest ‘

December 4, 2012December 4, 2012 / chr1 / Leave a comment

Full post here.

‘It’s always hard to understand the fast changing politics of a revolution in progress, but in Egypt the Islamists and the military seem to have reached an accommodation: The Islamists will leave the military alone and let the soldiers shape high politics while the military will stand back as the Islamists lead a conservative social revolution in the country.

Left out of this are the liberals, the Christians, secular Egyptians, and some of the business leaders and officials who were powerful under the old regime.’

There is still a bit of hope for other Egyptians, but the SCAF and the elected Islamists are still mostly calling the shots.

Morsi flees palace.

————————————-

So what’s the larger strategy to deal with the rise in Islamism?

————————-

Possibly related, a quote from Hill’s forward to Ajami’s new book on Syria, not Egypt, as discussed in the video:

“[The] greatest strategic challenge of the twenty-first century is involves “reversing Islamic radicalism”‘

From Abu Muqawama: ‘Mubarak And Me’…From Michael Totten: ‘The New Egyptian Underground’…Michael Totten At The American Interest: “A Leaner, Meaner Brotherhood”

Francis Fukuyama At The American Interest Online: ‘Political Order in Egypt’

Walter Russell Mead At The American Interest: ‘Mubaraks, Mamelukes, Modernizers and Muslims’……James Kirchik At The American Interest: ‘Egyptian Liberals Against the Revolution’

From The New Republic: ‘A Tour Of Egypt’s Half-Finished Revolution’

Eli Lake At The Daily Beast: ‘U.S. Officials Knew Libya Attacks Were Work of Al Qaeda Affiliates’

September 26, 2012September 27, 2012 / chr1 / Leave a comment

Full piece here.

The intelligence officials are anonymous as of now:

‘Within 24 hours of the 9-11 anniversary attack on the United States consulate in Benghazi, U.S. intelligence agencies had strong indications al Qaeda–affiliated operatives were behind the attack, and had even pinpointed the location of one of those attackers. Three separate U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to The Daily Beast said the early information was enough to show that the attack was planned and the work of al Qaeda affiliates operating in Eastern Libya.’

If this is true, I suspect it is because the current administration knows how much of a powder keg the Middle East is at the moment, and a direct military response, even if highly targeted, would have threatened Obama’s foreign policy further as well as any fruit the Arab Spring will have produced.

This could explain Secretary Of State Hilary Clinton’s PR tour across the region, the insistence on the video as the source of the attack (Susan Rice as well), and the lengthy, slow and visible, investigation. A plurality, if not a majority of Americans, and a vast majority Muslims it seems, are not where Obama wants them to be: woven together under a banner of liberal internationalist doctrine, with him bridging the divide.

Don’t get in the way: He’s threading the needle.

Addition: Yes, there is a certain amount of facetiousness in this post. Libyan president in a television interview says it was a planned, coordinated attack. Is it incompetence, a lack of communication, an inability to manage so many disparate interests and lack of leadership? Is it a failure or success of the liberal internationalist doctrine?

Via Reuters: ‘U.S. Ambassador To Libya Killed In Benghazi Attack’

Walter Russell Mead At The American Interest Online: ‘Obama’s War’…From The WSJ: “Allies Rally To Stop Gadhafi”…From March 27th, 2009 At WhiteHouse.Gov: Remarks By The President On A New Strategy For Afghanistan And Pakistan…From The New Yorker: ‘How Qaddafi Lost Libya’…

Adam Garfinkle At The American Interest: ‘Remember Libya?’…A Few Thoughts On Watching Operations In Libya

Is Bernhard Henri-Levy actually influencing U.S. policy decisions..? From New York Magazine: ‘European Superhero Quashes Libyan Dictator’…Bernhard Henri-Levy At The Daily Beast: ‘A Moral Tipping Point’…Charlie Rose Episode On Libya Featuring Bernhard Henri-Levy, Les Gelb And Others…

Adam Garfinkle At The American Interest: ‘What Did The Arab Spring Really Change?’

August 6, 2012August 6, 2012 / chr1 / Leave a comment

Full essay here.

Garfinkle links to a piece by Olivier Roy, and summarizes (as he advises he shouldn’t due to the quality of Roy’s piece):

‘What has changed, in a nutshell, to enable this new focus is that the younger demographic in the Arab world no longer respects the social authority of the old system, which, after all, has long since proven its incapacity to negotiate modernity. Changes in technology and the overhang of globalization have individuated Arab society, not uniformly and not all at once, but in ways that undermine old authoritarian habits. As Roy sees it, these deep social changes open the way not necessarily for democracy, but for democratization. Roy insists on seeing the concept not as a static noun but as a process.’

In Tunisia, Libya, Syria, Egypt, a strong wind blew away the old regimes, but what is coming up in their places? Is it merely greater space for radical Islam, or just a resurgent Islam claiming the public square in characteristically undemocratic ways…or is it something more?

Like Fukuyama via Huntington overturning modernization theory:

‘Roy’s argument is that Arabs can become democrats without becoming secularists or liberals, and that, indeed, the new context of Arab society is mandating exactly such a circumstance.’

According to Roy, what’s changed is the individual’s relationship to Islam as social tradition, and ritual…the old set ways…, so the pace is glacial, but it hasn’t necessarily been a wash:

“There is a cultural gap”, Roy points out, “between the Islamists and the younger generation that is less about Islam per se than about what it means for a person to be a believer.” Islamic fundamentalism, as Roy has contended for many years, has aided mightily this process because its appeal is to individual believers in the face of, and as opposed to, received static tradition, which fundamentalists have savaged as being adulterated with accumulated superstition, corruption, laxity, and even idolatry. Fundamentalism, in other words, has diversified––indeed, pluralized––Islam.’

What do we do in the meantime, to protect and promote our interests in dealing with Syria, Iran, Israel, Egypt, Libya? Does Roy’s map line up with the terrain?

Frenchmen do have a different way of understanding the world which is informed by a complex past, especially as it relates to the individual and the State: Was Bernhard Henri-Levy actually influencing U.S. policy decisions..? From New York Magazine: ‘European Superhero Quashes Libyan Dictator’…Bernhard Henri-Levy At The Daily Beast: ‘A Moral Tipping Point’

The modern State awaits, with a more efficient bureaucratic class overcoming the corruption and earning the public trust here in the West?: Francis Fukuyama At The American Interest-’The Two Europes’

Adam Garfinkle At The American Interest: ‘Is Manaf Tlass’s Defection a Sign That Assad’s Regime Is Cracking?” From Foreign Affairs-’Former Syrian General Akil Hashem on the Uprising in Syria’…From Slate: ‘In Aleppo, Syria, Mohamed Atta Thought He Could Build The Ideal Islamic City’…Michael Totten At World Affairs: ‘Syria’s Regime Not Worth Preserving’…

Via Youtube-Uncommon Knowledge With Fouad Ajami And Charles Hill

August 4, 2012 / chr1 / Leave a comment

————————-

A quote from Hill’s forward to Ajami’s new book on Syria as discussed in the video:

“[The] greatest strategic challenge of the twenty-first century is involves “reversing Islamic radicalism”‘

Both men want to see more leadership out of this administration. They probably won’t get it. They both argue that there needs American led involvement of some sort in Syria. It’s a bad neighborhood.

Hill pushes further to suggest that if America doesn’t lead onto a new set of challenges that now face the West (and not just subsume ourselves to liberal international doctrine) then Europe surely isn’t capable of it either (the wellspring of the Westphalian State that provided the model for the modern State but which is now subsidized by our military and economic strength).

And China leading? Russia? Goodness.

What about some as yet to be conceived international order by many of the same ideals and thinkers that have led to the failures of the Eurozone and the U.N that don’t understand how dangerous a world this can be? There seem to be design problems in those models which likely require independent American thought and action.

—————–

How about a coalition of free traders, that works for the common self-interest of protecting the life-blood of our respective economies with naval forces against piracy, drug-runners, and corrupt and aggressive regimes that agitate in international waters? Perhaps America, Britain, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Africa, South Korea, Germany, France, Israel, Brazil, Chile (China down the road) could start something like a cleaned up, international, merchant marines?

I’m just throwing ideas out there. Any thoughts and comments are welcome.

What are some downsides of liberal internationalism?: Richard Fernandez At PJ Media: ‘The New Middle East’

Adam Garfinkle At The American Interest: ‘Is Manaf Tlass’s Defection a Sign That Assad’s Regime Is Cracking?” Thursday Quotation: Jeane Kirkpatrick – J.S. Mill…From Foreign Affairs-’Former Syrian General Akil Hashem on the Uprising in Syria’…From Slate: ‘In Aleppo, Syria, Mohamed Atta Thought He Could Build The Ideal Islamic City’…Michael Totten At World Affairs: ‘Syria’s Regime Not Worth Preserving’…

Democracy as we envision it requires people to constrain themselves within laws and institutions that maintain democracy…through Mill’s utilitarianism?: Thursday Quotation: Jeane Kirkpatrick – J.S. Mill Is Bernhard Henri-Levy actually influencing U.S. policy decisions..? From New York Magazine: ‘European Superhero Quashes Libyan Dictator’…Bernhard Henri-Levy At The Daily Beast: ‘A Moral Tipping Point’

Do we try and invest in global institutions as flawed as they are…upon a Kantian raft of perpetual peace?: Daniel Deudney On YouTube Responding to Robert Kagan: Liberal Democracy Vs. Autocracy

Adam Garfinkle At The American Interest on Egypt: ‘Still More of the Same—and Something New’

June 17, 2012June 19, 2012 / chr1 / 2 Comments

Full post here.

From a Reuters article as Egypt holds elections:

‘Both contenders may herald further turbulence. An Islamist president will face a mistrustful army, while a victory by a Mubarak-era general will rile the revolutionaries on the street.’

and from Garfinkle’s piece:

No one knows where this will all lead. The satyrs of history are on the loose again. Many say that, after Tahrir Square, Egypt will never be the same. And that is true: Egyptians have dared to dream that things could be different, better, and that their own hands and hearts could make a difference. But most likely, in two or three years’ time Egypt will look for all practical purposes very much the same as it did before the so called revolution’

And a previous quote from Walter Russell Mead:

‘What we are seeing in the streets of Cairo is less a revolution seeking to take shape than a haggling process. The leaders of the Egyptian political parties want to be able to choose all the parliamentary candidates through naming them to parliamentary lists. That would make party leaders the chief power brokers in a parliamentary regime. The military wants more MPs to be elected as individuals, weakening the parties and making it easier for the real powers in the country to manipulate the parliamentary process.’

—————————————–

Update: The Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammed Mursi claims victory with 52% of the vote…we’ll see how this goes from here as the military is unlikely to transfer power to the office of the Presidency. Where has there been a deep transformation in Egyptian society…deep enough to embark on a bold new path of representative government?:

The Shafiq campaign rejected Morsi’s claim of victory and accused him to trying to “usurp” the presidency or lay the groundwork to challenge the official result if it shows Shafiq winning

Another Update: Mubarak suffers a stroke.

Francis Fukuyama At The American Interest Online: ‘Political Order in Egypt’

Walter Russell Mead At The American Interest: ‘Mubaraks, Mamelukes, Modernizers and Muslims’……James Kirchik At The American Interest: ‘Egyptian Liberals Against the Revolution’

Michael Totten Interviews Rick Francona At World Affairs: ‘From Saigon to Baghdad’

May 12, 2012 / chr1 / Leave a comment

Full interview here.

Totten is guest-hosting at Instapundit. An informal, interesting discussion about the Middle East:

‘Most US military sources I’ve spoken to are familiar with Iraq and the Persian Gulf but know relatively little about the Levant (the Eastern Mediterranean) and even less about distant North Africa. Francona knows Iraq and the Gulf, and the Levant and the crucial parts of North Africa.’

Francona from the interview:

‘The only country that ever seriously embarked on a nuclear weapons program and failed to develop a bomb is Iraq, and that’s only because the Israelis stopped it. Every other country that had the will and the material support has succeeded. No one has ever been stopped by technology. Everyone has been able to acquire the fissile material by hook or by crook. It’s no longer magic. It just isn’t.

Non-lethal methods are always better than blowing things up, but I don’t think anything will stop the Iranians short of war. You and I were at the same briefing about this in Israel. The Israelis think Iran can’t be deterred, and I think they’re right.

So we have to do one of two things. We either tell the Iranians that we won’t allow them to develop nuclear weapons, and that we’re prepared to physically stop them, or we start planning for the day when Iran has the bomb’

Walter Russell Mead At The American Interest: ‘Iran: Keeping The World’s Oddest Couple Together’…Materialism and Leftism Paul Berman On Bloggingheads: The Left Can Criticize Iran

…From Michael Totten: ‘An Interview With Christopher Hitchens’…From Abu Muqawama: ‘Mubarak And Me’…From Michael Totten: ‘The New Egyptian Underground’…Michael Totten At The American Interest: “A Leaner, Meaner Brotherhood”

From Foreign Policy: ‘No Brothers In Arms In Egypt’

April 26, 2012April 26, 2012 / chr1 / 5 Comments

Full piece here.

A more tense relationship has developed between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Supreme Council Of The Armed Forces, which is essentially running the country.

As Murad Mohamed Aly, a Morsi campaign official, told me, “The Egyptians did not revolt to get rid of Mubarak … to get another Mubarak — Shafiq or someone.” And this same logic could apply to Amr Moussa, Mubarak’s former foreign minister who currently leads most national polls. “We have strong doubts that Egyptians will elect someone who is connected to the previous regime,” said Aly. “If [Moussa is elected] through interference, we will protest.”

A previous quote from Walter Russell Mead:

‘What we are seeing in the streets of Cairo is less a revolution seeking to take shape than a haggling process. The leaders of the Egyptian political parties want to be able to choose all the parliamentary candidates through naming them to parliamentary lists. That would make party leaders the chief power brokers in a parliamentary regime. The military wants more MPs to be elected as individuals, weakening the parties and making it easier for the real powers in the country to manipulate the parliamentary process.’

From Abu Muqawama: ‘Mubarak And Me’…From Michael Totten: ‘The New Egyptian Underground’…Michael Totten At The American Interest: “A Leaner, Meaner Brotherhood”

From The New Republic: ‘A Tour Of Egypt’s Half-Finished Revolution’

February 20, 2012 / chr1 / Leave a comment

Full piece here.

‘There is a correlation, I’ve noticed, between the volume of mosques’ loudspeakers in a country and its radical Islamists’ ambitions and aggressive claims to power. Thirty-three years ago, one of the first hints of rising religious despotism in Iran was the sudden increase in the volume of loudspeakers in every neighborhood mosque. Piety was no longer private and voluntary, but public and mandatory.’

From The National Interest Via The A & L Daily: ‘Rawls Visits the Pyramids’…Francis Fukuyama At The American Interest Online: ‘Political Order in Egypt’…From Abu Muqawama: ‘Mubarak And Me’…From Michael Totten: ‘The New Egyptian Underground’…

James Kirchik At The American Interest: ‘Egyptian Liberals Against the Revolution’

December 26, 2011December 30, 2011 / chr1 / Leave a comment

Full essay here.

Kirchik homes in on a problem:

“…a media narrative developed about the political state of play in Egypt that persists to this day. It presents a story that is as simplistic as it is erroneous. There exist, according to this analysis, roughly three groups in Egyptian politics: the “liberal” protestors, the Islamists and the military. The last of the three has been the easiest to define: The military is the strongest and most respected institution in Egypt, and its agenda—preserving its economic power and privilege in society—is evident in every action it takes.”

There are, apparently, are some Egyptian liberals actually against the recent revolution (a la Burke):

‘But Rezkalla—along with a small band of other young Egyptian liberals whom I’ve met—has no time for the discredited ideologies of the past like Arab nationalism. Grouped around a relatively new non-governmental organization, the Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth (EULY), they look to the classical liberal thinkers of Europe and America—to John Locke, not Gamal Abdel Nasser…’

and on the poverty, need, and want of a majority of Egyptians:

‘This is why, Badr says dismissively, the secular protestors who initiated the revolution were mostly middle class. The vast majority of the country, which remains poor, did not have serious problems with the Mubarak regime as it was steadily enjoying a higher quality of life under it. But the aspirational class, which has access to the Internet and some means of foreign travel, whose social advancement is more visibly thwarted by the corruption and nepotism of a dictatorial regime, and which is not living hand-to-mouth, places a higher value on political rights than do residents of Cairo’s vast slums.’

This reminds me of Niall Freguson’s observations (halfway through the video) on China:

Now that China has enacted economic reforms (by the old Communist structure) and is developing capital markets rapidly, it’s developing a broader “middle-class” of 200 million or more. This is the group with a longer time-horizon that will force a diversification of institutions, challenge the old authoritarian structures as they demand more freedoms and opportunity. This is the next wave (if it appears) that can go about creating longer-term political stability.

Would Egypt have similar options?

Addition: Via Instapundit, more not promising reports.

Related On This Site: It seems like one point of discussion is what kind of Western ideas lead the debate: Some Quotations From Leo Strauss On Edmund Burke In ‘Natural Right And History’…Paul Berman At The New Republic: ‘From September 11 to the Arab Spring: Do Ideas Matter?’…french Liberte?: Charlie Rose Episode On Libya Featuring Bernhard Henri-Levy, Les Gelb And Others…

Yes, Edmund Burke opposed the French Revolution: Sunday Quotation: Edmund Burke On The French Revolution..