It’s not about the US, newcomer. It’s not about us. It’s about them. Obama is doing the one thing that the US never does. Stay the fuck out of other people’s business. While more and more firmly, calling for human rights to be maintained.
I’m pretty sure the backchannels are burning, but right now? It’s about the Egyptians.
I disagree US should stay away.
You may not take me seriously but the rest of the world sees US as the ultimate hope. Who else to call on Mubarak to listen to the voice of people but US?
It’s not about staying away but doing the right thing. Isn’t that the American way?
I for one do not want the World void of US influence - it’s just sometimes they should do what is expected from the World’s leader. And with all due respect to back-channels but in the age of WikiLeaks I don’t hold my breath for those to resolve anything.
Is it wrong of me to notice from all those protesters that Egyptians are a very good looking people. Yowzaa
Not really. Talking about it is the American way, but when it comes to action we always support the side we think will be friendlier to us. Sometimes that’s Le People, and sometimes it’s not. Usually, not. And especially not in the Middle East.
Not that every other country doesn’t do the same thing, of course.
yes, quite a coincidence, isn’t it?
Obama is not going to go in and escort Mubarak off the premises. Be real. Instead it is being made clear in public statements that Mubarak needs to leave and that a peaceful transition is needed. The details of that need to worked out in back channels.
Will Sulieme be a transitional president with fairly prompt elections? Or will ElBaradei be agreed to by the military? What sort of timetable?
My guess is that Mubarak leaves, with the US’s facilitation, Sulieme becomes the transitional president as is constitutional, with the agreement that ElBaradei is made Prime Minister and that elections are set for a very near term.
And agreed, less because it is right, than because it is the least unstable path forward.
We’ll see. Interesting times.
Agreed. Do you intend this to be a statement of the way things are or the way that things should be?
Both Clinton and Obama have publicly stated that there needs to be a peaceful transition to a democratically elected government.
Since Mubarak holding power does not represent a “peaceful transition,” they have made the U.S. position clear without getting trapped into a statement that Mubabrak must leave–a declaration that would immediately prompt others to demand to know the timeline for Mubarak’s departure, followed by claims that the U.S. was “forcing” him out and “interfering” with the Egyptian government.
They have now done the best they could for this specific point. If they had done less, they would be accused of supporting Mubarak. If they had done more, they would be accused of meddling.
Or there is a real fear that another strongman could arise from the chaos. Say another military man whose just there to “restore order”.
That is at least partly because they are, at this time in history, a very young people, a Boomer-like demographic bulge having lowered the average age. And apparently Egypt’s surplus of college-educated, unemployed young men are at the forefront of this revolution, to the extent anyone is. And their young wives/girlfriends are out there with them. It’s like if the youth revolution American radicals dreamed of in the 1960s were actually happening now in Egypt. Without the sexuality, drugs, or counterculture. And without leftist politics – in fact, there is as yet no clear content of their politics, beyond Mubarak-must-go. Also, without the pacifism even in theory.
How about, the people?
We get BBC instead of CNN, and they seem to be doing a good job on this. I can only hope they’re being accurate, because they royally fucked up coverage of the Bangkok riots last year. They truly seemed to turn black into white, and their “analyses” displayed an almost complete ignorance of background events leading up to the trouble. There was a huge local outcry again them in the aftermath, by expats and Thais alike. Hope the Beeb’s not screwing this one up.
I’m another one who’s surprised Mubarak is 82. Turns 83 in May. He’s stayed so much under the radar that I’ve not given him much thought, although I did know he was in his 50s when he assmed the Pharaohship.
Amazing though it may seem, Egyptians are not all identical drones.
Yeah, and you know the guy in this picture is saying, “check me out; I got it going on…”
??? Jaysus that’s some blinkered thinking. Over the years I have read lots of criticisms of AJ, but not that it’s “state owned” has anything much to do with them. And here is two Israeli arties that came up on my Guardian news feed:
Israel thinks Mubarek is just peaches, becomes sole non Arab voice calling to support dictatorship and Egypt having shot at Democracy = Iran 1979.
I’d say Israel and its press view the Arab world through a very peculiar lens. If you just view these events through that lens, well that’s a mighty skewed view.
The adage, hammer, only tool…
The US and every other country will look out for its direct interests. Nothing wrong with that. How those interests are interpreted and whether some forward thinking and risk taking enters into it (like the US & UK abandoning their fear of ANC from the old commie days) or whether it is purely defence driven and conservative, well that’s another matter.
The rest of the world does not see the US as “the ultimate hope” - jaysus get a bloody grip. The US in Egypt is clearly a major broker, Billion odd a year to the Egyptian security forces makes them that, but " ultimate hope" is really blinkered.
The “state owned” is the *source *of the criticisms - AJ broadcasts whatever serves the policy of its owner, the Emir of Qatar. I thought that was common knowledge.
As for your examples from the Israeli press - the first was a simple report on certain Israeli government actions, and the second was an opinion piece from the avowedly right-wing (and second-rate) Jerusalem Post. I suggest you read some Ron Ben Yishai or Nahum Barnea instead. Israeli Arab-affair journalists are Arabic-speaking, have an encyclopedic knowledge of Arab politics and have an in-depth understanding of Arab culture. As I’ve said before, Israel is a Middle Eastern country. Why should we have less of an understanding of the Middle East than other Middle Eastern countries do? We fucking live here.
Yeah I know who owns it mate, but its ownership seems to my reading not to be the fundamental to the substantive criticisms of AJ. You evidently have different views.
Never said anything about less understanding, I wrote something about blinkered views. That is not by a long English mile synonymous. This isn’t a thread about Israel so I’ll just leave it at that.
At what point do we come to realize that our meddling in other nations is more to our detriment than our benefit? :rolleyes:
Yeah that Marshall Plan caused all sorts of trouble …
And the Operation Ajax led to an outpouring of democracy.