Failing Islamic States - 2011

[George Wallace]

This may be worth some contemplation.  What real credibility does the MSM have in shaping the history or nations?  Does this article point at a possibility that Media moguls may have some power to shape the direction politics will be played out in nations?  Could the media be a tool of a powerful individual or organization to direct certain populations in a direction that would shift the political orientation of a nation?  Can this be taken further to affect whole Regions or Continents or more?  Has the MSM become so finely polished as to become a mass propaganda tool for those who have the financial clout and an agenda?  In the case here, with Al-Jazeera owned by the emir of Qatar, Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, we have the question being posed to us. 

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

A Voice as Powerful as Countries



Can Al-Jazeera Topple Governments?

02/08/2011
By Matthias Gebauer and Yassin Musharbash
SPIEGEL ONLINE


LINK

The wave of protests in the Arab world has highlighted the power of Al-Jazeera, which has unparalleled influence in the Middle East. It has been banned from reporting on the unrest in Egypt, where its reporters have been targeted by Mubarak supporters. Governments in the region fear the station could be their undoing.


It is 10:22 a.m. and 7 seconds in Doha in the Emirate of Qatar, according to the red digital numbers on the studio clock. It's an hour earlier in Cairo. The anchorwoman, sitting in a sky-blue studio, is just switching over to the Egyptian capital, where several people were killed and wounded the night before in brutal attacks by regime loyalists against opponents of President Hosni Mubarak. Al-Jazeera is showing the images of the street fighting once again.

A professor is on the phone from Cairo. He is so distraught that the anchorwoman in Doha can hardly interject her questions as he continues to speak. Both the anchorwoman and the professor are speaking very loudly. On top of that, there are the images of violence and the news updates running across the bottom of the screen in red lettering, like warnings from another world -- a world descending into chaos. The Arab world is in crisis. Anyone watching Al-Jazeera at this moment understands that fact immediately. And a lot of people watch Al-Jazeera.

No other Arab TV network, no daily newspaper and no radio station reaches as many of the Arab world's 360 million people. Al-Jazeera's Arabic-language station is broadcast into about 50 million households.

The network is powerful in the Arab world, where it has more influence than CNN or the BBC. It determines which images are important for the people in the region -- and which emotions these images trigger in Tunisia, Egypt or Saudi Arabia or elsewhere

Political Factor

Al-Jazeera isn't just a news network, but also a political factor -- and one with a sense of mission. Its editors are particularly zealous in scrutinizing secular regimes like Mubarak's. Al-Jazeera is generally pan-Arab, but there is also a pro-Islamist spectrum within the network.

About two weeks ago, when Al-Jazeera revealed that the PLO delegation was allegedly prepared to make extensive concessions in its negotiations with Israel, the main beneficiary of the report was the radical Islamist group Hamas, which favors confrontation instead of cooperation with Israel.

In airing the story, Al-Jazeera set the stage for days of accusations. The PLO already accuses the network of waging a campaign against it and supporting Hamas with propaganda. And as nonpartisan as the network purports to be, it is certainly not entirely without bias.

Al-Jazeera seems to have been getting even more powerful of late -- so powerful, in fact, that governments are now asking themselves whether the network has the power to incite popular uprisings in the Arab world.

The Egyptian regime was hunting down journalists last week, in an apparent effort to prevent the world from witnessing its thugs attacking the protesters. German journalists were also affected. An employee of the ZDF television network spent 20 hours in jail. And during the ZDF news show "Heute Journal," a laser pointer was aimed at a correspondent who was reporting live from Cairo.

'Why Are You Breaking the Law?'

The Qatar-based network was also affected. The Al-Jazeera office in Cairo was vandalized last Friday, an act the network blames on Mubarak supporters. But the reprisals had already begun at about 1:00 p.m. on the previous Monday, when four soldiers burst into a room on the 24th floor of the Ramses Hilton Hotel, from which all major TV networks are running their live reporting operations. The hotel is very close to Tahrir Square and offers a view of the center of the uprising. The soldiers, wielding Kalashnikov rifles, immediately pushed their way to the balcony, knocked over Al-Jazeera's cameras and began searching the room and collecting passports and mobile phones.

One of the uniformed men shouted at the journalists, saying: "Why are you breaking the law? You know perfectly well that we have closed your office here, and that you no longer have a license." Six employees were taken downstairs in a service elevator. The soldiers, their weapons at the ready, urged the reporters to hurry.

An army colonel, speaking politely but loudly, explained his quandary to the six journalists. "I know you're just doing your job," he snapped at the reporters, "but by doing your job you make my work more than difficult."

The journalists were released, but not before the colonel had confiscated their equipment.

Rough Treatment

But it is questionable just what benefits the regime will obtain through its rough treatment of journalists. In Tunisia, the government tossed out Al-Jazeera's journalists shortly before it was overthrown, but to no avail. A Tunisian anchorman for the network made arrangements for Lotfi Hajji, an old friend, to report from a secret location in Tunisia. In addition to being a journalist, Hajji also describes himself as a human rights activist, according to the New York Times.

When the uprising began, Tunisians sent him homemade videos documenting incidents of police brutality. Al-Jazeera broadcast the videos. More and more videos turned up, and they too were broadcast. Did the overthrow of the Tunisian leader, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, originate in Doha? Could the same fate be in store for Egyptian President Mubarak?

'We Don't Wish to Take Any Sides'

The Al-Jazeera newsroom, the nerve center of the network, where all editorial decisions are made, could not offer a greater contrast to the feverish nature of the news broadcasts. The journalists greet each quietly when they arrive at work, and they walk slowly across the pale green carpet. No one here runs or shouts.

It is 10:35 a.m. and 45 seconds when Mustafa Souag walks into his office. The tall man is wearing a light green suit, and he carefully hangs his jacket onto a coat hanger. Souag is the director of news at Al-Jazeera's mother ship, its Arabic-language station. This is also the center of power, where decisions are made on what is important in the Arab world. In contrast, Al-Jazeera's English-language station is more relaxed and aloof, more like CNN or the BBC.

Souag uses a pen with the network's logo on it, and the logo is also printed onto a package of tissues on his desk. Al-Jazeera is Souag's life. He seems modest at first, when asked whether his TV news machine has political power and whether it can topple regimes.

The question amuses him. "Lotfi Hajji is not some kind of Superman who can cover all of Tunisia for us by himself!" But how much influence did the station have on the revolt in Tunisia? Souag dodges the question to a certain degree. "Academics should look into that. We are not politicians. And we don't wish to take any sides. Instead, our goal is diligent reporting -- and I believe that's enough."

Multiple Perspectives

The newsman is a native Algerian and an intellectual. He once taught literature at university, and later worked for NBC and the BBC. He is intimately familiar with the standards Western critics apply to evaluate his network, and he believes that Al-Jazeera meets those standards. "We believe in the right of citizens to information, and we show our audience what freedom of opinion means every day," he says. "Sometimes we are accused of not being balanced. But when we ask for evidence (of the alleged bias), we don't get much in response. After all, we are constantly showing various perspectives and standpoints."

Al-Jazeera has been accused of everything since it was founded in 1996. And for every claim that is targeted at the station, there is invariably someone else who accuses it of the exact opposite. Some people say it is too tolerant of Islamists, while others claim it treats them unfairly. Some say it allows itself to be influenced by Arab autocrats, while others accuse it of not respecting them. Some say it only portrays the side of Arab victims, while others disagree completely, saying that it talks with Israelis far too much. Al-Jazeera seems to be the network that no one likes but everyone watches.

Does Al-Jazeera really take its motto ("the one opinion -- and the other") seriously? It is unquestionably true that, unlike the state-controlled media in the Arab world, where censorship is standard, Al-Jazeera does not ignore the other opinion. But it's also clear that the network has obvious biases.

For example, the network's sympathy for the protesters was clear in its reporting on the revolution in Tunisia and the current uprising in Egypt. When regime supporters attacked regime opponents in Cairo on Thursday of last week, a message periodically appeared at the bottom of the Al-Jazeera screen stating that the demonstrators had asked the army for "protection against a massacre."

But those who criticize Al-Jazeera for being too emotional and biased often forget that Western media are not immune from such things either: At around the same time, CNN correspondent Ben Wedeman sent out a Twitter message that a "government-sanctioned mass lynch" was "underway" in Tahrir Square.

'Special Responsibility'

People from more than 60 countries work at Al-Jazeera in Doha. "We have men and women, people on the right and the left, Islamists, pan-Arabists and nationalists," says Souag. He is proud of this diversity. Perhaps it is also a means of protection against too much partisanship at the network.

At Al-Jazeera, the management decrees how the network is to refer to specific crises, as an uprising, intifada, revolt or revolution. The current policy for the events in Egypt is to call them "popular protests". Of course this is discussed, says the news chief, "but then everyone drinks coffee together." He calls this the "spirit of Al-Jazeera."

Whether the network will have a similar impact on the Egyptian revolts as it did in Tunisia is hard to say. It is clear, however, that as long as it assigns top priority to the protests, the Arab world as a whole will remain caught up in the excitement. Al-Jazeera shows Arabs what other Arabs are saying, without translation, without filters, unabbreviated and in the raw.

People throw themselves at the Al-Jazeera cameras and weep uncontrollably, curse, scream and beg their Arab brothers and sisters for help. "The fact that we have influence isn't a problem," Souag says nonchalantly. "It just means that we have a special responsibility."

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

More on LINK


Short history of Al-Jazeera

 

[The Bread Guy]

Good piece, GW.

While media, publicly and privately owned, help shape messaging and the info environment, I don't think they, alone, can "flick the switch" for regime change - there has to be pent-up frustration in the population to get that going. 

How much of a role does media play in the equation?  Depends on the situation and all the other factors affecting it - in Egypt's case, I'm going to estimate 25-30%, if only because of the restrictions placed on reporters in country (at least in place before the worst of the fracas).  My gut tells me much of the avalanche effect is from human momentum + behind-the-scenes organizing/driving.

 

[George Wallace]

Here is a perspective from a Westerner who has lived in Egypt for five decades and witnessed the many changes in the population and government over time.



Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Egypt's Blight


A Correspondent Reminisces on 56 Years in Cairo

02/08/2011
An Essay By Volkhard Windfuhr
SPIEGEL ONLINE


LINK

SPIEGEL's longtime Cairo correspondent has spent more than five decades living in the city. He describes Egypt's decline under a leader obsessed with discipline, calm and stability who lost touch with his people and allowed the Arab world's most vibrant country to stagnate.

Volkhard Windfuhr, 74, has been living in Cairo since 1955. He joined SPIEGEL as its Middle East correspondent in 1974. Since then, he has reported on the major crises in the region and met and interviewed nearly all Arab leaders, including the three Egyptian presidents Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak. In an essay for SPIEGEL, he describes the changes that have taken shape in Egypt in the decades he has spent in the country.
_______________________________________________________________________

I am among the oldest in the crowd to cross the Nile Bridge and enter Tahrir Square this Wednesday morning. I have lived in Cairo longer than nearly everyone else who strolls along peacefully beside me: women, men, young people, old people, educated and less educated, workers, preachers and engineers. We talk about this and that. I know their language. I know their jokes. It is also my language, and they are my jokes, too.

But what befell us three hours later, seemingly out of nowhere, shattered my image of this country in which I have lived for the past 56 years. This was not the country I know and love.

"Al-Maut lil-Kilab!" shouted two young men who suddenly appeared in front of the Sudan Air offices on Talat Harb Street, with their fists flying: "Death to the dogs!" One wielded a butcher knife, the other started beating up a demonstrator. "Down with the regime" it said on the cardboard sign that he tore from the man's hands. At first, I didn't understand what was happening. What did these people want? Where did this aggression come from?

But then people started to scream, horses and camels galloped across the square, and it slowly dawned on me: This was a gang of thugs sent to break up a peaceful demonstration. They tore off women's blouses and headscarves, knocked over people in wheelchairs, and even kicked children aside.

I fled to an archway and took a closer look at them: They were, without a doubt, men who belonged to the regime -- some had even sewn onto their jackets the emblem of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP). I know that this government doesn't tread lightly when it breaks up demonstrations -- but having such a mob rush a crowd like the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse? I have never experienced anything like it. An older man, a law professor who had been hit on the back of his head, fled with me into a small side street and said: "I don't understand my people anymore." They were my thoughts precisely.

I feel ashamed of this country, which I see as my second homeland. How could the government allow something like this to happen? How does the tank commander feel who is not allowed to prevent the massacre? What higher standard allows soldiers to look away who only one day before were hailed as the people's protectors?

A Uniquely Disarming Open-Heartedness

I have experienced tumultuous crowds in Egypt before -- also in Palestine, Lebanon, Sudan, Iraq, Algeria, Tunisia and Iran. But the emotions of my fellow Egyptians were always different: softer, less aggressive. When the Iraqis overthrew their monarchy in 1958, they killed their 23-year-old king and dragged his body through the streets of Baghdad. In 1952, the Egyptians sent off their last ruler, King Farouk I, from the port of Alexandria with gun salutes and military honors. And when the man detested by the putsch officers died in exile in Italy, al-Ahram, Cairo's largest daily newspaper, appeared with mourning borders around the front page. Syrian and Iraqi friends teased me as a "friend of the Egyptian wimps." I took that as a compliment. Perhaps it is the Egyptians' uniquely disarming open-heartedness that has made it so easy to settle down here.

"Family and religion are what the Egyptians value most of all," Mubarak's predecessor Sadat once said. He could have put at the top of the list their sense of community, which has shaped the rhythm of life here since the age of the pharaohs and, based on a neighborly division of labor, allowed them to refine their irrigation systems.

Feb. 2, 2011 represents a decisive and rupturous departure from this tradition. It contradicts everything that I have experienced in this country to date. I remember the helpless rage of the Egyptians in late October 1956. I was riding on a tram from my neighborhood in eastern Cairo to visit a schoolmate on Zamalek, the big Island on the Nile, where large numbers of foreigners had always lived and had their schools -- including the German school that I attended back then. It was dark, and the streetcar halted at a stop in front of the Lutheran Church on Gala Street, flanked by the publishing houses of the two large daily newspapers, al-Ahram and al-Achbar. Then the tram started to move again, but shuddered to such a lurching stop again that I fell to the floor.

Then I saw it: Red, blue, green and yellow flares burst in the sky. I screamed, but the attendant had a smile on his face as he pulled me back down to my seat. "Alaab," he said, "fireworks". A strong blast of air, glaring flashes of light and earsplitting detonations ensued. The British Royal Air Force had launched air strikes on Cairo, marking the beginning of the Suez crisis.

Polite and Always Ready to Lend a Hand

During the Suez War, the Egyptians remained -- just as I was also to experience them later time and again -- polite and always ready to lend a hand. And although there was a great deal of anger toward the British and the French, foreigners were left alone.

When US President Dwight D. Eisenhower ended the war, the British and the French withdrew in humiliation and the founder of the state of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, had to retreat from the Sinai, which his forces had overrun right up to the Suez Canal. It was the first time that the Americans intervened in the Middle East. A new era had begun.

The Americans are by no means as hated as they are often portrayed to be. Not even Nasser wanted to break with Washington. "They don't understand that we have thrown out the British and taken the Suez Canal away from them," he said. "They don't understand that we want to be independent and refuse to be told what to do again by a foreign power."

'Stay with Us, You Are One of Us'

When I worked for Radio Cairo in the 1960s and was asked to act as an interpreter for a conversation between Nasser and East German leader Walter Ulbricht, the Egyptian president firmly gripped my shoulder and said: "Make this precisely clear to your listeners -- that's something people simply have to understand." The eldest of Nasser's two daughters even studied at the American University in Cairo, in the midst of the Cold War.

Nasser didn't woo the people -- he had already won their hearts. Despite the undeniable brutality of the dictatorship that he imposed, and the darkness of his torture chambers, he conveyed an undisputed sense of self-esteem to the barefoot masses. "Irfaa rasak, ja achi," -- "Lift your head, brother!" is how he began his speeches.

Nothing could dent his charisma, not even the most brazen lies told by his administration -- nor the devastating defeat in the Six-Day War. When I left my apartment at 9 a.m. on June 5, 1967, and stepped onto the street, marching music and a special news report droned from the loudspeakers that were installed everywhere in the city at the time. "The Zionist enemy attacked Egypt early today. But we are prevailing. We have already shot down 186 Israeli aircraft." We believed what was said that morning, even I did.

But towards noon we knew that Israel had destroyed all of Egypt's airbases, overrun the Sinai, taken tens of thousands of soldiers prisoner, and was marching toward the Suez Canal. It was the end. Egypt wept. Four days of mourning and dismay.

On June 10, a broken Nasser addressed his people. "I assume full responsibility and shall resign." Everyone ran into the streets, people hugged each other, then they chanted: "Maalisch," "It doesn't matter" -- I can't find the right words to accurately translate this sentiment here -- "Stay with us, you are one of us."

That was the big-heartedness of the Egyptians. That was Nasser. When he died three years later, some people were so distraught that they took their own lives.

Peace with Israel

His successor Sadat was loyal. For years, he had his own presidential portrait hanging next to an oversized picture of Nasser. Sadat didn't come into his own until 1973, when, despite the heavy casualties that this entailed, he launched a successful attack across the Suez Canal during the Yom Kippur War. Sadat had plans for this victory. Negotiating from a position of strength -- he wanted to broker peace with Israel. And he was successful. I accompanied him on his trip to Jerusalem and reported on his speech to the Knesset.

Sadat was a visionary, a talented speaker who could win people over. And when he finally turned his back on Nasser's failed pan-Arabism, when he made Nasser's "United Arab Republic" into the state of "Egypt" once again, the Egyptians cried. These were tears of pride. With this move, he struck a fundamental chord with his people: We are the descendents of mankind's oldest culture.

Initially, the peace accord with Israel was very popular. Although the stern Syrians and the defiant Iraqis threw Egypt out of the Arab League, the Egyptians believed that peace had now been brought to the Middle East. Even the Palestinians believed that at the time. But the peace process came to a standstill. Sadat's good friend Menachem Begin annexed Arab East Jerusalem -- and humiliated the "hero of the war and the peace," as the Egyptian leader was known.

Bread Riots and Political Islam

That wasn't, however, what alienated Sadat from the Egyptians. It was the fact that he lost touch with his people. It was his thoughtless privatization of over 6,000 state-owned enterprises, a move which benefited the fat upper crust of society while the poor went hungry and the first bread riots erupted in 1977. And it was political Islam, which he, like most US allies at the time, gave free rein to in a bid to counter the communist menace.

In the last interview of his life, he vehemently denied that he was under threat. "No, the misguided youth know that I am their father. Sons don't kill their fathers," he said four days before he was assassinated. On Oct. 6, 1981, during a parade to celebrate the eighth anniversary of his victory in the Yom Kippur War, six men left the military procession, approached the stands, and shot down Sadat. His vice president, who threw himself on the ground to avoid the hail of bullets, survived: Hosni Mubarak.

A Man Who Has Failed to Speak to the Hearts

The third president of modern Egypt had neither Nasser's charisma nor Sadat's visionary strength. I have interviewed him on a number of occasions, and no matter how disappointed I am with him today, I cannot help but give him credit for his accomplishments. Mubarak stabilized the peace that was brokered by Sadat -- in fact, he kept his predecessor's word with a degree of reliability that is uncommon in the Middle East. He expanded tourism to make it the largest source of income, and he improved the infrastructure. I had to wait 12 years before I received my first telephone connection in the late 1960s; it took four days for my first cell phone to be activated in 1996.

But in his 30 years in office, Mubarak hasn't managed a single time to speak to the hearts of his people. He lacks this ability. He is not a national hero. When he nevertheless tries to adopt this posture, as he did during his speech last Tuesday, it seems phony and rehearsed. The air chief marshall has always remained an officer -- a commander who is concerned with discipline, calm and stability -- which eventually led to stagnation. Egypt was always the most vibrant of the Arab countries, but a blight has descended on this state during Mubarak's 30 years of rule.

Mubarak no longer saw the suffering and the lack of freedom that spread under his rule. When I once called him "pharaoh" after an interview at his farm on the Mediterranean coast, west of Alexandria, he was annoyed. "What do you mean by that?" I reassured him: "The pharaohs were the backbone of Egyptian culture. Even your predecessor Nasser allowed himself to be portrayed as a pharaoh." This prompted only a brief smile.

Nasser gave us Nasserism; Sadat left behind an agreement that brought his people peace and earned him the Nobel Peace Prize -- but Mubarak has failed magnificently. It is bitter, also for me, that he will depart with a question that has no answer: Why doesn't he step down in a manner that is worthy of Egypt?

More on LINK

 

[George Wallace]

The West, which includes us, is now facing a new dilemma; what to do about former members of the ruling factions who are fleeing these countries.  Will they be offered asylum or be denied entry?  Will there be problems with new governments in these nations demanding the return of those who have fled to face criminal charges?  This is not a new problem, but then again society has changed and perhaps lessons learned from past experiences in dealing with these matters will have also changed our attitudes towards offering foreign despots refuge in our nations.


Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

The Despot Dilemma


Germany Divided over How to Deal with Dictators

02/08/2011
By Sebastian Fischer, Björn Hengst and Veit Medick
SPIEGEL ONLINE


LINK

Speculation about Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's possible departure for Germany for medical treatment is putting pressure on Berlin. The case highlights the German government's problems in dealing with autocratic leaders: It craves stability but doesn't want to be seen as propping up dictators.

The Max Grundig Clinic is an exclusive getaway 800 meters (2,600 feet) above sea level in the idyllic surroundings of the Black Forest in southwestern Germany. The luxury private hospital has large suites and oil paintings on the walls. It proudly trumpets the claim that it provides "an ideal atmosphere for recuperation, relaxation and reorientation."

Could it also be a place for Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to retreat to?

The long-standing autocrat may soon check into the clinic in Bühl near the city of Baden-Baden. According to information obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE, exploratory talks are already underway about a possible stay by Mubarak in Germany. The scenario is certainly attractive: Egypt would get rid of its unpopular president, and Mubarak could make a dignified departure.

But it's still not clear whether the man himself is even interested in this exit strategy. In fact, it currently looks increasingly likely that he could tighten his grip on the reins of power.

Facilitating a Political Transition

Nevertheless, the mere possibility that Germany might host a former dictator has sparked fierce political debate in the country. Martin Schulz, the head of the Socialist group in the European Parliament, has nothing against such a retreat. "Why not?" he says. "I'm in favor of any moves that will allow him to relinquish power in a dignified manner and facilitate the political transition in Egypt."

"The German government should discreetly signal to Mubarak that he can come to Germany if he wants to," Elmar Brok, a member of the European Parliament for the center-right Christian Democrats, told the Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper. "If there is a way to achieve a peaceful transition in Egypt, then one should do it."

Other members of Germany's governing Christian Democrats and their business-friendly coalition partners, the Free Democratic Party, have voiced similar sentiments about a possible hospital stay for Mubarak in their country.

But many others oppose the very notion. Green Party floor leader Jürgen Trittin, for example, told the Hannoversche Allgemeine newspaper that Germany should not provide Mubarak with an easy way out of his predicament. "That's about the last thing the Egyptian people expect us to do," he says.

The Green Party co-leader Cem Özdemir is also skeptical. "Care must be taken," he says, "to ensure that Mubarak doesn't use a stay at a German hospital to duck his responsibilities toward the people of Egypt. Germany cannot become a luxury sanctuary for deposed despots."

Rainer Stinner, a foreign policy expert with the FDP, told the Frankfurter Rundschau that a stay in Germany on medical grounds would be acceptable. "But exile in Germany would be very problematic," he added. He argued that there were other countries that could take Mubarak.

Softly-Softly Approach

The dispute perfectly highlights the dilemma that Germany's diplomats face in dealing with the Egyptian autocrat and other dictators in the region. These regimes have been tolerated for decades as part of a quid pro quo for cooperation on security issues. These dubious pacts worked fine for a long time. But now uprisings in various Arab countries have turned the arrangement into a political albatross around the German government's neck. After all, years of close ties with shady leaders can't be undone overnight.

This was most recently evident at the Munich Security Conference this weekend, where not a single minister, prime minister or head of state so much as mentioned the Cairo demonstrators' central demand, namely that Mubarak resign immediately.

The German government is well aware of the possible dangers of such a move. One cabinet member has already admitted the government is skating on thin ice. Chancellor Angela Merkel has also suggested as much. The German chancellor argues in favor of a realpolitik approach, but insists she is always very reserved in her contact with authoritarian leaders like Libya's Moammar Gadhafi and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.

How, then, should autocrats be treated? Should Berlin continue with business as usual, or has the time come to reassess its softly-softly attitude to often brutal dictators?

The proponents of the former approach see no reason to change the way autocratic leaders are treated, and believe Germany should carry on as before. In other words, they want Germany's politicians to go on cooperating with despots behind the scenes and only call for democracy in pious-sounding public speeches at most. The advantage of this approach is that Germany can rely on a certain amount of stability in the countries in question, which in turn favors security and trade.

Political scientist Christian Hacke is one of those calling for such pragmatism. "We have to weigh up the moral imperatives and other interests on a case-by-case basis," the foreign-policy expert says. "You can't generalize. Whether it's dealing with Tunisia, Egypt, Syria or Yemen, the German government should never decide abstractly, but rather based on the individual situation."

Hacke says that such a policy has ensured that few mistakes were made in recent years. If anything, he says, German foreign policy was "too steeped in moral considerations." Hacke points to Afghanistan, where he says people initially argued about rights for women and about new schools but gave too little thought to strategic geopolitical considerations.

"There are no grounds for a fundamental shift in German foreign policy," argues Ruprecht Polenz, a Christian Democratic politician who chairs the parliamentary foreign-affairs committee. Whether it's China, Russia, Uzbekistan or Egypt, "the strategy will always change depending on the relevant country's size and significance." One thing is clear, he says: "There can be no such thing as 'business as usual' when dealing with authoritarian regimes."

A Clean Break with Cairo?

The opponents of Germany's previous approach, however, feel that history has vindicated them. They are now calling for a complete overhaul of Germany's attitude to autocrats -- even if they're not totally sure what they want in its place. Jürgen Trittin is one of these revisionists. The Green politician is constantly criticizing Chancellor Merkel's handling of the Egyptian crisis. "The German government must now unambiguously demand a peaceful transition," he recently said. "That is why we want Mr. Mubarak to resign." Trittin even proposes considering a freeze on European Union aid to pressure the Egyptian president into leaving. It's an argument in favor of a clean break with the regime in Cairo.

That's something Trittin's Green Party colleagues have always shied away from, however, not least because Merkel's cabinet wasn't the first to find itself backed into a corner over the despot dilemma. The former coalition government of the center-left Social Democrats and Greens, which was in power between 1998 and 2005, turned a blind eye to Mubarak's transgressions. "We knew human rights were being trampled on in Egypt," admits Kerstin Müller, who was a senior official in the German Foreign Ministry under then-Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, also a member of the Green Party.

In a recent appearance on a popular German television talk show, Jürgen Chrobog, another former senior Foreign Ministry official from the Fischer era, criticized the fact that "stability is still our number-one priority." He added that Mubarak had to go "immediately." Chrobog said he had nothing against Germany wanting stable partners, but argued that Berlin should have spoken out more strongly about conditions in Egypt. "After all, it goes without saying that we knew about the human rights abuses there."

Germany's Social Democrats have also become self-critical. One of those speaking out is Gernot Erler, who was a senior official in the Foreign Ministry under former Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. Erler says that Mubarak played such a pivotal role in the Middle East peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians that people didn't look more closely at his domestic policies. It was "a high price to pay," as Erler now readily admits. Worse still, the pact with the despot didn't pay off. "The peace process is in a disastrous state. That's the hardest thing to accept," Erler concedes.

West's Credibility at Risk

But what does the German chancellor want? As is often the case, she's keeping her cards close to her chest, and waiting to see how things develop in North Africa. Even after Mubarak leaves power, which he must do eventually, there will probably be a new strongman in place that Berlin will have to deal with.

Foreign-policy expert Hacke doubts Egypt has the prerequisites for the hoped-for civil society and liberal democracy. "We shouldn't rule out the possibility of an enlightened military dictatorship with greater legal security," he says.

One thing is certain: Whoever comes to power in Cairo will be viewed much more critically in Berlin. Merkel and her colleagues have raised the bar, and the West won't tolerate another Mubarak. If it did, it would weaken its own credibility even further -- and sink deeper than ever into the despot dilemma.

SPIEGEL ONLINE editors Florian Gathmann and Philipp Wittrock contributed to this report.

Translated from the German by Jan Liebelt

More on LINK

 

[The Bread Guy]

Shared in accordance with the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright  Act:

This from the Ahram Online Egyptian news site**:

Suez Canal Company workers from the cities of Suez, Port Said, and Ismailia began an open-ended sit in today. Disruptions to shipping movements, as well as disasterous econmic losses, are expected if the strike continues. Over 6000 protesters have agreed that they will not go home today once their shift is over and will continue their sit-in in front of the company's headquarters until their demands are met. They are protesting against poor wages and deteriorating health and working conditions.

A bit more from Reuters-Africa:

Strikes by workers in companies in the Suez Canal zone will not affect Suez Canal operations and movement of ships, a senior official said on Tuesday.

"The strike by companies will not affect the operation of the Suez Canal and movement of ships. These companies work in areas far from the canal zone and movement of ships," the official told Reuters. Around 3,000 workers in companies owned by the Canal authorities and based in Ismailia and Suez had gone on strike on Tuesday over pay and conditions. Workers in Canal-owned companies in Port Said will go on strike on Wednesday.

More from businessweek.com:

Shipping on Egypt’s Suez Canal, used to carry about 8 percent of global seaborne trade, is transiting on schedule after service workers linked to the waterway began striking, the Suez Canal Authority said.

Workers from Suez Canal Co. began a sit-in today, Al-Ahram newspaper reported earlier today in its online edition, without saying where it got the information. The 6,000 workers are from Suez, Port Said and Ismailia, Al-Ahram said.

“This doesn’t have anything to do with Suez Canal traffic and the canal is operating normally,” Mohamed Motair, director of companies at the Suez Canal Authority, said by phone. The striking employees belong to seven service companies linked to the waterway and are not involved in operations, he said ....

** Alexa.com, whois and siteanalytics.complete.com information on ahream.org.eg site.

 

[George Wallace]

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Middle East

Jordanian Beduin tribes demand political reforms
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH 
02/08/2011 22:22
The Jerusalem Post

LINK

Tribal leaders launch attack on Queen Rania, who is of Palestinian descent, accusing her of corruption and interference.

In an unprecedented move, leaders of powerful Jordanian Beduin tribes have warned King Abdullah II that he risks a popular revolt unless he implements political reforms.

The tribal leaders also launched a scathing attack on Queen Rania, who is of Palestinian descent, and accused her of financial corruption and interfering in the government’s running of the kingdom.

The attack on the queen reflects increased tensions between Jordanians and Palestinians living in the country.

The queen, “her sycophants and the power centers that surround her” are dividing Jordan, said the statement signed by 36 tribal leaders.

The statement likened Rania to Leila Trabelsi, the wife of ousted Tunisian President Zine el Abideen Bin Ali.

The Beduin leaders urged the king to fight against corruption and those who have “looted the country and public funds.” A Jordanian news website that published their strongly worded statement said it had come under attack by “international hackers.”

Some Jordanians, however, held the mukhabarat, or General Intelligence service, responsible.

“The Tunisian and Egyptian hurricane will come to Jordan, sooner or later,” said the statement.

“We express regret over the fact that the regime has surrounded itself with a group of corrupt commercial partners.

Jordan is suffering from a regime and government crisis, as well as a crisis of corruption.”

The tribal leaders said that “people without freedom are a people without an identity, and a people without freedom and justice are a people without dignity. Political reform is now an urgent matter that cannot be delayed; holding the corrupt and the thieves accountable and freezing their assets, prohibiting them from traveling, are all part and parcel of political reform.”

The statement warned of an “explosion if poverty humiliates people.”

More on LINK

 

[George Wallace]

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Middle East

Gulf leaders hear rumblings of dissent

By ASSOCIATED PRESS 
02/08/2011 14:06

The Jerusalem Post

LINK

It's too early to predict if protests could rise across a region symbolized by its wealth, powerful sheiks and important US military footholds.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — There were only a few dozen Saudi women at a protest to demand the release of prisoners they claim are unfairly linked to militants. Yet the small act of defiance in Riyadh is part of a wider question for autocratic rulers in the Gulf who wonder if the ripples from Egypt could head their way.

It's too early to predict what — if any — street demonstrations could rise across a region symbolized by its skyscraper-studded wealth, super-powerful sheiks and monarchs and some of Washington's most important military footholds.

The failure to draw crowds at planned rallies in Syria last week also underscores that the protest fire from Tunisia and Egypt apparently can be stamped out by hard-line state security, which is also a hallmark of Gulf states.

But there's no shortage of hints that reform-seeking groups in the Gulf are trying to seize the moment.

The rare protest rally on Saturday in Saudi's capital came a week after Saudi activists launched a Facebook page demanding more jobs and political accountability in the world's biggest oil exporter. Calls on social media sites also have gone out for protests next week in Bahrain and next month in Kuwait — the two Gulf nations with the most active and organized political opposition.

Even the United Arab Emirates — with almost no public voice in decision-making — is urging for new faces on a 40-member government advisory panel in a bid to show a response to the upheavals that began in December in Tunisia and now grip Egypt.

"There will be pressures coming to the Gulf for reforms on things like corruption, abuses of power and a greater voice for civil society," said Mustafa Alani, a regional analyst at the Gulf Research Center in Dubai. "What happened in Tunis may make these ruling families somewhat more flexible to bend with the wind."

But Alani believes any calls for change will not include demands to topple the tribal-centric regimes.

"This is a red line because, simply, there are no alternatives," he said.

Still, even the smallest cracks in the Gulf status quo would be closely watched in the West, which has deep economic and military ties across the region. Washington also depends on its Arab allies in the Gulf as a front-line buffer against Iranian influence and as host for key Pentagon outposts, including major air bases and the US Navy's 5th Fleet headquarters in Bahrain.

It was a safe choice because the risk of political uncertainty is so low. Some of the Gulf dynasties stretch back to the region's hardscrabble past before oil was king. And their attitudes about sharing power remains generally rooted in desert tradition: keep the real decision-making in just a few hands.

Some nations, led by Kuwait, have brought in parliaments that can challenge ruling authorities. Others have advisory groups with limited clout such as the UAE and Qatar — whose state-founded Al-Jazeera network has been accused by some Arab leaders of fomenting protests with its blanket coverage of Tunisia and Egypt.

"This is the Achilles' heel of the Gulf," said Christopher Davidson, a Gulf expert at the University of Durham in Britain. "There might be belief in change in other parts of the Arab world, but they don't want it to get too close."

In some ways, it's already at their doorstep.

A Kuwaiti group calling itself Fifth Fence is using Twitter messages for calls to rise up against "undemocratic practices" by the government, which has been under increasing pressure from opposition lawmakers over allegations of fiscal abuse and attempts to roll back political freedoms.

On Sunday, Kuwait's rulers accepted the resignation of the scandal-battered interior minister in an apparent attempt to undercut the protest plans. It seems to have bought them some time.

The protest group had called for a rally outside parliament for Tuesday, but postponed it until March 8 "in response" to the interior minister stepping down. The statement, however, repeated its goal of forcing out the entire government.

In Bahrain, meanwhile, a Facebook page and other websites carry appeals for an anti-government demonstration on Feb. 14, the anniversary of the country's 2002 constitution that brought in an elected legislature and reforms such as allowing women to vote and run for office.

The tiny island kingdom has been the most volatile in the Gulf. Majority Shiites have long alleged discrimination and other abuses by Sunni rulers. A wave of arrests of Shiite activists last year touched off weeks of protests and clashes — and a highly sensitive trial of 25 Shiites accused of plotting against the state. The next trial session was initially set for Thursday, but has been postponed for Feb. 24.

"The Gulf states are not that far removed from what has happened in Tunisia and Egypt," said Ali Fakhro, a political analyst and commentator in Bahrain. "Why? Because all Arab youth have similar demands: jobs, freedom, a feeling they are not oppressed by their leaders. The Tunisian revolution, as well as Egypt, is spreading new principles and a new definition for Arab youth."

The impression of a political hunger in the Gulf can seem at odds with the widely held perception of a passive citizenry content with generous state handouts and cushy public sector jobs. Kuwait, for example, is giving every citizen the equivalent of about $3,600 and free food coupons this month to mark 50 years of independence and other anniversaries.

But Gulf governments are trying to shrink their bloated payrolls. They also face the lopsided demographics that fueled their stunning growth: a glut of foreign companies and workers that squeeze out opportunities for young locals.

The UAE and others are pressing to enforce quotas for businesses to hire nationals in an effort to avoid a backlash from university graduates with limited job options.

Last month, the New York-based group Human Rights Watch accused Gulf states of stepping up pressure on political activists, including blocking blogs and web forums.

The attention on human rights is "very, very new for the region," said Ahmed Mansour, a human rights activist and a blogger in the UAE. "But they are starting to express themselves."

More on LINK

 

[George Wallace]

An interesting claim to fame:


Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

International

Freed Google executive: I helped spark Egypt revolt
By ASSOCIATED PRESS 
02/08/2011 09:35

The Jerusalem Post

LINK

Marketing manager Wael Ghonim was held by Egyptian authorities for 12 days; says he was behind Facebook page that ignited demonstrations.

CAIRO — The young Google Inc. executive detained by Egyptian authorities for 12 days on Monday said he was behind the Facebook page that helped spark what he called "the revolution of the youth of the Internet."

Wael Ghonim, a marketing manager for the Internet company, wept throughout an emotional television interview just hours after he was freed on Monday. He described how he spent his entire time in detention blindfolded while his worried parents didn't know where he was. He insisted he had not been tortured and said his interrogators treated him with respect.

"This is the revolution of the youth of the Internet and now the revolution of all Egyptians," he said, adding that he was taken aback when the security forces holding him branded him a traitor.

"Anyone with good intentions is the traitor because being evil is the norm," he said. "If I was a traitor, I would have stayed in my villa in the Emirates and made good money and said like others, 'Let this country go to hell.' But we are not traitors," added Ghonim, an Egyptian who oversees Google's marketing in the Middle East and Africa from Dubai, one of the United Arab Emirates.

Ghonim has become a hero of the demonstrators since he went missing on Jan. 27, two days after the protests began. He confirmed reports by protesters that he was the administrator of the Facebook page "We are all Khaled Said" that was one of the main tools for organizing the demonstration that started the movement on Jan. 25.

Khaled Said was a 28-year-old businessman who died in June at the hands of undercover police, setting off months of protests against the hated police. The police have also been blamed for enflaming violence by trying to suppress these anti-government demonstrations by force.

Ghonim's whereabouts were not known until Sunday, when a prominent Egyptian businessman confirmed he was under arrest and would soon be released.

The unmasking of Ghonim as the previously unknown administrator of the Facebook page that started the protests could give the crowds someone to look to for inspiration to press on.

Whether Ghonim forcefully takes up that mantle remains to be seen, but he said repeatedly in Monday night's interview that he did not feel he was a hero.

"I didn't want anyone to know that I am the administrator," he said. "There are no heroes; we are all heroes on the street. And no one is on their horse and fighting with the sword."

The show commemorated some of those killed in the protests and showed their pictures during the interview, sending Ghonim into sobs just before he got up and walked out of the studio.

"I want to tell every mother and father: I am sorry. I swear it is not our fault. It is the fault of everyone who held on tight to authority and didn't want to let go," he said before cutting short the interview.

Ghonim looked exhausted and said he had been unable to sleep for 48 hours, but not because he was being mistreated.

He said he was snatched off the streets two days after the protests first erupted on Jan. 25. After he left a friend's house, four men surrounded him, pushed him to the ground and took him blindfolded to state security. He said he spent much of the following days blindfolded, with no news of the events on the street, being questioned.

In contrast, he said, in his release he was treated with respect. Just before he was freed, he said, he was brought before Interior Minister Mahmoud Wagdy — installed only days earlier in a government reshuffle — in his office. The minister "talked to me like an adult, not like someone of strength talking to someone weak" and then the new head of the National Democratic Party escorted him home.

"This is because of what the youth did in the street," he said in the interview on private station Dream 2 TV.

He said his interrogators were convinced that foreigners were backing the movement, but Ghonim asserted it was just young Egyptians "who love this country." He also sought to debunk the government's accusations that the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood, Mubarak's most bitter rival, was involved in planning the protests.

He referred to his arrest as a "kidnapping" and a "crime" but also sounded conciliatory, saying "this is not a time for settling accounts or cutting up the pie; this is Egypt's time."

He did forcefully place blame for the country's ills on Mubarak's National Democratic Party and said the good among them should abandon it and start something new to earn the people's respect.

"I don't want to see the logo of the NDP anywhere in the country," he said. "This party is what destroyed this country. The cadre in this party are filthy."

US-based Human Rights Watch told The Associated Press on Monday that two weeks of clashes have claimed at least 297 lives, by far the highest and most detailed toll released so far. It was based on visits to seven hospitals in three cities and the group said it was likely to rise.

While there was no exact breakdown of how many of the dead were police or protesters, "clearly, a significant number of these deaths are a result of the use of excessive and unlawful use of force by the police," said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director at Human Rights Watch.

More on LINK

 

[57Chevy]

Al-Qaeda calls for “holy war” in Egypt
article link (with video)

The Iraqi branch of al-Qaeda has entered the fray in Egypt, calling on the people demonstrating there to launch a “holy war” to install a government that will enact Sharia law.

It calls on the Egyptian people to abandon the paths of “pagan nationalism” and “disappointing democracy”.

It is the first time the terrorist organisation has made any statement on the Egyptian crisis.

With pressure building within the country for faster change, the White House made it clear overnight that it agreed with proposals announced by the new government, but wanted to see quicker implementation.

“We believe there has to be a process; that in this process that results in free and fair elections, that the emergency law be lifted, as we’ve talked about many times, and that specific constitutional changes are made,” said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.

Tuesday saw some of the biggest demonstrations yet against President Mubarak, who continues to insist on September as the date for his departure. With popular suspicions rising that a behind-the-scenes deal is being worked out by Vice-President Suleiman to neuter reforms, there is fertile ground for subversive networks to work on.

                                  (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

 

[The Bread Guy]

Al-Qaeda calls for “holy war” in Egypt
article link (with video)

The Iraqi branch of al-Qaeda has entered the fray in Egypt, calling on the people demonstrating there to launch a “holy war” to install a government that will enact Sharia law.

It calls on the Egyptian people to abandon the paths of “pagan nationalism” and “disappointing democracy”.

It is the first time the terrorist organisation has made any statement on the Egyptian crisis ....
                                  (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

If you want to read the statement via a non-jihadi site link, researcher/analyst Aaron Zelin has posted it to his Jihadology blog in Arabic here - Google English translation available here.

 

[57Chevy]

Egypt regime warns of crackdown as revolt spreads

CAIRO - Egypt's embattled regime warned of a military crackdown on Wednesday as massive protests demanding its overthrow spilled out across the country and deadly unrest flared in the remote south.

Hundreds of demonstrators marched on parliament from the epicentre of the uprising in Cairo's Tahrir Square the day after the largest protests since the revolt began, as other demonstrations erupted in cities across the country.

Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit warned the army, until now a respected and mostly neutral force on Cairo's streets, would intervene to protect the country if the protests against President Hosni Mubarak escalated.

"If chaos occurs, the armed forces will intervene to control the country, a step . . . which would lead to a very dangerous situation," the official MENA news agency said, paraphrasing Abdul Gheit's interview with Arabic-language satellite television channel Al-Arabiya.

His remarks came after newly appointed Vice President Omar Suleiman warned of a possible "coup" in the absence of a peaceful transfer of power.

The protesters however showed no sign of backing down on their demand for Mubarak's overthrow as tens of thousands of people filled Cairo's Tahrir Square well into the third week of a revolt that could reshape the Middle East.

Around a thousand marched on parliament to demand its members' resignation, vowing to remain until the legislature — widely seen as unfairly dominated by the ruling party — is dissolved.

The night before they had been joined by several hundred thousand supporters for the biggest rallies yet in the two-week-old drive to topple the autocratic president and replace his 30-year-old U.S.-backed regime.

On Wednesday, volunteers were building portable toilets, indicating the protesters have no intention of leaving the "liberated" square, now a sprawling tent city with sound stages, flag vendors and a mobile phone charging station.

In a sign the protests were widening beyond Cairo, unrest gripped the remote oasis of Kharga, where at least five people were killed and 100 wounded when security forces opened fire on demonstrators, a security official told AFP.

In the Suez Canal city of Port Said, some 3,000 protesters stormed a government building, torching office furniture and the governor's car.

In the southern town of Assiut, some 4,000 protesters blocked a railway with wooden planks and bricks and shut down a major highway with burning tires.

Several smaller strikes broke out in Cairo and the Nile Delta to the north, where textile workers demanded higher wages and better conditions.

The 82-year-old Mubarak has charged Suleiman, his longtime intelligence chief, with drawing selected opposition groups into negotiations on democratic reform before elections due in September.

Some parties have joined the talks, but the crowds in Tahrir Square insist that Mubarak must go before they will halt the protest. Suleiman, however, warned that the transition must be slow and orderly.

"The second, alternative way would be a coup — and we want to avoid that — meaning uncalculated and hasty steps that produce more irrationality," he warned Egyptian news editors.

Protesters in Tahrir said they were unmoved by Suleiman's remarks and vowed to remain in the square until their demands are met.

"He is acting as they've been acting with us for 30 years. The same talk, the same lies," said Neven al-Sergany, a 44-year-old teacher. "I don't think I will leave. The people here are so determined."

The Muslim Brotherhood, the country's best organized opposition group despite a half century of illegality, meanwhile moved to reassure observers who fear an Islamist takeover should Mubarak's regime be toppled.

"The Muslim Brotherhood does not seek power. We do not want to participate at the moment," senior leader Mohammed Mursi told reporters, adding that the movement would not field a presidential candidate.

The United States is watching events in the most populous Arab country with great concern, hoping the transition to elected rule can take place without a descent into violence, or an Islamist or military takeover.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the government had yet to meet the "minimum threshold" of reform demanded by Egyptians.

Suleiman's proposed transition process "does not appear to be in line with the people of Egypt. We believe that more has to be done," he said, adding that it was not for the United States to dictate the shape of reforms.

In another sign the regime has not gone far enough, Culture Minister Gaber Asfour — appointed just nine days ago in a cabinet shake-up prompted by the revolt — resigned for "medical reasons."
                                  (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)

 

[Journeyman]

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the [Egyptian] government had yet to meet the "minimum threshold" of reform demanded by Egyptians.

Suleiman's proposed transition process "does not appear to be in line with the people of Egypt. We believe that more has to be done," he said, adding that it was not for the United States to dictate the shape of reforms.

No contradiction there.  :

 

[The Bread Guy]

Shared in accordance with the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright  Act.

Ahram.org.eg (state-run, as it happens):

President Hosni Mubarak is to deliver a televised address to the nation within hours, according to Egyptian state TV. It is widely believed that Mubarak will announce that he stepping down, though it is as yet not known if this will take the form of a resignation or the transferring of his power to the vice president. The announcement of the prospective address by the president comes in the immediate wake of the release of Communique #1 of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which declared the council was in open-ended session in order to safeguard the nation and the achievements of its people.

Reuters:

The head of Egypt's ruling party told the BBC on Thursday that he would be surprised if President Hosni Mubarak was still president on Friday.

"Yes, I would be, because I think the right thing to do now is to take the action that would satisfy ... protesters," Hossam Badrawi told BBC television in a live interview.

Bloomberg:

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak will decide “within hours” whether he will step down or not, according to cabinet spokesman Magdy Rady.

“The decision was not taken yet,” Rady said when asked if the president plans to step down today. “The decision will be taken within hours by the governing bodies of the country and by the authorities of the country and by the president of the country. He has to decide himself whether he leaves or not.”

Mubarak will address the nation from his headquarters in Cairo tonight, state-run Al Masriya television reported, without giving further details.

Associated Press:

President Hosni Mubarak will meet the demands of protesters, military and ruling party officials said today in the strongest indication yet that Egypt’s longtime president may be about to give up power and that the armed forces were seizing control.

Gen. Hassan al-Roueini, military commander for the Cairo area, told thousands of protesters in central Tahrir Square, “All your demands will be met today.” Some in the crowd held up their hands in V-for-victory signs, shouting “Allahu akbar,” or “God is great,” a victory cry used by secular and religious people alike.

The military’s supreme council was meeting today, without the commander in chief Mubarak, and announced on state TV its “support of the legitimate demands of the people.” A spokesman read a statement that the council was in permanent session “to explore “what measures and arrangements could be made to safeguard the nation, its achievements and the ambitions of its great people.” ....

 

[The Bread Guy]

....via the BBC:

Statement Number One, issued by the Higher Council of the Armed Forces,

Stemming from the armed forces' responsibility and committing to the protection of the people, safeguarding their interest and security, and keen on the safety of the homeland, the citizens and the achievements of the great Egyptian people, and asserting the legitimate rights of the people,

The Higher Council of the Armed Forces convened today, Thursday, 10 February 2011, to deliberate on the latest developments of the situation and decided to remain in continuous session to discuss what measures and arrangements could be taken to safeguard the homeland and its achievements, and the aspirations of the great Egyptian people.

Peace, mercy and the blessings of God.

Two views on the statement, saying the military's holding back....

The Egyptian military top brass showed extreme restraint over more than two weeks of street protests with a culminating set of events showing on Thursday the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces ready to take power.

The Council, consisting of Field Marshal Mohammed Hussein Tantawi, defense minister and commander of the armed forces; Lt. Gen. Sami Annan, military chief of staff; the chief of operations; and the heads of the Egyptian army, navy, air force and air defenses, came out with the release of a statement, titled, “Statement No.1.”

One political pundit noted, “It is significant that the Council has numbered the communique – showing its intention to follow up with more such statements in future.”

This is the third Council meeting with two earlier meetings held in 1967 and 1973 during the conflict with Israel, but on Thursday the Council promised to have regular and more meetings in future ....

.... or stepping in:

Egypt's military announced on national television it had stepped in to secure the country and promised protesters calling for President Hosni Mubarak's ouster that all their demands would soon be met. Mubarak planned a speech to the nation Thursday night, raising expectations he would step down or transfer his powers .... The developments created confusion over who was calling the shots in Egypt and whether Mubarak and the military were united on the next steps.  The military's moves had some trappings of an outright takeover, perhaps to push Mubarak out for the army to run the country itself in a break with the constitution. But comments by Mubarak's aides and his meetings with the top two figures in his regime — Vice President Omar Suleiman and Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq — before his speech suggested he may try to carry out a constitutionally allowed half-measure of handing his powers to Suleiman while keeping his title as president ....

 

[MarkOttawa]

Good piece by David Ignatius:

In the Middle East, a Catch-22 for the CIA
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/09/AR2011020904531.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions

The CIA uses the term "liaison" to describe its contacts with foreign intelligence services. And in Arab capitals such as Tunis, Cairo and Amman, these relationships can be so seductively beneficial that they limit the CIA's ability to run its own "unilateral" operations to learn what's going on inside the host country.

This conundrum - how to work with your hosts and also spy on them - is one of the difficulties facing the CIA as it tries to understand the youth revolution spreading across the Middle East. The agency has cultivated its relationships with people such as Gen. Omar Suleiman, Egypt's chief of intelligence and now vice president, but it has not done as well understanding the world of the protesters.

It's a Catch-22 of the intelligence business, especially over the past decade, when counterterrorism became the CIA's core mission: The agency needed good relationships with Arab intelligence services to collect information about al-Qaeda, but to maintain those relationships, the agency sometimes avoided local snooping. The CIA did recruit some long-term contacts within the Egyptian establishment who are said to have provided crucial intelligence in recent days. But it's a far cry from the early 1980s, when the Cairo station chief would regularly meet the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and other opposition groups.

"We pulled back more and more, and relied on liaison to let us know what was going on," says one former station chief who's a veteran of the CIA's Near East Division...

The problem of dependency became acute after Sept. 11, 2001, when the agency spent many hundreds of millions of dollars bolstering friendly services - especially from authoritarian, pro-American regimes such as Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen and Pakistan. Those are the countries now shaken by protest...

The revolution in Tunisia was a surprise, says this CIA defender, because it "wasn't clear even to President Ben Ali that his security forces would quickly choose not to support him." As for Egypt, he says, "analysts anticipated and highlighted the concern that unrest in Tunisia might spread well before demonstrations erupted in Cairo. They later warned that unrest in Egypt would likely gain momentum and could threaten the regime."

Here's the bottom line: The CIA is caught in a jam that's emblematic of America's larger problem in the Middle East. The agency has been so focused on stopping al-Qaeda that it has been distracted from other questions. America depends on good intelligence as never before, and the simple truth is that the CIA has to lift its game.

 

Mark
Ottawa

 

[The Bread Guy]

Twitter tidbits from Mubarak's speech (still ongoing at this point) via Postmedia News/National Post, AP and BBC:

"I will protect the constitution until a transfer of power occurs next Sept"

#Egypt President Hosni Mubarak "will not accept or listen to any foreign interventions or dictations"

Must continue the national dialogue (he repeats that line alot)

#Mubarak says emergency laws can only be lifted when stability returns and calls on all Egyptians to come together

BREAKING NEWS: Egyptian President Mubarak says he passed on his authority to his vice president.

 

[Old Sweat]

This has the potential to go very, very bad within the next 36 hours. There are just too many variables and too many players here to make any sort of prediction. What seems clear to me that there are too many competing interests. Maybe the best short term solution is a transfer of power (willingly or not) to the military to provide a few months of stability, but I fear how that may play out in the longer term. Mubarak may be ruling by rumour to buy time, if the various stories that broke today are any indication; he must may realize he is past his best before date, but what he does is anyone's guess. Whether he intends to make some sort of transfer is not clear. It also is not clear what the people will do if they begin to sense they are being played for suckers. Hopefully the junior officers in the streets are disciplined and trained in the use of force in aid of the civil power, and understand the people are not the enemy.

In the meantime the King of Jordan is probably watching this with more than a little interest and concern.

 

[vonGarvin]

OS:
I agree that this has the potential to go pear shaped, and soon.  I just hope that the Army fulfills its stated role to protect The People.  My impression from here, far far away in Canada, is that it seems to be a professional force that takes its role quite seriously.  I hope that my impression is correct.

 

[The Bread Guy]

OS/TV - Also agree things could go downhill pretty quickly.  Twitter (for what it's worth) coverage from the square suggests the crowd's not entirely satisfied with the speech.  The military's stepped in before (ask Mubarak), so it's not out of the question now.

A bit more, from BBC:

Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak has said he will stay in office and transfer power after September's presidential election.

His comments appeared to confound reports he was preparing to stand down immediately.

In an address on national television after 17 days of demonstrations against his 30-year rule, he praised the "youth of Egypt" protesting in Cairo.

But he said he would ignore "diktats from abroad".

Egypt's military had earlier said it was standing ready to "protect the nation".

"I express a commitment to carry on and protect the constitution and the people and transfer power to whomever is elected next September in free and transparent elections," Mr Mubarak said ....

... the Australian Broadcasting Corporation....

Egypt's embattled President Hosni Mubarak has handed some of his powers to his vice-president, but reiterated that he will stay on as leader.

Mr Mubarak previously announced he would not contest polls scheduled for Septmber.

Ahead of the nationally televised speech, tens of thousands of protesters packed Cairo's Tahrir square, amid anticipation he would annouce he was stepping aside.

Egypt's armed forces have announced they will be taking necessary measures to protect the nation and support the legitimate demands of the people.

Egyptian television cut into a sheduled program to broadcast a statement from a panel of senior military officers issuing what they described at communique number one of the Supreme Council of the Armed forces.

They said the armed forces were committed to protecting the people and supported the legitimate demands of the people ....

.... the Voice of America ....

Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak said in a national address Tuesday evening that he will not step down until a new president is selected in elections scheduled for September.

Saying a peaceful transfer of power is underway, Mr. Mubarak refused to give in to demands of tens of thousands of anti-government protesters who took to the streets for a 17th straight day.

It is the second time in two weeks that Mubarak told the nation he will stay in office until September.

The dramatic announcement came on state television shortly after 10:45 p.m. in Egypt. Demonstrators in Cairo's main Tahrir Square had earlier danced and sang in jubilation in expecation that Mubarak would resign.

Earlier in the day, Egyptian military officials and members of the ruling party said Mr. Mubarak will "meet protesters' demands." ....

.... and Reuters:

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said on Tuesday he would not leave Egypt although he would step down from the presidency at the end of his term, due to end when the country holds a presidential election in September. "The Hosni Mubarak who speaks to you today is proud of his achievements over the years in serving Egypt and its people," he said in an address broadcast on state television.

"This is my country. This is where I lived, I fought and defended its land, sovereignty and interests, and I will die on its soil," he said.

He also said pledged to implement a series of reforms, including calling on the judiciary to combat corruption, one of the complaints of protesters who have pushed him to announce an end to his presidency later this year ....

 

[Journeyman]

BREAKING NEWS: Egyptian President Mubarak says he passed on his authority to his vice president.

Actually, the Twit post reads "Mubarak: I have decided to hand over powers to VP Omar Suleiman according to the laws of the country." It doesn't say he's passed on his authority.

Given that al Jazeera's live reports state that Mubarak is refusing to stand down before the end of his term, I suspect that Mubarak is just providing Suleiman with suitable Vice-Presidential powers and authority.

That the crowd is not satisfied with isn't remotely 'news' 


Edit:

... the Australian Broadcasting Corporation....
Egypt's embattled President Hosni Mubarak has handed some of his powers to his vice-president, but reiterated that he will stay on as leader.

Ya, what they said  ;D