Mubarak is still a force to be reckoned with
Mubarak looks to the east and sees the worry in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, and the joy in Iran, and he knows that he is responsible for an entire era of dinosaurs.
By Zvi Bar'el Tags: Egypt protests Israel news"The solution cannot be a military one," Mustafa Al-Faki, chairman of the Egyptian Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee declared on Friday. Al-Faki, who served in the past as Information Secretary to President Hosni Mubarak, said last year that: "President Mubarak believes that too much freedom is not productive for the people or the regime."
It would seem from Mubarak's response to the protests this week that he is still stuck within the same mentality. For the first four days he was silent, like somebody who does not owe answers to anybody.
 |
An army officer who joined anti-government protester tears up a picture of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, downtown Cairo, Egypt, January 29, 2011 |
| Photo by: AP |
After that, he ordered the army onto the streets to make it clear that the military serves the government, and that it can move against the people if necessary. Finally, he agreed to speak - and announced that he was firing the cabinet.
With these steps Mubarak continues to demonstrate the mentality that has served him for the last 30 years: Any reform, if ever enacted, will only be implemented as he sees fit, and if he sees fit.
This is how he determined the scope of the constitutional amendments that permitted a limited number of candidates to run in elections for the presidency; this is how he limited the number of opposition representatives in the last parliamentary elections; this is how he restricted the amount of political protest and free expression that has grown under his rule.
The rules of this game, in which the opposition is also trapped in a cul-de-sac - especially after the last elections - are quickly disintegrating. Until now, the opposition figured that if it cannot boot Mubarak from power or prevent his son Gamal from inheriting a dynasty, it could at least demand reforms that would be implemented by the government - if not by the opposition itself.
After the elections that prevented almost any oppositional representation and in which the Muslim Brotherhood lost all of their parliamentary seats, Egyptian pundits wrote that "Egypt is returning to a single-party era."
It would seem that the opposition movements also did not understand the "Tunisia effect", and it took them at least three weeks to understand the size of the opportunity that lay before them.
Now that the demonstrations refuse to die down, the number of dead rises, and the offices of the government and ruling party go up in flames, the opposition faces a rival that is stronger than ever. Because Mubarak understands himself not only as "responsible for the security of the citizens" - as he said in his televised speech early Sunday morning, in an attempt to paint the protesters as criminals - but as responsible for the old order in the Arab world.
The implication is that toppling Mubarak could set off an avalanche of dominoes. Mubarak cannot accept that Egypt itself has become part of the avalanche in the wake of the fall of the regime in a young and unimportant state like Tunisia.
Mubarak looks eastward and sees the fear from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Jordan, and the cries of joy from Iran, and he knows that he is responsible for an entire era of dinosaurs. He is the finger in the dam. And therefore, despite Al-Faki's warning that the solution cannot be military, the solution that Mubarak is implementing until now has been exclusively military.
The formation of a new government is understood mainly as an attempt to foist responsibility on those who are not really responsible. After all, the prime minister and other ministers are appointed by the president, and it is he who determines their priorities.
Even the ruling party, of which Gamal Mubarak heads the policy committee comprising the ministers, can't say anything about the government. For years, the party controlled the government as part of its apparatus.
What are Mubarak's options?
All of this lends great importance to the president's choice of prime minister. If it will be another party leader that will in turn appoint party hacks, the move will be meaningless. If Mubarak appoints a person with authority, like Intelligence Minister Omar Suleiman for example, it might succeed, but then it would throw Gamal Mubarak's chances of running in the next elections for president in doubt.
Another option is to appoint a temporary government and announce early elections for president which are scheduled for September. Such an announcement would send the opposition for a loop, because it would supposedly move the debate from the street to the town hall and force them to establish positions in preparation for the elections.
This kind of opposition would force further constitutional amendments, especially those concerning the suitability of candidates for election, but they would also allow Gamal Mubarak to run for election, and maybe even win.
A third option is for Mubarak to announce a military regime limited to "protecting the public peace and property," instruct the army to enforce the curfew, and establish a national emergency government that could divert major financial resources to calm the portion of the populace that is protesting for economic reasons.
There is also the possibility of a combination of more than one of these options, with the sole objective being that Mubarak must continue to be the president and the public must know its place.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
The military has NOT exhibited any willingness to exert any force in anything except protecting government buildings etc...none whatseover on curtailing the demonstrations. This is cinsistent with the army's negative stance regarding the succession of power to Gamal...and actually provides the means to preclude it, instead have having to intercede later to prevent it. Mubarak has one foot out the door, and Suleiman is going to help him along with the other. Then Suleiman will promise reform and elections, and call on the crowds to go home and order is going to be restored BY the military, forcibly or not, and we'll see what cometh. Hopefully it'll lead to a stable and democratic government - at least infinitely more democratic than what they've had. But democracy by itself is NOT the solution to their woes...it won't help unless its accompanied by economic reform that provides honest and competitive opportunity for all Egyptians to benefit.
The little King's days are numbered though. Saudi Arabia & Kuwait have money they can throw at their people so I don't see this affecting them too much. Assad won't hesitate to follow Daddy's Hama rules for crushing dissent. So he'll be ok.
It seems that Mr. Bar'el has not been listening to the single demand of the demonstrators. There is one main demand, they want Mubarak out. Period. Nothing else will placate them. The gene is out of the bottle and no force on Earth will put it back. The dreaded undercover security forces are out of the picture and the army in all its history had never pointed their guns towards the population. Also, Mr. Mubarak could not care less about the fate of the regimes in Jordan, Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. His main concern right now is saving his own hide. His two sons already slipped out of Egypt and are now in London. The writing is on the wall, it is just a matter of time, just a little more time before he declares that he is resigning for the good of the country and giving the interim presidency to Omar Suleiman who is acceptable to both the West and Israel as well.
The antagonism and resentment felt towards Israel among the populations of its Arab neighbors stems almost completely from its occupations and oppression of the Palestinians. Had Israel accepted the initiative, those issues would have been resolved, and the majority of the hostility felt for it would have by now been largely defused and the gates opened for economic, cultural, and social interchange which would have further alleviated any animosity. This in turn would have largely removed the inherent threat of any change of regime, democratically or otherwise, in Israel's neighboring states. There was reason for the criteria set forth in this initiative, and the Arabs insistence they all be met - because ending that antagonism in their populations would also have made their own regimes more stable and less vulnerable to the influence of extremists - although in Egypts case, extremists haven't played a part...yet. Best advice to Israel: take the Saudi intiative before it's retracted, because it's the Arab p-e-o-p-l-e you need to make peace with - NOT their rulers(and Egypt is perfect example of this) - and the way to do that is to remove the barriers that stand between you. What's ironic too, is that it's exactly what Assad has reiterated when talking about peace with Israel - a comprehensive and cooperative peace, including cultural and social exchange - NOT just a piece of paper signed by governments.
It will be difficult for Israel and US to lose a devoted partner. The time is up for the collaborator dictators, and for so called kings and sheiks of Middle East. In case Israeli government shows respect to the rights of other people, the area could be in peace. If not difficult days are coming for Israel.
/Mubarak stronger than ever! Is this a joke? Perhaps you'd like things being so, but it has nothing to do with reality, open your eyes!
"Now in those days the counsel that Ahithophel gave was as if one consulted the word of God" - 2Samuel 16:23// Ahithophel gave Absalon, the son of King David, an advice that if followed, would have won him the Kingdom of Israel. Hillary gave Hariri the Son advice, which he followed and lost his rule over Lebanon. Hillary's advice was for Lebanon to stick with the International court investigating Hariri Sr.'s murder, and the Son followed it. The least that would have happened was an insurrection by Hizballah or a civil war. Fortunately for everybody, the Druze understood the threat and helped bring down the Hariri government by Kosher parliamentary means. Hillary still doesn't understand diplomacy. It is the art of the possible, lady. If you follow a route that does more damage than good, it is a stupid way of diplomacy. Obama himself needs some Ahithophel for help, not this anti-Ahithophel named Hillary.
Circuses, or to use a modern term, Entertainment, is critical. More entertainment means less sex and a lower population growth. In 1960 the Egyptian population was 30 million. Fifty years later it is 80 million. The new mouths to feed are beating all economic advances. As for Bread, Mubarak should ask the US to provide him with free wheat instead of free advice. Or if the US is too broke to do this favor, Saudi Arabia might provide; the regime there must be scared stiff of the riots. The last thing Egyptians need is Western Democracy. They are not used to it and it will do them more harm than good. Think of China. The Chinese are used to obey their leaders, so they are doing very well under their Communist masters. Mubarak (the Father or the Son) should fix the economy first, and worry about regime change later. Learn also from the Russian experience; if you bring "openness" (Democracy, for you) and only then restructure the economy (Perestroika), you fall into chaos.