What Is Next For Egypt?
Yesterday's very large Tamarrod protests against the Muslim Brotherhood and president Morsi in Egypt were mostly peaceful. But following those protests an attack on the Muslim Brotherhood's party building led to casualties on both sides:Members of the group inside the headquarters started firing live ammunition, according to Mada Masr's reporter, who also noticed a variety of arms held by protesters including guns. All lights were shut off in the surrounding streets.
The building was stormed, looted and burned just like the building of former president Mubarak's NDP party had been destroyed in the 2011 revolution. Six or eight people were killed. A reporter said of the looting: "I thought they would carry away everything but the kitchen sink. Then I saw one carrying a kitchen sink." A video from inside of the building confims that.
The loot included this seemingly genuine list of large bribes paid by the government of Qatar to the leading heads of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The police was not seen while the building was attack but came back to "guard" it after the looting was finished. The Muslim Brotherhood is now considering to create "self defense units", something that other say it already has build up, though secretly so far.
The big clash that was expected yesterday did not happen. The numbers of anti-Morsi demonstrators were too large for the other side to attack. But as smaller protests and the demand for Morsi to stand down will continue further strife seems inevitable. Issandr El Amrani looks at the possible alternative outcomes:
The United States and its elephant-in-a-china-shop ambassador Anne Patterson have so far be standing behind Morsi. Anti-Americanism was therefore a large theme in yesterday's protests. One wonders how that is compatible with the protesters calls for the U.S. backed army to take over.
- The army will wait it out to the last minute (possibly disastrously so as early intervention might be better in cases of large-scale violence) and may be internally divided about how to proceed (hence the hesitation).
- Should Morsi be toppled, it will create an enormous problem with the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists for years to come. They will feel cheated of legitimately gained power and Egyptian politics will only grow more divisive and violent.
- Whatever alliance came together behind the Tamarrod protests will fall apart the day after its successful, because its components are as incompatible as the alliance that toppled Hosni Mubarak.
- The leadership around the NSF (ElBaradei, Moussa, Sabahi etc.) has followed rather than led Tamarrod and will not be able to provide effective leadership in the coming days. Only the army can.
- If Morsi remains and the protests are repressed or simply die out, the country will nonetheless remain as difficult to govern considering Morsi's lack of engagement with the opposition.
That is indeed what I now find likely to happen. Rumors say that the army has already informed the U.S. that Morsi will be gone by the end of the week. Then a new cycle of writing a constitution and elections will begin. This time in an even more loaded atmosphere and under worse economic conditions.
Posted by b on July 1, 2013 at 13:00 UTC | Permalink
« previous pagehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o5vJKTgTdU
Apparently:
Morsi asked during his campaign: "What wd u do if millions gather in Tahrir & ask u 2 step down?"
Morsi: "step down"
Posted by: guest77 | Jul 2 2013 22:49 utc | 202
There is too much dualistic thinking going on in here either/or. Either Morsi is a stooge of the US or the Army is. Either Morsi is good or the protestors are right. blah blah.
First of all most of you fail to realise the obvious, that is that the amerikan empire policymakers shit themselves when Mubarak's reign was ended. Their bosses kept coming to them saying "Which horse would we back, the Muslim Brotherhood where our mates in Turkey reckon we've got an in, or our old friends in the Army whose ass we already own? Maybe we should back the young kids driving this on the net; the agency reckons we have a mob of players in there."
No one could really predict which way things were going to go so the old game was played of slowing everything down then buying everyone available, because backing the wrong horse would be fatal and having someone out of control in Egypt could mean the end of the largest imperial forward operating base in the history of man, israel. That would spell the end of empire. If amerika cannot maintain its hydrocarbon hegemony it is fucked. You amerikan think things are bad now with yer exchange rate turned to shit etc.
See what happens if the actual exchange rate is forced upon you (at the moment if the retail price of goods between amerika & say europe are compared you'll see amerikans pay about 15% to 20% less than the rest of the world. That is entirely due to the leverage brought about control of hydrocarbons and a few other 'essential' resources.)
amerika has strong threads reaching into the military, the MB and a few of the neo-liberal urban political activists.
Whatever side wins they'll be ok. Why are they favouring the protesters then?
Because even though they have control right now, things won't always stay that way if a process for peaceful transition of power becomes cemented in place.
For example the first few elected governments in Venezuela & Bolivia were very kindly towards amerikan interests.
Just as the first post Allende governments in Chile refused to take a good look at the horrors of the amerikan intervention there - that is changing in Chile just as it changed in Bolivia & Venezuela because the amerikan program of neoliberal propaganda only works in those societies that have a large and secure bourgeoisie which can be tricked into voting against their best interests with promises of a better future for them personally-fuck the neighbours.
Too many genuinely poor people means that popularly elected governments must eventually eschew the sort of neo-liberal bullshit systems that the amerikan empire depends upon to continue their parasitical & vampire-like practice feeding off the lifeblood of everyone else.
That transfer of 'scratch' from the world's impoverished to amerika's lower class is essential for amerikan citizens to be far enough off the poverty line to keep the amerikan system running without overthrow. Plus of course sufficient lower classes healthy enough to provide the bulk of the cannon fodder required to maintain the rest of the world under the jackboot's heel.
I don't much like Morsi or the sell-out MB, but if he is overthrown, the odds of Egypt attaining any sort of sustainable political system capable of meeting the demands of its citizens will be reduced to about zilch.
At the moment there is absolutely no chance of Egypt's citizens gathering the resources and solidarity essential to spark a real revolution, so altho I loathe the current global system of managed democracies more than I dislike any other form of government, from where I sit Egypt's only real chance of change rests with allowing this micro-managed democracy to last enough to become robust.
Posted by: debs is dead | Jul 3 2013 0:55 utc | 203
I don't care about Morsi. I do think it was harder to get Morsi to cooperate with Israeli policies than it was to get Mubarak, but I'm speculating. The US made the necessary threats and US colonies made the necessary bribes and I agree that Morsi today is following the US line in the region.
I don't think Morsi could reliably be expected to continue doing so as elections came nearer. I don't think the next President of Egypt, elected fairly would refrain from making an issue of Morsi's cooperation which might force Morsi to explain in public the pressures the US put on him.
What we are getting now is direct military interference in Egypt's political process.
That is exactly what the US wants, which is why the US allowed the SCAF to signal that he will remove Morsi from power. I believe the SCAF could not make that move without US pre-approval and coordination.
I think there is no chance the next constitution will be as independent as the one the military is preparing to void. And the military and the groups that have planned this current campaign are establishing a precedent that civilian government can be rescinded when it is convenient.
I think the military voiding a constitution that was ratified by a large majority of the population because of street protests has absolutely no legitimacy. Of course.
A facade of a limited civilian government that carves space out for the military, under the direction of the US to make policy in areas that the US is concerned with is exactly what people like Juan Cole and Jimmy Carter called for as soon as Mubarak's rule became untenable. Surprisingly, the MB gained control and did not explicitly carve out a space for Egypt's colonial relationship to be immunized from voters. This is what is being undone now.
George W. Bush's approval ratings went down and the US waited for the next election. The idea that the military should push out a president whose ratings go down, if they actually did go down is ridiculous.
There is no reason not to wait for the next election and hold the elections that are actually scheduled for the People's Assembly. If a huge majority of secularists come into the PA, it could drastically limit Morsi's ability to set MB policies and could constitutionally impeach Morsi.
Again, do you think the Mubarak-era constitutional courts have not been delaying the PA elections without coordination with the US?
The withholding of funds creating economic hardship, the delayed elections, this well organized and funded campaign for signatures and street protests, these likely preplanned steps by the military all seem to be aimed at subverting democracy in Egypt. On the question of who benefits, the clearest answer is the US. On the question of who could coordinate these things, the clearest answer is the US.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 3:53 utc | 204
In a public opinion poll conducted in Egypt on 20-23 Jun 2013, with a sample size of 2,069 adults nationwide contacted by random telephone calling, and published 2 Jul 2013, one of the questions was: "If the Military Council had remained in power during the past year, would the nation’s status today be better, worse, or no different?" 59% of respondents said the nation’s status would've been better with rule by the Military Council, 10% said it would've been no different, 18% said it would've been worse, and 13% were unsure. To repeat, just 18% thought that hypothetical rule by a military council would've been worse than what rule by the Muslim Brotherhood has been this past year. Another question: Has the Muslim Brotherhood's governance been better than you expected, or worse, or no different than you expected? 64% answered Worse, 15% answered "no different", 13% unsure, and 8% said better. In response to another question, 63% said that their own standard of living is today worse than it was at the start of Morsi's presidency 12 months ago. The full poll report is at http://www.baseera.com.eg/pdf_poll_file_en/One%20year%20of%20Morsi%20and%20the%20Brotherhood%27s%20rule%20Poll%20-%20en.pdf .
A related other slightly older public opinion poll by the same agency in Egypt is at http://www.baseera.com.eg/recentpolls_en.aspx . It shows that the approval rate for Morsi as president has been dropping sharply for the past several months, and the steepness of the drop has been getting steeper month to month.
Those two polls, and other indicators consistent with them, indicate that (1) the top brass of the army has got the social support to do what they think fit in the circumstances, and (2) if the army were to decide that president Morsi must re-contest his post electorally in an early election, then Morsi would have practically have no choice but to consent this decision, for surely it would be fruitless for him to attempt to defy the army in view of his weak social support and the army's strong social support, and moreover Morsi would lose the post in the election if he tried to defend it, and (3) if early parliamentary elections are held, the Muslim Brotherhood's party is surely going to get far fewer votes than it got in last year's elections.
There should have been parliamentary elections months ago. Delaying those elections escalated this tension. Morsi never called for delaying them, the Mubarak-era court that communicates with the Americans did.
Why do you think the People's Assembly elections have been delayed? The effect, combined with other elements has been to provide a justification for the military voiding the ratified constitution.
Again, forcing a sitting president out because his poll numbers have gone down is ridiculous. Voiding the entire constitution, and every single election that has happened, including for the elected Shura Council that is now sitting is even more ridiculous.
The United States is lucky some people are willing to accept such flimsy rationales for such stunningly anti-democratic moves. This gullibility is starting to seem like a real problem.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 5:15 utc | 206
The ratified constitution goes. Every elected body goes. The Mubarak-era courts stay. The SCAF assumes complete control of the government and continues being paid and directed by a foreign power.
People say "Well, Morsi's poll numbers did go down".
Absurd. I wouldn't believe it if I wasn't watching it.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 5:20 utc | 207
Here's from the other opinion poll I mentioned at #205, and I believe this is also the poll that 'b' was referring to at #22. It was published on 25 June, and conducted by telephone between 15 and 20 June, and it had more than 6,000 respondents nationwide.
Respondents were asked: "If elections were held tomorrow with Mohammed Morsi as a candidate, would you elect him?” Result: 25% Yes, 62% No. There was no governate or province in Egypt where a majority answered Yes. In the governates of Cairo and Alexandria only 16% said Yes. In the election last year Morsi got 58% of the votes in Alexandria. http://www.baseera.com.eg/pdf_poll_file_en/President%20approval%20rating%2012%20months%20-%20en.pdf
The reality in Egypt is that the top brass of the army has got the society's support to do whatever they think fit in the circumstances. The top brass has said they don't desire or intend to try to govern the country themselves. They're doctrinally opposed to rule by a military junta, they've said. What they're in favour of is still unclear or unannounced. But early elections is the obvious option.
The Nour Party said on Tuesday it's in favour of early elections.
From the opinion poll data quoted at #205, the status of the army in Egypt is such that the army has very broad social support to step into the political realm in the circumstances. Because the broad social support is there, stepping in does not ruin the democratic political institutions, or at least not necessarily, and not probably. From that perspective, I have to disagree with what I said at #169.
As an example of the phony propaganda the Sunni theocrats constantly put out, accusing everyone else of being pro-USrael, I love this: "Actually the pro western liberal/secular protesters would be to the interests of the US and Israel. (Anonymous, 186)" There is no attempt at specifics at all. It's like, they all wear jeans, so they must be pro-US.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jul 3 2013 7:58 utc | 211
Rowan
I love how you talk about me in 3rd person like you dont dare taking the debate, make a reply to me instead.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 8:47 utc | 212
It sounds silly saying "hello anonymous". There could be any number of anonymouses on here.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jul 3 2013 9:06 utc | 213
A good discussion, thanks all.
Still there are several rather stupid misconceptions.
The protesters are pro U.S.!
Really?
The Anti-US component of the uprising in Egypt
The US media don't report that the protests in Egypt today (and previously) have a strong anti-US component. Many signs in the protests are directed at the US and its perceived support for Morsi. In the interviews on the streets today, especially on New TV, many protesters directed their anger at the US for its embrace of Morsi, in return for security cooperation with Israel. People here still think that Arabs are too dumb to notice what is happening.
Morsi is not a puppet for the U.S.!
Really?
Egyptian developments
Worried about Egypt: it does not bode well that the supporters of change and protesters are placing their hopes in the command of the Egyptian Army (the center of foreign powers's intervention in Egyptian and the enforcers of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty). I also worry that the remnants of Mubarak regime are infiltrating heavily the ranks of the protests, in the media and the leadership. What is `Amr Musa if not a Mubarak remnant? I worry that the Saudi-Qatari conflict is also playing in Egypt and therefore Saudi Arabia is attempting to hijack an element of the protests. I worry that removing Morsi will be easier than removing Sisi and the rest of the military generals, or removing the power of the remnants. The US is also up to no good in Egypt: as usual, whenever a puppet is about to fall, the US president jumps in and claims that he is in favor of the puppet's respecting the wishes of the people. The people of Egypt know better: they have been targeting the US ambassador in Egypt in their protests: that the US is an accomplice of the Ikhwan regime, all for the sake of Israel. But Egypt sets the standards: constant change and instability is the way to go. Constant change and shifts are what revolutionary momentum is made of. But there is so much to be done, and the show has just started. The Ikhwan after one year in power are at their weakest since the days of Nasser. They are finally placed on the defensive. Their ugly Jihad rhetoric is now exposed as nothing more than secret cooperation with Israel, and their Islamic solution is in fact compounding all the existing problems. One more year and the people of Egypt will turn all atheists.
The army is payed off by those $1.5 billion (which by the way get mostly spend in the U.S.) and does what the U.S. wants!
Really?
The Egyptian movement Rebel responds to US response
The spokesperson of the Tamarrud movement in Egypt said that there is great "US pressures" on the armed forces to rescind its ultimatum. The spokesperson said: "We clearly announce our rejection of American intervention in the Egyptian matter and affirm that the will of the Egyptian people is bigger than US and Muslim Brotherhood combined.
b
Not sure how credible Angryarab are as a source. Just because there is some anti-american groups in the opposition, the opposition in general is more biased to US policy since their ideologies match more than the MB does with the US.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 9:44 utc | 216
Egypt’s unrest (Lovely word) is rattling market prices, Oil that is -The futures market is seeing some unusually heavy volume in after-hours trading as oil advances to $102. Even if it has little oil and it's economy is not of a major player. This tells me 1. Either speculators looking for another excuse to push up oil prices, and they do so with glee.
However, Egypt's strategic location for transport, the Suez Canal, is important, and Egypt is next door to Israel would be more logical. An uncontrolled Egypt is not a good partner for the dismantlement of Syria, the timing could not get much worse - in that;
I wonder if the Oil price surge is also a ‘Gift’, “Gents ( Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait etc), thank you for your support, we have a few hitches, but we will hike Oil so you can get return for the short term and back on path to slice up Syria and get back the Egypt as the 'Devil we know' and sorry for the going off track, HR these days, not like it used to be, that Morsi fella, a bit radical and all that”?
Posted by: kev | Jul 3 2013 10:22 utc | 217
latest news --morsi killed by suicide bomber in cairo----riote break out 54 killed
Posted by: jub | Jul 3 2013 11:53 utc | 218
the good thing about the Angry Arab is not that he is always right, but that he always let's his hair down, so to speak, and shows his feelings, so you know why he is taking the view he is, even if you may think it's factually inaccurate, or insufficiently informed. He has a very interesting piece on al-Akhbar today (I dare say it is on his blog as well, but for some technical reason I always find that an absolute pig to load): he argues that the reason for the hurried resignation of the emir of Qatar in favour of his son, was that the US wanted the Saudi-Qatari rivalry resolved, because it was leading to mayhem in the field.
http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/angry-corner/change-qatar
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jul 3 2013 12:12 utc | 219
5 pm, the clock is ticking - Morsi told Egyptians he was "prepared to sacrifice his blood" for the safety of the homeland, whatever that means? The armed forces, who responded by announcing that they'll go to any length to defend Egypt against "terrorists, radicals or fools." Whatever that means?
On another front, away from all the attention of Snowden, Syria (THe latter Very quiet right now!), and then Egypt;
More than a dozen people are dead in Pakistan after what's believed to be the third US drone strike in recent weeks. Multiple missiles were fired at a house in North Waziristan, killing 17 and making this the deadliest drone attack of 2013 so far - US 'life' goes on!
Posted by: kev | Jul 3 2013 12:32 utc | 220
@Jul 3, 2013 7:53:33 AM | 218 - What news source? Getting nothing here?
Posted by: kev | Jul 3 2013 12:45 utc | 221
You measure popular support in democracies according to pre-established rules, not as you go along. In Egypt, popular support is measured in elections.
There is an election being delayed as I write this. Is there really broad opposition to the MB? Then hold the People's Assembly election and lets see in a real representative contest. If the MB loses spectacularly, that by itself would reign in Morsi, and the PA could also start impeachment proceedings according to the rules.
Throwing out the rules and claiming that because of poll results and street protests unelected bodies that have historically been accountable to foreign powers can throw out every single elected official in the government and void all six post-Mubarak elections that the MB won is absurd and outrageous.
I don't believe Egypt is broadly opposed to the MB. If it was, we would have seen real proof of it in elections that Morsi is not delaying. I also don't believe that while Americans are speaking publicly in support of Morsi that the US Embassy is not supportive, to the degree of offering funds, coordination and organization to this current anti-MB campaign.
Either the SCAF is suddenly acting in direct vehement opposition to the US' wishes after never doing so for decades and after the US Secretary of State has certified that $1.5 billion in annual bribes gives the US leverage over army policies or the US and Army are lying for the public about their positions. The latter is far easier for me to believe.
There is no country that has had free, fair, competitive elections where it would be valid to say because of street protests to void a ratified constitution and all of the elections because of street protests and polls. Again, this is really outrageous.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 12:52 utc | 222
@anon "he opposition in general is more biased to US policy since their ideologies match more than the MB does with the US."
This is exactly as Rowan Berkley said. You're basing bias towards US policy on their "ideology" (in essence their social preferences) when frankly, that couldn't matter less. Because the MB is "Islamist" and the US & protesters are "Secular" doesn't make the policy different. That's like saying some mega theocracy like Saudi Arabia could never be an ally of the secular US.
What matters in policy terms isn't "Islamist" vs. "secular" but "will you back the us wars?" "will you back neo-liberal economics?" "will you back the sunni/shia split narrative?"
In all cases Morsi answers Yes YES and OH YES.
So please, Anon, stop trying to convince us using the same tired b.s. the United States and Israel use to try and hoodwink the rest of the world. You're not going to convince us that being "Islamist" makes Egypt anymore independent than it makes Saudi Arabia.
Posted by: guest77 | Jul 3 2013 13:02 utc | 223
http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/al-ahram-reveals-details-armed-forces-post-morsy-roadmap
Al-Ahram reveals details of Armed Forces' post-Morsy roadmap
The paper also said that the Armed Forces’ roadmap has received international support and that its framework was devised with help from regional and international capitals. The source also said it is expected to be well received by Egyptians and local political circles.
Of course. The SCAF had never been defying its patrons in Washington DC.
I can't believe people fell for this.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 13:07 utc | 224
guest77
Well if Rowan said it too that just gives more credit to my argument.
If you feel offended by facts and comments here, please dont reply to my arguments.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 13:27 utc | 225
Check out the photos on here - to say they exhibit pronounced anti-americanism on the part of the protestors would be a prodigious understatement:
http://directorblue.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/15-photos-from-tahrir-square-protests.html
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jul 3 2013 15:05 utc | 226
So what's your point? If at least one protester is anti-American, then it's a good thing for the every elected element of government to be replaced by the military?
That's a disgusting position.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 16:02 utc | 227
When even the Copts criticize the US, you get an idea something was getting wrong
16:25 The National Association for Change (NAC), a pro-democracy umbrella group of liberal, leftists and Brotherhood activists formed in 2010 to coordinate opposition against Hosni Mubarak’s rule. has issued a statement warning all “foreign states, entities and institutes” against interfering in Egypt’s internal matters asserting that any attempts of intervention would be a de facto declaration of war on Egypt.
In their statement, the NAC addressed the US in particular, criticising its ongoing interference “obviously reflected in their recent actions and statements.”
The NAC also called on Hamas and other Arab groups to understand “the danger of interfering in internal matters, or the involvement in the complicated struggle between the people and the groups of local and global terrorism."
Anti-Americanism has been a feature of some of the anti-Morsi protests recently, with some protesters arguing that the US is too close to the Muslim Brotherhood. A statement released this evening by Coptic rights group the Maspero Youth Union also warned the American people that their president and US ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson support "a fascist group [the Brotherhood] that oppresses minorities."
Posted by: Mina | Jul 3 2013 16:44 utc | 228
Le Monde has posted that on its live feed
"Les explications de Christophe Ayad, journaliste au Monde, sur l'interdiction de quitter le territoire émise contre Mohamed Morsi et plusieurs repsonsables des Frères Musulmans :
L'interdiction de voyager décrétée contre les principaux dirigeants des Frères musulmans dont le Guide suprême Mohamed Badie, son numéro 2, Khaïrat Al-Chater, et le président Morsi, semble justifiée par l'armée par une affaire d'évasion de prison en 2011.
En fait, fin janvier 2011, en plein soulèvement contre Hosni Moubarak, les gardiens des principales prisons du pays avaient pris la fuite suite à des mutineries, laissant les prisonniers s'échapper : c'est comme cela que Khaïrat Al-Chater, le cerveau de la confrérie, qui dirigeait l'organisation depuis sa cellule, avait retrouvé la liberté alors qu'il purgeait une peine de sept ans de réclusion, prononcée en 2008 par un tribunal militaire, pour blanchiment d'argent et financement des Frères musulmans, alors interdits.
Avant même que Hosni Moubarak tombe, la confrérie avait négocié avec Omar Suleiman, le vice-président et chef des services de renseignement une "grâce" officieuse pour son mentor. Mais la condamnation n'a jamais été effacée.
C'est déjà sous ce prétexte qu'il avait été empêché de se présenter à la présidentielle de juin 2012. Mohamed Morsi, surnommé "la roue de secours", avait été choisi pour le remplacer en catastrophe. Cette affaire de condamnation pendante et d'évasion-libération est opportunément ressortie par l'armée aujourd'hui. On comprend aussi mieux l'acharnement que les Frères musulmans avaient mis à purger la justice pendant leur première année au pouvoir.
mercredi 3 juillet 2013 18h35 "
What it doesn't say is that al Jazeera was broadcasting this escape almost "live", with some prominent MB figure on the phone, explaining there was a pile of corpses in the prison because Mubarak's police had ordered to eliminate them but they had managed to escape.
This of course was BS.
It is only after that "live event" that the MB finally took to the streets against Mubarak, while before that they had kept repeting the motto cherished by Salafis and the Saudis: demonstrations are forbidden, and questioning the authority is haram.
After the MB won the elections, mosques were often using this argument to forbid protests in small villages.
Posted by: Mina | Jul 3 2013 16:53 utc | 229
According to an MB spokesman, a full military coup is underway right now with tanks and APCs on the streets of Cairo.
Several hundred Egyptian soldiers, together with armored vehicles, are taking part in a military parade on the road near presidential palace, a witness told Reuters. Live images from Sky News Arabia show army tanks in several Cairo neighborhoods.National security adviser Essam El-Haddad said that "no military coup can succeed in the face of sizeable popular force without considerable bloodshed." He added that he expects army and police violence to remove pro-Mursi demonstrators from the streets of Cairo
See: 'Full military coup' underway in Egypt, tanks & APCs seen on streets
Posted by: William Bowles | Jul 3 2013 17:03 utc | 230
228) it is obvious that Egypt was not a democracy under Mubarak and it is obvious that democracy was not what the Muslim Brotherhood has been fighting for.
There must be more than two alternatives in Egypt, neither go back to military rule nor Brotherhood dictatorship.
Posted by: somebody | Jul 3 2013 17:06 utc | 231
Ok now the military coup is on for real. Not good. Clearly show that Egyptian people (as far as the loosing opposition goes along with the corrupt military) is not ready for democracy. This may end bloody.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 17:13 utc | 232
A military coup means that the army would intend to be the sole executive power (cf Sudan). A "military coup" where the army spends the day speaking with the different parties and minorities and religious leaders of the country is unheard of. Check your definition and premises. The army has said they plan to manage a transition, has they had started before the elections, and with rules that were dropped by the winners without any legal warrant (for example, the fact voting was obligatory for everyone above 18).
Several governement members have already resigned in the last few days and even the Salafist Nour party has called for early election already 3 days ago, de facto making the MB coalition fall.
Posted by: Mina | Jul 3 2013 17:16 utc | 233
Reuters have got that too but they give it a faint air of comic opera:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/03/us-egypt-protests-idUSBRE95Q0NO20130703
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jul 3 2013 17:20 utc | 234
The western trained Abdul take power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Fatah_Khalil_Al-Sisi
But some people will still say the opposition is led by anti-americanism.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 17:21 utc | 235
Truly despicable developments in Egypt. What about the millions of Egyptians who voted for Morsi, who want Morsi as their president? Fuck 'em, right?
1000 fuzzy beards aren't worth a single pair of breasts when deciding whose opinion counts. The young, Prada wearing twitterati want another revolution. Let them have it, and let it be bloody.
Posted by: Pat Bateman | Jul 3 2013 17:29 utc | 236
The MB won under six fair contested elections and remained subject to elections. If the People's Assembly elections had gone on as scheduled and the MB lost, the MB would have relinquished power according to the constitution.
There is no possible definition of dictator that fits Morsi. That's just hysterical nonsense that naively and stupidly plays into the hands of the US which opposes democracy throughout the region.
If you claim to be anti-American, but support removing all elected officials in favor of the military which has historically and recently been certified to be subject to US pressure then you are really pro-American. The anti-American claim is at best naive and at worst dishonest.
Posted by: Arnold Evans | Jul 3 2013 17:32 utc | 237
"Dear Egyptian Army,
Please don't interfere and let a real civil war break out, we enjoy so much watching the Muslims killing each other to the last one like in Syria.
Gratefully,
Some MoA trolls."
Posted by: Mina | Jul 3 2013 18:05 utc | 238
Arnold Evans
Our arguments here will be vindicated, just wait, dont expect that Mina, guest77, Mr Pragma would admit though.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 18:42 utc | 239
Pat Bateman (235)
What about the millions of Egyptians who voted for Morsi, who want Morsi as their president?
who want morsi as their president? You should say "wanted". Depending on which numbers one trusts, around 2/3ds of those who voted for morsi are decidedly discontent with him.
As for those who complain about lack of respect for democracy along the line, that having been elected basically is an irrevocable carte blanche for 4 years: How much more direct, clear, and unmistakably can "the will of the people" be shown than by millions on the street?
morsi has had his chance - up to the last minute he showed no respect for the people nor the slightest readiness to compromise.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Jul 3 2013 18:44 utc | 240
@Arnold There is no possible definition of dictator that fits Morsi.
Last November the guy declared himself to be above the law. If that is not a definition of dictatorship ...
The one having shown
not ready for democracy(quoting Anonymous) is morsi.
And you, if you *really* (and not just for the sake of provocation) think that being elected is an irrevocable carte blanche.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Jul 3 2013 18:47 utc | 242
b
How are you to rule as a president of a state if there is no constitution and if you are forbidden to take any steps such as decrees? Thats not a dictatorship nor putting "himself" above the law.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 19:02 utc | 243
Mr Pragma
I can tell you are mad, however when lacking arguments you shouldnt adhere to ad hominem.
Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 3 2013 19:02 utc | 244
I can tell you are mad ...you shouldnt adhere to ad hominemUhum. Brilliant!
So, I guess, your argument is "it pleased me, anonymous, to say so".
Thanks anyway.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Jul 3 2013 19:27 utc | 245
The comments to this entry are closed.
The absence of determined statements from nato-related government (spokespersons) about this situation is, at least to me, quite unusual.
Found this Obama quote in the WaPo:
“Our commitment to Egypt has never been around any particular individual or party,” he said. “Our commitment has been to a process.”
My interpretation would be: this revolt/coup/insurrection is an internal egyptian affair indeed and won't concern or change the egyptian stance in "foreign" policy (Syria, Iran, Russia), so I'd guess for one time it's the Natos interest to have things happen without too much turmoil or even bloodshed.
I'm really not familiar with the inner happenings of egyptian society, so my views and guessings are always limited to the western and western media point of view of "middle east" policies.
Since there seem to be native Egyptians here: What I've heard about the MB (before the "spring") is that it's origins are deeply rooted in egypt and that their strategy was focussed on winning sympathies by welfare and charity mainly for the poor or lower classes. Maybe now that the MB has officially taken over and is officially free to act (as opposed to being banned under Mubarak), these people that MB targeted for welfare get disappointed and take to the streets? Or would you think that the masses of people are actually tied to the old power apparatus? What's the main reasons for discontent among the people? Has the egyptian economy actually deteriorated that much since Morsi took over?
Posted by: peter radiator | Jul 2 2013 22:22 utc | 201