How the Leader of the Free World Became the Leader of the Global Right Wing.

AmeriKa's president, Donald Trump, will not be the leader of the free world. He will, however, be the leader of the global right wing. Across Europe, the radical right is embracing the next US leader as one of their own. Donald Trump validates their ugly bigotry, racism and xenophobia. He is one of them. It's no accident that he's also warmly received by the radical right Netanyahu government in Israel.

In the Middle East, the strongman thugs who rule with iron fists in the post-Arab Spring era couldn't be happier.

He will be a bit of both but radically different, too, predicts Theodore Karasik, a senior adviser with the Washington-based Gulf State Analytics, who has discussed the future of the region with Trump’s advisers in recent months. Trump’s chief priority, he said, will be to fight the Islamic State, while outsourcing the rest of the region’s security to Russia and to Arab states.

Words like “moderate” and “democracy” won’t feature in a Trump administration’s Middle East vocabulary, he added. “We are now engaged in realpolitik.”

For the region’s strongmen, most of whom had fraught relations with the Obama administration, that is welcome news. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyep Erdogan and Egypt’s President Abdel Fatah al-Sissi have hailed Trump’s election as a chance to reset their badly frayed relationships with Washington.

Hold onto your hats. With ideology this rancid driving AmeriKa's foreign and military policy, we could be in for a very sharp and wild ride.

Could Syria Become the 21st Century Sarajevo?

There were plenty of proxy wars during the Cold War only back then the principals had enough sense to avoid direct clashes. That was then, this is Syria where today we find the rival superpowers circling each other inside the same phone booth.

You could search the world over and never find one place where so many players are gathered as Syria.

First up is the Alawite government of Bashar Assad.

Then there's the original rebels, Syrian Sunnis.

Then we have the Sunni Islamists - the 'moderate' al Nusra, an affiliate of al Qaeda, and the far nastier Islamic State, ISIS.

The United States and its minions have been waging a bombing campaign against ISIS, first in Iraq and later also in Syria. It's been the standard, ineffective "whack a mole" stuff.

Turkey finally got off the fence and began its own air campaign only they're less concerned about ISIS than they are at bombing Syrian Kurds.

The United States was supporting the Syrian rebels with equipment and training until it discovered the rebels were surrendering all that gear to al Nusra and al Qaeda. Can't be having that. So the United States is now supporting Syria's Kurds which is really pissing off Turkey's Erdogan.

Recently three more places have been set at the table of mass mayhem. Here sit Russia, Hezbollah and now Iranian forces all supporting Bashar Assad.  Latest word has it that Iran has not only sent in units of the Revolutionary Guard but also a contingent of warplanes. They seem to be focused mainly on the moderate Syrian rebels but they also take on the Sunni Islamists every now and then.

It's hard to keep track of how many nations are waging air wars in Syria.  There's the Syrian air force, naturally, its strength replenished by replacement aircraft from Russia. There's the US Air Force and the League of Vassals, America's aerial Foreign Legion that, naturally, includes a Canadian contingent plus strike fighters from France, Britain, Australia and other European states plus Jordan and a half-hearted effort from a few Gulf States.

We want to battle ISIS. The other side seems intent mainly on attacking Syrian opposition rebels. The Turks prefer to bomb Syrian Kurds, the very group the US is still supporting. Nobody is bombing Assad, the guy who sparked the original fighting, and, with the Russians riding shotgun, it's hard to imagine the Western coalition going after him any time soon.

Syria, which is almost the same size as the state of Washington (just over twice the size of New Brunswick), suddenly has an awful lot of warplanes buzzing overhead at cross purposes.  The Russians have also introduced their highly lethal  S-300 surface to air missile batteries. Turkey, meanwhile, is clamoring for the US and Germany to reactivate their Patriot missile batteries in support of their NATO partner. Eventually someone may fire one of those things.

The Americans have been snookered by Putin and this is bound to have geopolitical ramifications throughout the Middle East. Will the Saudis and the Egyptians tolerate Shiite Iran's military presence in Syria? Will they pile on?

Could Syria become the Sarajevo of the 21st century, the place where a proxy war becomes a shooting war between the West and Russia? Those expert in these matters warn these eyeball to eyeball confrontations are the sort of situations in which rival powers can back into direct conflicts neither one of them truly wants to initiate.

Meanwhile, Today In ISIS News....

These guys are really getting around.  They're in Syria and Iraq.  They're in Libya and environs.  They're becoming established in Afghanistan.  Now they're engaging Egypt and Israel.  Yes, that's right, Israel.  This ISIS outfit is on the move.

The Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reports that the Israeli Defence Force is preparing for an ISIS attack out of the Sinai peninsula.  The Sinai branch of ISIS has announced on Twitter (naturally) plans to launch a barrage of 150-rockets into Israel.  This is the same bunch that's been attacking Egyptian forces with some success.

The threat of the Islamic State on Israel's southern border "is of great concern to the army and influences our preparedness for any incident that might occur," Col. Arik Chen, deputy commander of the 80th Territorial Division, said yesterday in a briefing for reporters.

The IDF "knows the intentions and the abilities" of the Islamists in the Sinai and is prepared for any aggression, whether it is aimed at the Egyptian security forces or whether "it becomes a threat to Israel in the future," Chen said.

The number of casualties from attacks on Egyptian forces by the Sinai branch of the Islamic State has increased drastically since last September, he added.

...The group calling itself Ansar Bait al-Maqdis announced its allegiance to the Islamic State last year and is now regarded as the Sinai branch of the organization. The group is attempting to get its hands on sophisticated weaponry, including anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft missiles and explosives.

Meanwhile Egyptian president al-Sissi took to FOX News to plead for more American help.  FOX News shill, Bret Baier, had little difficulty getting al-Sissi to criticize Obama for cutting off military aid to Egypt in the wake of massacres.

It sounds like the Saudis and Egyptians are forming some sort of military alliance but they still want the US and its allies to do their fighting.  Quelle surprise.

Washington's Quagmire Mentality

When it comes to Iraq, or the rest of the Middle East for that matter, America is operating on a number of assumptions rooted in fantasy.  These false assumptions ensure that America will keep getting itself trapped in quagmire.

Andrew Bacevich, former US Army commander turned academic, knows a good deal about Iraq.  The Columbia professor commanded US troops in Operation Desert Storm and his son was lost to an IED during Operation Enduring Freedom.

Inside the Beltway, policymakers, politicians, and pundits take Iraq’s existence for granted.  Many can even locate it on a map.  They also take for granted the proposition that it is incumbent upon the United States to preserve that existence.  To paraphrase Chris Hedges, for a certain group of Americans, Iraq is the cause that gives life meaning. For the military-industrial complex, it’s the gift that keeps on giving.

Considered from this perspective, the “Iraqi government” actually governs, the “Iraqi army” is a nationally representative fighting force, and the “Iraqi people” genuinely see themselves as constituting a community with a shared past and an imaginable future.

Arguably, each of these propositions once contained a modicum of truth.  But when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003 and, as then-Secretary of State Colin Powell predicted, broke the place, any merit they previously possessed quickly dissipated.  Years of effort by American occupiers intent on creating a new Iraq out of the ruins of the old produced little of value and next to nothing that has lasted.  Yet even today, in Washington the conviction persists that trying harder might somehow turn things around.  Certainly, that conviction informs the renewed U.S. military intervention prompted by the rise of IS.

...otherwise intelligent people purporting to believe in things that don’t exist -- can be applied well beyond American assumptions about Iraq.  A similar inclination to fantasize permeates, and thereby warps, U.S. policies throughout much of the Greater Middle East.  Consider the following claims, each of which in Washington circles has attained quasi-canonical status.

* The presence of U.S. forces in the Islamic world contributes to regional stability and enhances American influence.

* The Persian Gulf constitutes a vital U.S. national security interest.

* Egypt and Saudi Arabia are valued and valuable American allies.

* The interests of the United States and Israel align.

* Terrorism poses an existential threat that the United States must defeat.

For decades now, the first four of these assertions have formed the foundation of U.S. policy in the Middle East. The events of 9/11 added the fifth, without in any way prompting a reconsideration of the first four. On each of these matters, no senior U.S. official (or anyone aspiring to a position of influence) will dare say otherwise, at least not on the record.

Yet subjected to even casual scrutiny, none of the five will stand up.  To take them at face value is the equivalent of believing in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy -- or that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell really, really hope that the Obama administration and the upcoming Republican-controlled Congress can find grounds to cooperate.

As for the stabilizing effect of US troops, Bacevich points out that this has seldom occurred.  To the contrary, it has often destabilized countries where American troops have been based.  

Iraq and Afghanistan provide mournful examples. The new book “Why We Lost” by retired Lieutenant General Daniel Bolger finally makes it permissible in official circles to declare those wars the failures that they have been.  Even granting, for the sake of argument, that U.S. nation-building efforts were as pure and honorable as successive presidents portrayed them, the results have been more corrosive than constructive.  The IS militants plaguing Iraq find their counterpart in the soaring production of opium that plagues Afghanistan. This qualifies as stability?  

The Middle East is no longer strategically vital to the United States.  The energy dependence the US once had on the ME has been superceded by events. 

Access to Gulf oil remains critically important to some countries, but surely not to the United States.  When it comes to propping up the wasteful and profligate American way of life, Texas and North Dakota outrank Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in terms of importance.  Rather than worrying about Iraqi oil production, Washington would be better served ensuring the safety and well-being of Canada, with its bountiful supplies of shale oil.  And if militarists ever find the itch to increase U.S. oil reserves becoming irresistible, they would be better advised to invade Venezuela than to pick a fight with Iran.

Does the Persian Gulf require policing from the outside? Maybe. But if so, let’s volunteer China for the job. It will keep them out of mischief.

As for America's supposed Arab allies:

For decades, Saudi Arabia, Planet Earth’s closest equivalent to an absolute monarchy, has promoted anti-Western radical jihadism -- and not without effect. The relevant numbers here are two that most New Yorkers will remember: 15 out of 19.  If a conspiracy consisting almost entirely of Russians had succeeded in killing several thousand Americans, would U.S. authorities give the Kremlin a pass? Would U.S.-Russian relations remain unaffected?  The questions answer themselves.

Meanwhile, after a brief dalliance with democracy, Egypt has once again become what it was before: a corrupt, oppressive military dictatorship unworthy of the billions of dollars of military assistance that Washington provides from one year to the next.

Bacevich says it's long past time that the United States had a realistic assessment of its supposed ally, Israel:

For the government of Israel, viewing security concerns as paramount, an acceptable Palestinian state will be the equivalent of an Arab Bantustan, basically defenseless, enjoying limited sovereignty, and possessing limited minimum economical potential. Continuing Israeli encroachments on the occupied territories, undertaken in the teeth of American objections, make this self-evident.

It is, of course, entirely the prerogative -- and indeed the obligation -- of the Israeli government to advance the well being of its citizens.  U.S. officials have a similar obligation: they are called upon to act on behalf of Americans. And that means refusing to serve as Israel’s enablers when that country takes actions that are contrary to U.S. interests.

The “peace process” is a fiction. Why should the United States persist in pretending otherwise? It’s demeaning.

The quest to defeat terrorism is Quixotic at best:

Like crime and communicable diseases, terrorism will always be with us.  In the face of an outbreak of it, prompt, effective action to reduce the danger permits normal life to continue. Wisdom lies in striking a balance between the actually existing threat and exertions undertaken to deal with that threat. Grown-ups understand this. They don’t expect a crime rate of zero in American cities. They don’t expect all people to enjoy perfect health all of the time.  The standard they seek is “tolerable.”

...aspirations to eliminate terrorism belong in the same category as campaigns to end illiteracy or homelessness: it’s okay to aim high, but don’t be surprised when the results achieved fall short.

Eliminating terrorism is a chimera. It’s not going to happen. U.S. civilian and military leaders should summon the honesty to acknowledge this.

What would be the scariest thing Washington could do to its Middle East client rulers?  Leave.  Tell them they're on their own, Israel included.  Just stop supporting them.  No troops, no cash, no weapons unless they serve America's interests.  Eventually America must tire of being bled out by enemies and supposed friends alike in the Middle East.

And if Washington is going to persist and continues to implement a foreign policy based on fantasies, why should Canada enroll in America's Foreign Legion?  With our belief-based government that persistently follows gut instinct instead of fact, appearance over substance, we're highly susceptible when America goes bonkers.

Egypt's Government - The One We Like - Mass Murderers?

A Human Rights Watch investigation into the deaths of more than 800-protesters by Egyptian security forces at last August's Rabaa massacre finds the slaughter was both planned and politically motivated.

"The 195-page investigation based on interviews with 122 survivors and witnesses has found Egypt's police and army 'systematically and deliberately killed unarmed protesters on political grounds' in actions that 'likely amounted to crimes against humanity'.

"The report recommends that several senior individuals within Egypt's security apparatus be investigated and, where appropriate, held to account for their role in the planning of both the Rabaa massacre and others that occurred last summer - including Abdel Fatah al-Sisi, Egypt's then defence minister and new president.  As head of the army at the time, Sisi had overall responsibility for the army's role at Rabaa, and has publicly acknowledged spending 'very many long days to discuss all the details'." 

Okay, I just started the clock.  How long do you think it will be before Mr. Human Rights, John Baird, rears up on his hind legs to denounce al-Sisi and demand he stand trial?

Reaping the Whirlwind in Egypt

If democracy is to have any chance of surviving in Egypt it's up to the E.U. and the U.S. to move against the generals.   The Egyptian army's counter-coup is now a fait accompli.   Expectations that toppling the democratically-elected Morsi government would pave the way for a secular, non-elected, democratic (???) civilian government have been dashed as the generals moved to consolidate their hold on the country.

It's been suggested that Western governments and media demonized Morsi to condition the public for his ouster.   If so, it worked.

Mubarak was released, Morsi imprisoned.   When secular leader El Baradei resigned in protest at the military's wanton power grab he and his family had to flee to safety in Europe even as the generals ordered his arrest.

Today's New York Times editorial asks, "Who Will Be Left in Egypt?"

On Thursday, with much of the world distracted by Syria, the Egyptian generals and the civilian officials they have appointed extended a countrywide state of emergency for two months. And after overthrowing Mohamed Morsi, Egypt’s first freely elected president, two months ago and trying to crush his Muslim Brotherhood allies, security forces have also begun to round up other dissenters, a chilling warning that no Egyptians should feel safe if they dare to challenge authority. 

The 1950s-era state of emergency law, which removes the right to a trial and curbs on police abuses, was for decades a hated symbol of Mr. Mubarak’s excesses. Although the law stayed on the books, the state of emergency was suspended after Mr. Mubarak’s overthrow. The military leadership revived it last month and has extended it until November, citing the security problems that have only grown worse since Mr. Morsi’s ouster.

Just as troubling, the government has moved from singling out the Brotherhood and other Islamists to going after liberal and left-leaning activists and journalists.

There seems to be no end to the draconian controls as the military seeks to restrain the news media, manipulate the courts, misuse security services and restrict civil society groups. If it prevents the Muslim Brotherhood from operating at all, as many expect, it will go even farther than Mr. Mubarak. The process of revising the Constitution that was put in place by the government seems as flawed as the one implemented by Mr. Morsi. The results are almost certain to be regarded by many Egyptians as illegitimate. 

The Times calls for Washington to cut off all aid to the generals.  A similar appeal to the European Union was recently made in The Guardian.  Unfortunately the message has yet to be sent to the men with the funny hats and all the ribbons in Cairo.

Here, Mo, You Can Have Hosni's Cell

Any remaining shred of doubt that the Egyptian military is playing  major league hardball on this coup d'etat is gone.  It's not just the killings of Egyptian Islamists.  It's not the release of their own capo, Hosni Mubarak.   Now they're after Mohamed ElBaradei, the liberal who served for exactly one month as vice-president briefly after the ouster of Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood. 

ElBaradei, long-serving former Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, lawyer and diplomat, winner of the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize, is being accused by the Egyptian military of a variety of misdeeds arising out of his four-week tenure as Veep.

ElBaradei, who quit following last week's mass killing of protesters, "stands accused of failing to present any alternatives to dispersing two mass sit-ins in Cairo, as well as disregarding "terrorist crimes" committed by the Muslim Brotherhood there.

ElBaradei was a member of the National Salvation Front, part of the opposition to Mohamed Morsi, who was deposed by the army last month. He has been vilified in the Egyptian media since quitting. He has been called a "traitor" and caricatured stabbing Egypt in the back. The case is being brought by a professor of law, Sayeed Ateeq. ElBaradei is now in Austria with his family.

Ah, Austria, what a lovely place at this time of year.  I'm just guessing but Mo and family might be staying there for a while.

You Know It's a Coup When

When you're an Egyptian, you know your uprising has actually been a military coup when the authorities release Hosni Mubarak.

It was unclear how Egyptians — particularly those who have welcomed the military action against Mr. Morsi — would respond to the release of a despised autocrat whose downfall united Mr. Mubarak’s secular and Islamist foes. News of the legal maneuvers came at a time of sustained bloodletting.

Just in the past 24 hours, the Egyptian government has acknowledged that its security forces had killed 36 Islamists in its custody, while suspected militants were reported on Monday to have killed at least 24 police officers and wounded 3 others in an attack on their minibuses in the restive northern Sinai region.

Mr. Mubarak, 85, faces an array of legal challenges including allegations of corruption and a retrial on charges of complicity in the murder of protesters whose revolt forced his ouster in February, 2011.

Chris Hedges on "Murdering the Wretched of the Earth"

There's a reason the Muslim poor flock to radical Islam, several reasons in fact.  They've been discussed at length before but Chris Hedges, in light of the massacres ongoing in Egypt, recaps:

Radical Islam is the last refuge of the Muslim poor. The mandated five prayers a day give the only real structure to the lives of impoverished believers. The careful rituals of washing before prayers in the mosque, the strict moral code that prohibits alcohol, along with the understanding that life has an ultimate purpose and meaning, keep hundreds of millions of destitute Muslims from despair. The fundamentalist ideology that rises from oppression is rigid and unforgiving. It radically splits the world into black and white, good and evil, apostates and believers. It is bigoted and cruel to women, Jews, Christians and secularists, along with gays and lesbians. But at the same time it offers to those on the very bottom of society a final refuge and hope. The massacres of hundreds of believers in the streets of Cairo signal not only an assault against a religious ideology, not only a return to the brutal police state of Hosni Mubarak, but the start of a holy war that will turn Egypt and other poor regions of the globe into a caldron of blood and suffering. 

The only way to break the hold of radical Islam is to give followers of the movement a stake in the wider economy, the possibility of a life where the future is not dominated by grinding poverty, repression and hopelessness. If you live in the sprawling slums of Cairo or the refugee camps in Gaza or the concrete hovels in New Delhi, every avenue of escape is closed. You cannot get an education. You cannot get a job. You do not have the resources to marry. You cannot challenge the domination of the economy by the oligarchs and the generals. The only way left for you to affirm yourself is to become a martyr, or shahid. Then you will get what you cannot get in life—a brief moment of fame and glory. And while what will take place in Egypt will be defined as a religious war, and the acts of violence by the insurgents who will rise from the bloodied squares of Cairo will be defined as terrorism, the engine for this chaos is not religion but the collapsing global economy, a world where the wretched of the earth are to be subjugated and starved or shot. The lines of battle are being drawn in Egypt and across the globe. Adli Mansour, the titular president appointed by the military dictator of Egypt, Gen. Abdul-Fattah el-Sisi, has imposed a military-led government, a curfew and a state of emergency. It will not be lifted soon.

He's right.   We support those who created the conditions of despair for the masses, who drive them into the arms of radical extremists, and then we dehumanize them, the better to prepare for their slaughter.  As Hedges points out, again correctly, this is only just getting started.

What is happening in Egypt is a precursor to a wider global war between the world’s elites and the world’s poor, a war caused by diminishing resources, chronic unemployment and underemployment, declining crop yields caused by climate change, overpopulation and rising food prices.

The belief systems the oppressed embrace can be intolerant, but these belief systems are a response to the injustice, state violence and cruelty inflicted on them by the global elites. Our enemy is not radical Islam. It is global capitalism. It is a world where the wretched of the earth are forced to bow before the dictates of the marketplace, where children go hungry as global corporate elites siphon away the world’s wealth and natural resources and where our troops and U.S.-backed militaries carry out massacres on city streets. Egypt offers a window into the coming dystopia. The wars of survival will mark the final stage of human habitation of the planet. And if you want to know what they will look like, visit any city morgue in Cairo.   

Is America Now Okay With the Post-Mubarak Egypt?

Did Benjamen Netanyahu just rebuild America's relationship with Egypt?

After the fall of the brutal, murderous Mubarak regime, many American pols seemed genuinely distraught when a candidate from the Muslim Brotherhood, Mohammed Morsi, was elected the first Islamist president of Egypt.

When Netanyahu unleashed the Israeli air force on Gaza the world eyed Morsi suspiciously, fearful of an Islamist retaliation against Israel.   Instead the Egyptians calmly backed the Gaza Palestinians and set about brokering a ceasefire that Netanyahu had no choice but to accept.   As the New York Times reports, president Morsi emerged as the real victor.

"The United States, Israel and Hamas all praised Egypt’s role in brokering the cease-fire as the antagonists pulled back from violence that had killed more than 150 Palestinians and five Israelis over the past week.

"...The deal demonstrated the pragmatism of Egypt’s new Islamist president, Mohamed Morsi, who balanced public support for Hamas with a determination to preserve the peace with Israel." 

Canada's theocratic government of the day can't be at all pleased with this outcome but, like the Americans, they're just going to have to accept there is a new political dynamic in the Middle East and that demonizing Islamism as a matter of course is of dwindling utility.   The Rapture freaks can remain mired in their religious fantasies that drive their dark world view but the future of the Middle East will be written by people with names like Edrogan and Morsi.

This Is Beyond Gross

I have deleted the entire text of the original post.  Readers have pointed out that it was a hoax story by anti-Islamics in Egypt that was picked up and carried even in mainstream Canadian media.

Hey Fellas, Be My Guest

My blog was just visited by the US Army Intelligence Center.   They're shown as having checked out two posts.  One was the recent piece on Gwynne Dyer calling for urgent Egyptian military intervention to stop Gadaffi wiping out the uprising and butchering the rebels and their families.    The other was my piece from February 22 calling for urgent Egyptian military intervention to stop Gadaffi wiping out the uprising and butchering the rebels and their families.

Hey guys, glad you could stop by.   I'm even waiving any claims to intellectual property on these ideas.   Be my guest, help yourselves, go for it.   You're still giving those Egyptians billions of dollars in military aid.   Time you called in a marker or two.

Gwynne Dyer Calls for Egyptian Intervention in Libya

Back on 22 February, I did a quick analysis and concluded the fastest, surest and least bloody option for ridding Libya of the mad tyrant Gaddafi was for Egypt's  air force and army to intervene.   Libya operates small forces of 60's and 70's-vintage armour, artillery and combat aircraft, ample to crush the rebels but not much else.   Egypt, by contrast, fields 240 F-16s and regiments of US-built M-1A1 tanks that, between them, could make short work of Gaddafi's firepower advantage.

Yesterday Gwynne Dyer added his endorsement of the Egyptian option.   Given Gaddafi's comeback of the past three weeks, Dyer argues that Egypt represents Libya's last chance.

What happens to the rebels and their families after active resistance is crushed will be much worse. When political prisoners in Abu Salim prison staged a protest at jail conditions in 1996, Gaddafy had 1,200 of them massacred. All the people now fighting him, or helping the Libyan National Council that organises resistance in the east, or just demonstrating against him, will be tracked down by his secret police. They and their families are doomed.

The collapse of the democratic revolution in Libya will also gravely damage the prospects of the “Arab spring” elsewhere. Rulers in other Arab countries where the army is also largely made up of foreign mercenaries (Bahrein and several other Gulf states, for example), will conclude that they can safely kill enough of their own protesters to “restore order.”

How can this disaster be prevented? Condemnation from abroad, including from the Arab League, will not stop Gaddafy. An arms embargo is too slow-acting, as are economic boycotts and freezing Libyan government assets overseas. Gaddafy is fighting for his life, probably literally, and he knows that if he wins, the embargoes, boycotts and asset freezes will eventually be lifted. Libya has oil, after all.

Even the famous “no-fly” zone over Libya (now endorsed by France, Britain and the Arab League) would not stop Gadaffy’s advance. It’s not that destroying or grounding the Libyan air force, which is poorly trained and badly maintained, is a problem. Neither are Libya’s decrepit, last-generation-but-one surface-to-air defences. It’s just that Gaddafy can win without his air force. Tanks and artillery beat courage and small arms every time.

...What is actually needed is active military intervention on the ground and in the air by disciplined, well-trained Arab forces, sent by a revolutionary Arab government that is in sympathy with the Libyan rebels. So where is the Egyptian army when the Libyans need it?
Egypt has an open border with the rebel-controlled east of Libya, and just one brigade of the Egyptian army would be enough to stop Gaddafy’s ground forces in their tracks. The Egyptian air force could easily shoot down any of Gaddafy’s aircraft that dared to take off, especially if it had early warning from European or American AWACS aircraft.

The Egyptian army would probably not need to go all the way to Tripoli, although it could easily do so if necessary. Just the fact of Egyptian military intervention would probably convince most of the Libyan troops still supporting Gaddafy that it is time to change sides.

Arab League support for the intervention would not be hard to get, and the Libyan rebels are now desperate enough that they would quickly overcome their natural distrust of their giant neighbour. As for internal Egyptian politics, what better way for the Egyptian army to establish its revolutionary credentials and protect its privileged position in the state than by saving the revolution next door?

It is very much in the interest of the Egyptian revolution that Gaddafy does not triumph in Libya, and even more that the forces of reaction do not win in the broader Arab world. For the first time since Gamal Abdul Nasser in the 1950s, the giant of the Arab world would also be its moral leader.

...Egypt would be enough on its own. Only do it fast. A week from now will probably be too late.

Recently I was chided by some radical progressives for advocating this very sort of Egyptian military rescue, essentially called a war monger.   It's their type who would sit back self-righteously and allow the rebels, their wives and children to fall into the hands of Gaddafi's murderous security butchers.


I expect that's why I never have and never will support rightwing or leftwing politics.   Both are the refuge of rigid ideologues, radicals and extremists who demand a world that conforms to their worldview.   They're a minority certainly but they're welcome in those parties nonetheless.   I guess that makes me an avowed centrist, albeit of the centre-left.

Can Egypt Liberate Libya?

Who better to do the job?   In fact, with Security Council authorization, Egypt might be the only country that could make a difference in time. 

Gaddafi's air force that he has reportedly unleashed on the demonstrators relies on a dozen or so, 1960's vintage Mirage F1s.  Egypt has 240, late model American F-16s plus a gaggle of modern Mirage 2000s, more than a match for Gaddafi's older French jets.

On the ground, Egypt fields modern armour including the America M-1 Abrams tank.   Gaddafi's forces rely on the antiquated Soviet era T-72 which is pretty much just target practice for the M-1.

Most of Libya's stuff is pretty old including its surface to air missile batteries which are all but useless against modern electronic countermeasures.

Egypt stands at Libya's eastern border, the part of the country that is already under the demonstrators' control.   This could be over in an afternoon.  The Egyptian air force could easily take out Libyan airfields (runways and bunkers) and demolish the garrisons of those ground forces loyal to Gaddafi.   Take out their critical infrastructure including their command and control systems and they're essentially homeless.   With no air cover and the prospect of Egyptian M-1 tanks rolling on to Tripoli, Libyan military commanders would be left with a pretty hard decision and I doubt it would go Gaddafi's way.   Probably the worst of them would just pack their bags, with or without Muammar.

If external muscle is what it's going to take to pry Gaddafi's claw from Libya's throat it'll have to come from the land of the Pharoahs.

How Hosni Was Shown the Door

On Thursday the world watched a defiant Hosni Mubarak vowing to stay on as president until September.   On Friday morning Mubarak's vice president Omar Suleiman went on Egyptian TV to nervously announce the his boss had quit and transferred power to the Egyptian military.

History shows that leaders can retire or they can reluctantly negotiate resignation or they can be forced out.   It was pretty clear that Hosni didn't choose voluntary retirement but was it a negotiated resignation or was he toppled?

The first sign that Mubarak was driven from office came a day after his resignation when it was announced that senior cabinet ministers had been forbidden to leave the country.  Then word came out that Egypt had asked the EU to freeze their assets.  Sure didn't sound like anyone going graciously into the night.

The Sydney Morning Herald reports on the story in Egypt's largest newspaper, al-Ahram

..military leaders threatened to publish their own statement announcing that Mubarak had been sacked.
 
The newspaper said a statement announcing Mubarak's resignation was pre-recorded by the army's chief-of-staff, Sami Enan, and delivered to the offices of the state television broadcaster Nile TV.

In the end the statement was not broadcast after Suleiman agreed at the last minute to read his own statement that Mubarak had resigned in the interests of the country.

In the days since the resignation, senior government and party officials have confirmed that Mubarak originally made a commitment to resign on Thursday, only to change his mind at the last minute.

Al-Ahram and Associated Press reported that Mubarak's top aides and family concealed the full extent of what was happening on the streets, instead telling the 82-year-old that he could ride out the turmoil which had brought the country to a virtual standstill.

 ''He did not look beyond what Gamal was telling him, so he was isolated politically,'' one official was quoted as saying. ''Every incremental move [by Mubarak] was too little, too late.''

The al-Ahram story confirms other insider comments that Mubarak's end was pre-ordained five years ago when he surrounded himself with "yes men" who isolated Mubarak from the nation he ruled.   These sycophants are the same men the Egyptian army now has either under house arrest or prohibited from leaving the country.

al Arabiya also sheds a little light on Mubarak's last hours in office.   The Arab news channel confirms that Mubarak was supposed to resign on Thursday night until his son, Gamal, intervened and persuaded his father to instead announce he was staying.   Apparently this provoked a shouting match between Gamal and his brother, Alaa, who accused Gamal of bringing their father to a shameful end and dragging the country into corruption.

Did Mubarak Step Down or Was He Pushed?

Hosni Mubarak is believed to be hanging out at his Sharm el Sheik villa on the Red Sea.  It is thought he went there after his announcement on Thursday that he was staying on as president.

On Friday, a tense-looking vice president, Omar Suleiman, appeared on state television to announce Mubarak had stepped down and had transferred power to the chiefs of staff of the Egyptian military.

So just what happened betwixt pillar and post?  Did Mubarak change his mind or was it changed for him?  No one has said exactly what happened but there is one sign that Mubarak and his government were overthrown.

The Hindu newspaper carried a report that Mubarak and his officials have been told by the military that they may not leave Egypt without the permission of the military or Egypt's chief prosecutor.  A similar account was published in the Italian news agency, AGI.

The Arab news service, Al Masry Al Youm, is also reporting some of Mubarak's cronies have been put under house arrest, others ordered not to leave Egypt.   Citing "well informed sources" the online paper is reporting that Mubarak may have fallen into a coma.  Egypt's foreign ministry has also requested that the European Union freeze any assets belonging to five key cabinet ministers suspected to widespread corruption.

This Is Not a Happy Camper

Ex-Egyptian vice president and torturer-in-chief Omar Suleiman doesn't look his cheery self as he announces both he and his boss are out of their jobs.   In fact, he looks just a little nervous.



I suppose Omar has an idea what might lie in store for him if he falls into the hands of the wrong people.

MUBARAK RESIGNS, MILITARY TAKES OVER

Al Jazeera reports that Hosni Mubarak has resigned.   Power is said to have been transferred to the Supreme Council for the Armed Forces.

Mubarak and family are said to have left Cairo.  His son and would-be successor is said to be in London.

With the army in power it would appear that the NDP government is at an end without having to be toppled in a coup.

Now we just get to sit back and watch how Mubarak extricates himself and his assets in the coming weeks.   I could be wrong but I'd be very surprised if Mubarak didn't secure some helpful terms before handing the government over to the military.

Update:

The Jerusalem Post reports that the Egyptian military is dismissing the entire Mubarak cabinet and dissolving parliament.  Al Jazeera quotes el Beradai as saying it could take a year to form political parties and organize a proper election.

If You Were Hosni

Who knew?  President AND a Shriner!

To many Westerners, Hosni Mubarak seems enigmatic, out of touch with reality, perhaps even irrational.  He seems all those things until you put yourself in his shoes.

Try to imagine Hosni Mubarak job hunting and sitting down to write his resume.  Under "job experience" I would suppose he'd write that he served Egypt, in uniform and out, for about 60-years.   In his early years he even flew Spitfires.  Then he got into politics, showed promise and moved on up the ranks.  He lived through every day of what could be called the Middle East modern era.  He served Nasser and Sadat and then did what neither of them could manage, he survived as Egypt's president for three decades.   He survived many assassination attempts and overcame constant challenges, internal as well as external, while enabling his immediate family to amass a fortune estimated at between 40 and 70-billion dollars.  He and Ronald Reagan became presidents in the same year, 1981.

So what sort of skillset does it take to do all that?  Above all else you've got to be a true survivor.  You've got to be nimble, shrewd, calculating, determined, cold, brutal and, when needed, ambiguous even unreadable.

Last night everyone expected Hosni to appear on TV to resign the presidency.  They were shocked, even outraged that he did the opposite.  Why?

If you were Hosni you would realize that it's over for you.   Your days in power are ending.  That can't be changed.   So what's second best?   That's obvious.  What Mubarak needs now is to salvage his National Democratic Party or get it on some sort of life support.  He's said he wants to live out the rest of his life in Egypt but I'm sure he doesn't want to spend those years behind bars.

If the NDP falls as it seems it must, Hosni is going to have to have some sort of amnesty in place first or else get the movers in.  Either way that takes time.  Moving or converting $70-billion in assets isn't something that's easy or quick to accomplish.  Getting family members resettled also takes a bit of time.  Hosni needs understandings with governments throughout Europe, the Middle East and in the United States.  A lot of these things will be far harder to pull off once he yields the presidency.  I'm pretty sure that while Omar is tending the shop, Hosni is working the phones.  He has to buy time and that will only become much harder once he steps down.    In the meantime the old bugger still has a few more cards to play.

Obama Whines, Mubarak Yawns

Barack Obama wasn't pleased with Hosni Mubarak's announcement today that he's not going to step down until next September.   That sent POTUS to the airwaves to insist the Egyptian government, "put forward a credible, concrete and unequivocal path toward genuine democracy."  Missing from Obama's rebuke was the "or else" part.

Or else what exactly?  America doesn't seem to be holding a strong hand.  It may be used to getting its way but this is the Middle East and Egypt borders Israel where the pols have been defying Washington at every turn for years.  If the White House tries to punish Mubarak by suspending aid to Egypt the King of Saud has promised to cover whatever is withheld.  Hosni already has two thugs in his pocket, King Abdullah and Benjamin Netanyahu, so he's pretty much away at the races.

The great mystery to these developments is why anyone in his right mind would expect Mubarak to go gently into the night.  If you were Hosni Mubarak, would you?


 You're 82 years old, not in the best of health, you're immensely wealthy, still very powerful, your friends are considerably outnumbered  by your enemies, you have a lot of skeletons in your closet for which you would rather not be held to account and, within just a few weeks, you've been overtaken by events that could just have you on the run or behind bars for the rest of your life.

So, do you step down graciously and place your own head in a noose or do you play for time, rely on your unindicted co-conspirators and tough it out?  I'm guessing most of us would play for time.  Time to weigh how much of the mob can be neutralized, what groups can be divided from others.  Time in which to see what deals are on the table, at home and abroad.   Time in which to review your assets, figure out what's safe, what needs to be moved or converted in form.  You'll need protection and immunities from people who can be relied upon to keep their promises.

While he clings to the presidency Mubarak continues to have time to work on his housekeeping.  And with up to $70-billion in family assets at stake, that's a lot of housekeeping.  Once he steps down it's time to run.

I'm not surprised that he's not leaving - yet.   But I will be surprised if he's not gone, along with his NDP, within a month.  In the meantime, unless Washington can figure out a way to get at Mubarak with surgical precision, some option that doesn't risk greater blowback later, America will remain the least of Hosni's problems.