Three Cheers for Egypt’s ‘Democratic Coup’! MILITARY ENSURES IT REMAINS THE POWER BEHIND THE THRONE . . . July 20, 2013, 7:01 pm "Egyptians would be lucky if their new ruling generals turn out to be in the mould of Chile’s Augusto Pinochet, who took power amid chaos but hired free-market reformers and midwifed a transition to democracy."- Wall Street Journal editorial, July 5, 2013. by Selvam Canagaratna Amy Davidson, a Senior Editor at The New Yorker, focused on the WSJ’s editorial ‘wish’ [quoted above] before relating, tongue-in-cheek, the horrible reality that is now a part of Chile’s history: "Quite a midwife, that Pinochet," she recalled with impish delight, "available for a very extended period of ‘labour’. He and his fellow-officers seized power in 1973; the democratic transition began in 1990, and not at Pinochet’s instigation. Egyptians might not consider themselves as lucky if Cairo’s sports stadiums were turned into mass-execution sites, as Santiago’s were." "There is something seductive about a military coup," wrote Amy. "Maybe it’s the uniforms, or the idea that it will bring order to chaos. Liberals are not immune, as we can see from the reaction to the Egyptian military’s forced removal of Mohamed Morsi, the country’s freely elected President. They may be particularly susceptible to the romance of it all — to crowds in the street demanding change and getting it, with the help of the military. Just as common is the dismay when violence follows. Military coups are the national-politics version of drone strikes: the allure is that of a clean sweep; the reality is too many people dead and reverberating anger." An equally ‘conservative’ and unrealistic view of the events in Egypt was the Op-Ed piece titled ‘Defending the Coup’ by David Brooks in the New York Times; he saw the debate about the goings-on in Egypt as being "between those who emphasize process and those who emphasize substance." Those backing process, according to Brooks, kept emphasizing that the government of President Mohamed Morsi was freely elected and that its democratic support has been confirmed over and over. [Which, incidentally, is irrefutable; that happens to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, Brooks notwithstanding.] Those in favour of substance, wrote Brooks, "argue that members of the Muslim Brotherhood are defined by certain beliefs. They reject pluralism, secular democracy and, to some degree, modernity. When you elect fanatics, they continue, [says Brooks, neatly fobbing off his own views on the Egyptian masses] you have not advanced democracy. You have empowered people who are going to wind up subverting democracy. The important thing is to get people like that out of power, even if it takes a coup. The goal is to weaken political Islam, by nearly any means." [emphasis added] So here’s a journalist who claims to faithfully uphold democracy and democratic traditions openly advocating the resort to a military coup, while also voicing the need to "weaken political Islam, by nearly any means". [A truly democratic terrorist?] All things considered, Brooks’s conclusions that "Egypt doesn’t have a recipe for a democratic transition" and that "it seems to lack even the basic mental ingredients" are merely figments of his warped, allegedly democratic, imagination. John Grant, founding member of the online newspaper ThisCantBeHappening! discerned American influence in the events unfolding in Egypt, which he considered "dishonest and dishonourable." Grant saw it as "the way the US does coups in the 21st century." The days of crude coups like Iran (’53), Guatemala (’54) and Chile (’73) are long gone. Today, it’s done with great coordinated finesse thanks to a sophisticated international secrecy network. "It’s true that the United States has lost a lot of its imperial mojo of late in the Middle East, but the important thing is it has not lost that mojo vis-à-vis the incredibly corrupt institution of the Egyptian military. Years of US tax-payer largesse has helped feather the nests of corrupt Egyptian officers in a military that’s deeply invested in business and finance. "The story in Egypt is certainly not over. The coup has opened room for another very large shoe to be dropped. Another civil war in the region is now a good possibility. It’s disappointing that so many young Egyptian demonstrators in Tahrir Square apparently became so frustrated with political life in Egypt they crawled into bed with the corrupt Egyptian military they’d recently opposed. In a New York Times Op-Ed, Khaled M. Abou El Fadl, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, wrote: "This time, the military agreed with the protesters. But next time, when protesters call for something that isn’t in the military’s interest, they will meet a very different fate. "It’s tragically logical that if the first democratically-elected president can be so easily removed by the military and the dirty deed so neatly finessed by Washington, the future of real democracy in Egypt seems doomed. We’ll have to wait to find out what the cost of such a devil’s bargain will be for ordinary Egyptians. A US-excused coup was disastrous for Hondurans." Ramzy Baroud, editor of PalestineChronicle,com, wrote: "Mohamed ElBaradei, a liberal elitist with a dismal track record in service of western powers during his glamorous career as the head of the IAEA, is a stark example of the moral and political crisis that has befallen Egypt since the ouster of former President Hosni Mubarak. "ElBaradei played a most detrimental role in this sad saga, from his uneventful return to Egypt during the Jan. 2011 revolution to the ousting of the only democratically-elected President this popular Arab country has ever seen. His double-speak was a testament to his opportunistic nature as a politician. "It is unfortunate, but hardly surprising, that many of the idealists who took to Tahrir Square in Jan. 2011 and spoke of equal rights for all, couldn’t bear the outcome of that equality. Some complained that decades of marginalization under Mubarak didn’t qualify Egypt’s poor, uneducated and illiterate to make decisions pertaining to political representation and democratic constitution. And in a sad turn of events, these very forces were openly involved in toppling the democratically-elected President and his party, as they happily celebrated the return to oppression as a glorious day of freedom. ElBaradie may now lecture Egypt’s poor on why, in some way, the majority doesn’t matter at all." Finally, author Tariq Ali’s poem, A Question for Egypt, which says it all: A Question for Egypt / Millions gathered in squares and streets / They wanted the end of the system / They wanted to topple Mubarik and his regime. / When the military men understood the resolve of the crowd / They took Mubarik away. / That was the first phase. / Then came the Brotherhood / Elected by many not of its number / They wanted to end the old regime for ever. / But the Brotherhood broke its promises, / Clung to the old system / Sent sewage down the tunnels of Gaza / Praised the man in the White House. / Did nothing at home / except torment Copt and women and Shia. / Angered by the betrayal / The people came out again / In numbers larger than before / And demanded an end to the regime they had elected / Millions came out. / The military men understood the resolve of this crowd, / They smiled and took Brother Morsi away. / Killed a few dozen of his people / As the millions chanted ‘freedom’. / But what if the Army and its friends / Carry on like the Brotherhood and Mubarik / And the millions come out again, / Who will take the Army away?
Posted on: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 20:42:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015