Egypt: A pivotal moment
Mohamed ElBaradei must be free to give political leadership
Editorial
The Guardian, Saturday 29 January 2011
It was the day on which Egyptians lost their fear: of green armoured personnel carriers, which swayed and toppled before the unstoppable tide of human wrath; of plainclothes thugs who had plagued their lives; of the ruling party's headquarters, from where elections were rigged and parliamentary seats managed – it too went up in flames; of military curfews; of the entire apparatus of a regime which had crushed all political dissent for nearly three decades. "Even if the dogs could speak," one of the hundreds of thousands who flocked the streets told our reporter, "they would tell you that they are fed up with [Hosni] Mubarak. We have to have change." This was a transformative day. The Arab world's largest power had just lost control of the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, Giza, Suez. The regime shut down the internet and unplugged the mobile phone network, a desperate move to stop the protests. It only propelled thousands more on to the streets. As darkness fell, shots were heard in Cairo and tanks were seen in Suez. And still the roar of protest continued.
The revolution threatens not only Hosni Mubarak's regime but the strategy the US and Britain have constructed in the Middle East. The hesitancy with which President Mubarak reacted last night was matched only by the perceptible shift in the emphasis of the statements by the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. Only two days ago she said the US assessment was that the Egyptian government was stable and was looking for ways to respond to the legitimate interests of the Egyptian people. The primary importance of keeping a key Arab ally and Middle East interlocutor stable was also emphasised yesterday by Tony Blair, the Quartet's envoy. Faced with the conflicting needs to keep an Arab partner of Israel afloat and to respond to demands for democratic reform, the US would choose the first every time. After yesterday's events, Ms Clinton's calls to lift internet controls and respond to the grievances of Egyptians became more strident. But it was too little, too late. Ms Clinton's initial support for the Mubarak regime had not been lost on Egyptians battling for their freedoms.
This is not to say that a post-Mubarak regime would tear up Egypt's peace treaty with Israel or in the short term be any less cordial in its official relations with its neighbour. But in the longer term a government which reflected the popular will of the people of Egypt would surely open the country's land border with Gaza and not block unity talks between Fatah and Hamas. If Mubarak's regime fell, the Palestinian Authority would also lose a vital backer and ally. The domino that toppled Egypt could also topple less secure regimes like Jordan and Yemen, in which smaller but no less significant demonstrations were taking place yesterday.
As Mr Mubarak last night imposed a nationwide curfew, the biggest question hung over what role, if any, the army would play. Compared to the interior ministry, it is popular. Protesters initially cheered the arrival of troops on the streets, in the hope that they would be protected from the police. This is the world's 10th largest army, from which all four Egyptian presidents since the fall of the monarchy have come. It has formed the core of the elite that has sustained the president's rule. Will it enforce an increasingly bloody security crackdown or act as an invaluable mediator between the people and a regime they are demanding must go? It is impossible to predict.
What the president has to do now is to announce that he will release the people he has locked up. Mohamed ElBaradei, the former head of the UN nuclear watchdog, who was briefly detained yesterday, must be free to give political leadership. Mr Mubarak must rule out a sixth term as president, and set up a council to rewrite the constitution. Even those measures might not be sufficient to stop the crowds. This revolt has a momentum of its own.
Editorial
The Guardian, Saturday 29 January 2011
It was the day on which Egyptians lost their fear: of green armoured personnel carriers, which swayed and toppled before the unstoppable tide of human wrath; of plainclothes thugs who had plagued their lives; of the ruling party's headquarters, from where elections were rigged and parliamentary seats managed – it too went up in flames; of military curfews; of the entire apparatus of a regime which had crushed all political dissent for nearly three decades. "Even if the dogs could speak," one of the hundreds of thousands who flocked the streets told our reporter, "they would tell you that they are fed up with [Hosni] Mubarak. We have to have change." This was a transformative day. The Arab world's largest power had just lost control of the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, Giza, Suez. The regime shut down the internet and unplugged the mobile phone network, a desperate move to stop the protests. It only propelled thousands more on to the streets. As darkness fell, shots were heard in Cairo and tanks were seen in Suez. And still the roar of protest continued.
The revolution threatens not only Hosni Mubarak's regime but the strategy the US and Britain have constructed in the Middle East. The hesitancy with which President Mubarak reacted last night was matched only by the perceptible shift in the emphasis of the statements by the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. Only two days ago she said the US assessment was that the Egyptian government was stable and was looking for ways to respond to the legitimate interests of the Egyptian people. The primary importance of keeping a key Arab ally and Middle East interlocutor stable was also emphasised yesterday by Tony Blair, the Quartet's envoy. Faced with the conflicting needs to keep an Arab partner of Israel afloat and to respond to demands for democratic reform, the US would choose the first every time. After yesterday's events, Ms Clinton's calls to lift internet controls and respond to the grievances of Egyptians became more strident. But it was too little, too late. Ms Clinton's initial support for the Mubarak regime had not been lost on Egyptians battling for their freedoms.
This is not to say that a post-Mubarak regime would tear up Egypt's peace treaty with Israel or in the short term be any less cordial in its official relations with its neighbour. But in the longer term a government which reflected the popular will of the people of Egypt would surely open the country's land border with Gaza and not block unity talks between Fatah and Hamas. If Mubarak's regime fell, the Palestinian Authority would also lose a vital backer and ally. The domino that toppled Egypt could also topple less secure regimes like Jordan and Yemen, in which smaller but no less significant demonstrations were taking place yesterday.
As Mr Mubarak last night imposed a nationwide curfew, the biggest question hung over what role, if any, the army would play. Compared to the interior ministry, it is popular. Protesters initially cheered the arrival of troops on the streets, in the hope that they would be protected from the police. This is the world's 10th largest army, from which all four Egyptian presidents since the fall of the monarchy have come. It has formed the core of the elite that has sustained the president's rule. Will it enforce an increasingly bloody security crackdown or act as an invaluable mediator between the people and a regime they are demanding must go? It is impossible to predict.
What the president has to do now is to announce that he will release the people he has locked up. Mohamed ElBaradei, the former head of the UN nuclear watchdog, who was briefly detained yesterday, must be free to give political leadership. Mr Mubarak must rule out a sixth term as president, and set up a council to rewrite the constitution. Even those measures might not be sufficient to stop the crowds. This revolt has a momentum of its own.
posted by Hanan Elbadry at 10:58 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home