Egypt’s Military Is Seen as Pivotal in Next Step
January 28, 2011
NY Times
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
Even as armored military vehicles deployed around important Egyptian government institutions on Friday for the first time in decades, it remained difficult to predict what role the armed forces might play in either quelling the disturbances or easing President Hosni Mubarak from power.
“Are they on the side of the nation or are they on the side of the regime?” a former senior Western diplomat with long service in Cairo asked. “That distinction had been blurred. We are now seeing a modern test of whether there is a separation between the two.”
The Egyptian military, the world’s 10th largest, is powerful, popular and largely opaque.
The military carried out the 1952 coup that overthrew the monarchy and has considered itself the shepherd of the revolution ever since; all four presidents in the ensuing years have been military generals.
But Mr. Mubarak, who led the Air Force before rising to prominence when President Anwar el-Sadat appointed him vice president in 1975, worked hard to keep the army out of overt politics and under his control.
In one famous incident, he dismissed Field Marshal Abdel-Halim Abu Ghazala, a popular, charismatic war hero, from his post as defense minister in 1989. The general had been tied to a smuggling scandal, but most analysts thought he had been fired because his public profile was too high.
No general has sought to curry public favor since. The current defense minister, Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, an unpopular man in his late 70s, is considered unlikely to challenge Mr. Mubarak.
When Tunisia exploded in chaos this month, the decision of the military chief not to fire on protesters was seen as a decisive factor in driving President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali out of the country. No one thinks a Mubarak loyalist like General Tantawi would play that role, but at some point his top subordinates might consider it. (Senior members of the general staff were in Washington when the violence erupted and hurried home.)
The army commands broad respect in Egypt. Demonstrators cheered on Friday as tanks deployed in front of government buildings like the Foreign Ministry and the main broadcast center. The demonstrators were partly inspired by the Tunisian example, analysts said, and some hoped that the military might play a similar role in Egypt.
The public’s respect contrasts sharply with the prevailing view of the police and other Interior Ministry forces, who are known for brutality and nicknamed “bultagia,” or thugs, by Egyptians.
Egypt’s military, with about 468,000 soldiers, is an institution apart, with its own social clubs and shopping centers. It has expanded over the decades into civilian areas like real estate development and engineering.
It has also provided a means of social advancement, where men from poor families can earn prestige and join the upper middle class. Mr. Mubarak has appointed retired generals to run most provinces and important state-run companies.
But deploying tanks is a sign of desperation, and raises the question of when the military might begin to doubt Mr. Mubarak’s viability. The tipping point could come, analysts believe, if the military is ordered to fire on demonstrators in any large numbers. It is one thing to protect government buildings from looters, but something else to tarnish the reputation of the army by killing citizens, they said.
“If the military fires on civilians after demonstrations that are clearly popular, that will imperil the standing of the military, its integrity,” said Samer Shehata, a professor of Arab politics at Georgetown University. “This time the institution’s future is at risk.”
Such action could also damage the military’s relationship with the United States, which may give the generals pause. The United States has provided about $35 billion in military aid to Egypt since it made peace with Israel in 1978. Robert Gibbs, President Obama’s spokesman, said that aid to Egypt, now $1.3 billion a year, would come under review should the violence continue.
Analysts have long predicted that the military’s view of Egypt’s political future would emerge only after Mr. Mubarak died. But now the question of how Egypt should be governed has been fast-forwarded.
If the military did remove the president, it is doubtful that Egypt could be run by a fifth military man for anything more than a transitional period.
“This is the people’s moment for a democratic transition,” said Emad el-Din Shahin, a professor at the University of Notre Dame, noting that awareness was running high among the young demonstrators that nondemocratic regimes are an anomaly in the modern world. “Will the people tolerate another 60 years of direct military rule?”
NY Times
By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
Even as armored military vehicles deployed around important Egyptian government institutions on Friday for the first time in decades, it remained difficult to predict what role the armed forces might play in either quelling the disturbances or easing President Hosni Mubarak from power.
“Are they on the side of the nation or are they on the side of the regime?” a former senior Western diplomat with long service in Cairo asked. “That distinction had been blurred. We are now seeing a modern test of whether there is a separation between the two.”
The Egyptian military, the world’s 10th largest, is powerful, popular and largely opaque.
The military carried out the 1952 coup that overthrew the monarchy and has considered itself the shepherd of the revolution ever since; all four presidents in the ensuing years have been military generals.
But Mr. Mubarak, who led the Air Force before rising to prominence when President Anwar el-Sadat appointed him vice president in 1975, worked hard to keep the army out of overt politics and under his control.
In one famous incident, he dismissed Field Marshal Abdel-Halim Abu Ghazala, a popular, charismatic war hero, from his post as defense minister in 1989. The general had been tied to a smuggling scandal, but most analysts thought he had been fired because his public profile was too high.
No general has sought to curry public favor since. The current defense minister, Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, an unpopular man in his late 70s, is considered unlikely to challenge Mr. Mubarak.
When Tunisia exploded in chaos this month, the decision of the military chief not to fire on protesters was seen as a decisive factor in driving President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali out of the country. No one thinks a Mubarak loyalist like General Tantawi would play that role, but at some point his top subordinates might consider it. (Senior members of the general staff were in Washington when the violence erupted and hurried home.)
The army commands broad respect in Egypt. Demonstrators cheered on Friday as tanks deployed in front of government buildings like the Foreign Ministry and the main broadcast center. The demonstrators were partly inspired by the Tunisian example, analysts said, and some hoped that the military might play a similar role in Egypt.
The public’s respect contrasts sharply with the prevailing view of the police and other Interior Ministry forces, who are known for brutality and nicknamed “bultagia,” or thugs, by Egyptians.
Egypt’s military, with about 468,000 soldiers, is an institution apart, with its own social clubs and shopping centers. It has expanded over the decades into civilian areas like real estate development and engineering.
It has also provided a means of social advancement, where men from poor families can earn prestige and join the upper middle class. Mr. Mubarak has appointed retired generals to run most provinces and important state-run companies.
But deploying tanks is a sign of desperation, and raises the question of when the military might begin to doubt Mr. Mubarak’s viability. The tipping point could come, analysts believe, if the military is ordered to fire on demonstrators in any large numbers. It is one thing to protect government buildings from looters, but something else to tarnish the reputation of the army by killing citizens, they said.
“If the military fires on civilians after demonstrations that are clearly popular, that will imperil the standing of the military, its integrity,” said Samer Shehata, a professor of Arab politics at Georgetown University. “This time the institution’s future is at risk.”
Such action could also damage the military’s relationship with the United States, which may give the generals pause. The United States has provided about $35 billion in military aid to Egypt since it made peace with Israel in 1978. Robert Gibbs, President Obama’s spokesman, said that aid to Egypt, now $1.3 billion a year, would come under review should the violence continue.
Analysts have long predicted that the military’s view of Egypt’s political future would emerge only after Mr. Mubarak died. But now the question of how Egypt should be governed has been fast-forwarded.
If the military did remove the president, it is doubtful that Egypt could be run by a fifth military man for anything more than a transitional period.
“This is the people’s moment for a democratic transition,” said Emad el-Din Shahin, a professor at the University of Notre Dame, noting that awareness was running high among the young demonstrators that nondemocratic regimes are an anomaly in the modern world. “Will the people tolerate another 60 years of direct military rule?”
posted by Hanan Elbadry at 9:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home