Tuesday, February 8, 2011

A puppet named Democracy

The different shades of Tahrir

Al Jareeza 2/8/011, Tahrir Square,

In the two weeks that have passed since Egyptians began street protests aimed at overturning president Hosni Mubarak's 30-year rule, central Cairo's Tahrir Square has become the movement’s beating heart and most effective symbol.

As long as protesters occupy the most prominent public space in Cairo – indeed in the whole country – they cannot be ignored by the international media or their own government, despite efforts by the army to contain the demonstrations and return life to normal.

Such an occupation, by hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life, requires supplies and a degree of organisation.

In the square, both have been achieved on an impressively ad-hoc basis. Leaders have emerged and committees have been formed, but the roughly 55,000 square metre "Republic of Tahrir Square" – as some inside are calling it – still operates on a mostly informal system of economy and defence.

Read the rest,   (it's worth it)


If you could transport yourself back in time, the scene is probably similar to hundreds of other popular revolutions against a dictator, monarch, warlord or kind of oppose.  Most of the time the bad guy, already well entrenched, well financed and well armed, wins.  Sometimes circumstances, determination, luck and maybe a little divine intervention allow the rebels to win.

Unless something changes drastically,  the rebels in Tahrir Square will win.  The dictatorship of President Mubarak is over, the question is who and what replaces it.

The general consensus is the people of Egypt want and are entitled to a true democracy, a Constitution that suits them and the elected officials they want.  It's kind of hard for an American to argue with that.

We've also been hearing about the roles the Army, the Muslim Brotherhood, Vice President Suleiman, the almost disposed Mubarak and US President Barack Obama and other "World Leaders" should play in forming the the new government.   Then we have the media, always ready to crown the newest smiling face as possible leader.  We've been told how the new government should be modeled after Turkey's mostly American Friendly Government.  Seems to me like everyone in the world is insisting they have a right or obligation to shape Egypt's New Democracy.  Maybe it's just me, but it seems like ordinary Egyptians are getting left out of the process.  They can have their democracy, as long as the rules are sculpted by others.

This is all being nicely orchestrated under the guise of maintaining Middle East Security. in other words a Mid East Balance of power that will allow the oil to flow, and Israel to remain safe. 

The truth of the matter is you can't have it both ways, if Egypt is to have a true Democracy, It Must Be Their Democracy.  We need to keep out of it.  If we support the Army or Suleiman it will be seen by the Egyptian People as an attempt to install another American Puppet.

Conversely their are other interests who who would like to install their version of Democracy.  The Chinese would love to have economic edge and Russia would love to have a military presence in the region again.

There are Islamic interests that would love to dominate Egypt..  Recently the old Muslim Brotherhood has reappeared.  We're told by Obama they only represent around 25 or 30% of the the total population.. If you follow Rasmussen, that's roughly the same percentage that strongly supports Obama on any given day.  I'm not sure he want to consider that a small percentage, 

Back to the Brotherhood, if they were to gain absolute power, then the Egyptian Copts would be used for target practise by Islamic extremists.  A Holy-War to eliminate Israel becomes highy probable.

As I said earlier, the general consensus is the people of Egypt want and are entitled to a true democracy, a Constitution that suits them and the elected officials they want.  The problem is everyone in the rest of the world thinks they have a compelling reason to determine how that government works and who runs it.

All that brings us to a simple question:  Does Egypt, do the Egyption people have a right to set up their own government, completely free from outside influences, or in the grand scheme of things, are the strategic and diplomatic issues too important to trust to ordinary people? 

I have mixed feelings, I don't trust Islam or any of the other competing forces.  It's a big gamble for us.. a very big gamble.

On the other hand, when we became a country, Spain a nd France both woud have loved to own a piece of us, given the chance, they would have.  If the Islamic Pirates that controlled the Mederteraian could have figured out a way, it's safe to say they'd have tried to own us as well.   We had to chase the English out a second time in 1814 before they were convinced we were truely independent

I think we should shut our mouths and let the Egyptians do what they want, with their country.  I also believe we need to be an independent referee...

Meantime,say a prayer Gina Alfina has it right.


1 comment:

  1. You hit it pretty much on the head. Nearly all revolutions are pent against a common enemy..with the goal being to overthrow that leader.

    Most of the participants do not know what will take its place, they just know that what is happening now is not what they want.

    An example that I have used many times is that of the French Revolution. After the government was replaced by committees the great terror began.

    The people were entertained by the guillotine and war.

    In the end they only replaced a king with an emperor.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.