The Middle East at a Strategic Crossroads: Threat to US Hegemony?
by Nicola Nasser
The Arab world is the beating heart of the overwhelmingly Muslim
Middle East, and the Arab masses are angrily moving for a change in
the status quo, practically dictated by the military, economic or
political hegemony of the United States, which in turn is whipped by
the regional power of the Israeli U.S. strategic ally. But any change
in the regional status quo would place the Middle East at a strategic
crossroads that is not expected to be viewed tolerantly by the U.S. –
Israeli alliance, a fact which expectedly would warn of a fierce
struggle to come. Despite the U.S. rhetorical defense of the
"universal rights" in the region, it is still premature to conclude
that this hegemonic alliance will allow the Arab move for change to
run its course, judging by the historic experiences of the last
century as well as by the containment tactics the United States is now
adopting to defuse whatever strategic changes might be created by the
revolting Arab masses.
The U.S. war on terror has preoccupied U.S. decision makers and
embroiled regional rulers in their preoccupation to overlook the
tinderbox of the double digit unemployment rate among Arab youth,
double and in some cases triple the world average, according to the
most conservative estimates, which under the U.S. – supported
authoritarian regimes has been a ticking time bomb for too long. Now,
the "demographic tsunami to the south of the Mediterranean," as
described by Swedish Foreign Minister, Carl Bildt, has overtaken the
west, but in particular the U.S. – Israeli alliance, by surprise,
sending shock waves across the Middle East, shaking the pillars of
what this alliance has taken for granted as a guaranteed geopolitical
stability reinforced by the Israeli 34 – year old military occupation
of the Palestinian territories, the Syrian Golan Hights and parts of
southern Lebanon and the U.S. invasion then the ongoing occupation of
Iraq. But "the Arab world's Berlin moment" has come and the U.S. –
supported "authoritarian wall has fallen," professor of Middle Eastern
Politics and International Relations at the London School of
Economics, Fawaz Gerges, told Reuters.
Unlike in Tunisia, the U.S. regional strategy cannot afford a
strategic change of regime in a pivotal regional country like Egypt.
U.S. senior officials' appeals for President Hosni Mubarak to respect
the "universal rights" of the Egyptian people and their right in
"peaceful" protests, for reforms that should be "immediately"
undertaken by the ruling regime, and their calls for "restraint" and
non-violence by both the regime and protesters are all smoke-screening
the fact that the United States is siding with what President Barak
Obama hailed as "an ally of ours on a lot of critical issues" and his
spokesman, Robert Gibbs, described as "a strong ally" - - which
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wishfully described his government
as "stable" on Wednesday, despite the roaring demands on the streets
for its change - - at least because "a more representative government
drawn from the diversity of Egypt's political opposition will be much
more inclined to criticize American and Israeli policies," according
to Bruce Riedel, a former long-time CIA officer and a senior fellow of
the Saban Center at the Brookings Institution, on January 29.
The U.S. posturing as neutral, "not taking sides," could appease and
mislead American public opinion, but to Arab and especially to
Egyptian public opinion even neutrality is viewed as hostile and
condemned in the region as a double standard when compared with the
U.S. siding with similar moves for change elsewhere in the world, let
alone that this neutrality contradicts the western highly valued
democratic values at home.
On Friday night, Obama called for "a meaningful dialogue between the
(Egyptian) government and its citizens," who insist on staying on the
streets until the regime, and not only its government, is changed and
Mubarak leaves. On January 28, Vice President Joe Biden told PBS
NewsHour that Mubarak should not step down. When asked whether time
had come for Mubarak to go, he said: "No. I think the time has come
for President Mubarak to begin to move – to be more responsive to some
.. of the needs of the people out there." Nothing would be more clear
– cut, but nothing would be more counterproductive to both Egyptian
and American interests on the background of footages on the screens of
satellite TV stations showing protesters condemning Mubarak as a "U.S.
agent" or showing live bullets or "made in U.S.A." tear gas canisters,
reported by ABC News, which were used against them.
It seems the en masse Arab popular protests in Egypt that no party in
the opposition could claim to be the leader are confusing the senior
officials of the Obama administration who "have no idea of exactly who
these street protesters are, whether the protesters are simply a mob
force incapable of organized political action and rule, or if more
sinister groups hover in the shadows, waiting to grab power and turn
Egypt into an anti-Western, anti-Israeli bastion." in the words of the
U.S. commentator Lesli e H. Gelb, the former New York Times columnist
and senior government official.
The U.S. confusion is illustrated by the stark contradiction between
the realities on the ground in Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Jordan,
Lebanon and Yemen and, for instance, what the U.S. Assistant Secretary
of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Jeffrey Filtman, told Josh Rogin of
Foreign Policy: "What happened in Tunisia strikes me as uniquely
Tunisian. That the events that took place here over the past few weeks
derive from particularly Tunisian grievances, from Tunisian
circumstances by the Tunisian people." How farthest cut off from
reality a senior U.S. official could be! "The White House will have to
be forgiven for not knowing whether to ride the tiger or help put him
back in a cage," Gelb wrote.
White House Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, said the U.S., in view of
the protests, will "review" its two – billion annual assistance to
Egypt. This "threat" is understood among Arab and Egyptian audiences
as targeted not against Mubarak to pressure him on reforms, but
against whatever anti – U.S regime might succeed him.
Arab en masse protests, especially in Egypt, are cornering the United
States in a bind, tortured between maintaining "an ally" and
respecting his people's "universal rights" in expressing their
"legitimate grievances," according to Obama. What message would the
United States be sending to the majority of Arab allied or friendly
rulers if it opts to dump the most prominent among them? Would AIPAC
and other American Jewish and Zionist lobbyists allow their government
to facilitate the ousting of the 30 –year old guarantor of the
Egyptian peace treaty with Israel? It's almost a forgone conclusion
that Obama's decision is already made to once again give priority to
the stability of U.S. "vital interests" in Middle East while in public
giving lip service to Americans' most cherished democratic values.
This translates into a naïve American recipe for preserving the status
quo by some cosmetic reforms. But "Those who stick to the status quo
may be able to hold back the full impact of their countries' problems
for a little while, but not forever," Clinton warned in Qatar on
January 13, otherwise, she added, the foundations of their rule will
be "sinking into the sand," but she did not announce the fears of her
country that the pillars of the U.S. hegemony would be then crumbling
too, anti – Americanism exacerbated and in turn fueling the only
alternative to democracy in the Arab Middle East, i.e. terrorism.
Egyptian former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency,
Mohamed ElBaradei, whom some of the protesters have chosen to head a
delegation to represent them on Sunday and who is seen as a potential
presidential challenger to Mubarak, warned in Newsweek before his
return to Egypt last week, that it was too late to believe reforms
were still possible under the 82- year-old Mubarak, who has held
"imperial power" for three decades and presides over a legislature
that is a "mockery."
Similarly, Israel was taken by surprise. On Tuesday, January 25, the
Egyptian popular tsunami flooded the streets of Cairo on the Police
Day. The coincidence was highly symbolic. The U.S. – supported police
state was unable to honor its police and within a few days police
simply "disappeared," army was called in to protect vital state and
public property while protection of private property and safety was
left to the "popular committees," which sprang up of nowhere. On the
same day, the new chief of the Israeli Military Intelligence, Maj.
Gen. Aviv Kochavi, was telling the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense
Committee that the Egyptian President's rule was not under threat, his
regime was stable and Mubarak was able to rein in the protests. In no
time Kochavi was proven wrong. Ordering his government's spokepersons
to shut up on Egypt and, like Obama, holding urgent and high level
meetings with his senior security and intelligence officials, Israeli
Prime Minister sent a clear and brief message on January 30: Israel
will "ensure" that peace with Egypt "will continue to exist."
The Egyptian shock waves have already hit Israel and the Israeli
possible reactions are potentially the most dangerous. "An Egyptian
government that is less cooperative with Israel .. could make Israel
more prone to unpredictable unilateral actions, creating greater
instability throughout the region," warned Jonathan Alterman, director
of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies. Israeli mainstream media is already crying
wolf. "If Mubarak is toppled then Israel will be totally isolated in
the region," said Alon Liel, a former director-general of the Israeli
Foreign Ministry and a former ambassador to Turkey. "Without Egypt,
Israel will be left with no friends in Mideast," a story in Haaretz
was headlined. Similarly, "Israel left all alone," Itamar Eichner
headlined his column in the Yadioth Ahronot online. The Egypt – Gaza
Strip borders is now under Israeli spotlight. The Egyptian army which
was called into cities west of the Suez Canal could not deploy in
Sinai east of it, especially on those borders, restricted by none
other than the peace treaty with Israel; the Egyptian security vacuum
in the last few days was no evident more than in Sinai. The statement
by the Hamas government on January 29 that the borders between Egypt
and the Israeli besieged Gaza Strip, already declared an "enemy
entity" by Israel, were unilaterally and "fully under control" was not
good news in Tel Aviv. Hence the Israeli media reports about a
possible Israeli reoccupation of the Gaza – Egypt borders.
On the surface, the Arab world representing the status quo is no less
confused and undecided; its heart is with the Egyptian regime, but,
like its U.S. ally, it has to speak with tongues. Example: "The Saudi
government and people stands with the Egyptian government and people,"
the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) quoted Saudi King Abdullah as telling
President Mubarak in a phone call; earlier the king told U.S.
President Obama there should be no bargaining about Egypt's stability
and the security of its people, according to SPA. In view of the U.S.,
Arab and Israeli thinly veiled determination to save the moment in
Egypt, it was a forgone conclusion that Mubarak will cling to power,
thus setting the stage either for a long battle of instability with
his own people that for sure will deplete the country's meager
resources or cutting this battle short by a bloody crackdown that
would make the repression which created the present people's uprising
look like a mercy.
Nicola Nasser is a veteran Arab journalist based in Bir Zeit, West
Bank of the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23021
------------------------------------
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/