I’m glad that John Tabin has
referenced Reuel Marc Gerecht’s deeply insightful analysis of
the Egyptian uprising. Gerecht is one of our best Middle Eastern
analysts; and what he sees on the streets of Cairo gives him cause
for optimism.
Gerecht’s
work is analytically
rich and deserves to be read in full, but the most important
points in his recent work are those concerning the Muslim
Brotherhood. The Brotherhood, of course, has given much angst to
many
of our conservative friends.
My takeaway from Gerecht’s superb analysis of the Brotherhood is
this:
The question is not whether the Muslim Brotherhood will rule
Egypt. The question is: how can the United States work with key
Egyptian institutions — including the Egyptian military and the
current Egyptian government — to help create a political system in
which all political factions (perhaps including, but absolutely not
limited to, the Muslim Brotherhood) have representation and
guaranteed rights that cannot be abridged?
And so, an obsession with the Brotherhood, Muslim anti-Semitism,
and Arab hostility to Israel does not help to advance this key
American objective.
These are all facts of life in the Middle East, which U.S.
policymakers must deal with and not ignore, of course. However, the
fact that the Middle East is politically and culturally regressive
in significant ways mustn’t cripple American foreign policy and
reduce the United States to inaction.
To the contrary: the existence of these problems requires that
America redouble its efforts to promote liberal democracy in the
Middle East.
Mubarak, after all, is 82 years old and ridden with cancer. He
won’t live forever and likely will die soon. So whatever his
virtues as an American ally, his reign is fast coming to an
end.
Moreover, a successor autocrat may not be as helpful to the
United States as Mubarak has been. A new Egyptian dictator, in
fact, may be more hostile to U.S. interests.
Best, then, not to support any one man or clique in Egypt.
Instead, the United States instead should support liberal
democratic principles and modernizing institutions — now.
David W| 2.9.11 @ 12:01PM
"Should the Muslim Brotherhood Stymie American Action in Egypt?"
I think President Obama will do just nicely without the Brotherhood's help. Maybe he can build a high-speed rail to unite the various factions.
Occam's Tool| 2.9.11 @ 12:21PM
The problem is that you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.
Ken (Old Texican)| 2.9.11 @ 12:48PM
John,
I believe we should be very active vis a vis Egypt.
1. Cut off their aid
2. Remind them of the Aswan dam hanging over their heads.
3. Tell them to begin building nuclear bomb shalters.
4. End Egyptian visas to the United States....unless they are Christians.
In fact, freeze and revoke all Muslim visas.
Clint| 2.9.11 @ 1:30PM
We Tea Party Patriots Say "America First".
Drill Our Own Oil, Build Our Own Nuke Energy Plants, Secure Our Borders, Arrest & Deport All Illegal Aliens & Put All Foreign Aid On The Deficit Spending Chopping Block.
The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates.
Rise Up.
JP| 2.9.11 @ 3:34PM
Good grief, in light of Hamas's take over (through democratic elections), the near take over of Turkey by Islamasists (through democratic means), the continued violence in Iraq (despite democratic elections for 7 years), you'd think a few conservatives would wipe the stardust off thier eyes. Yes, by all means protect the Brotherhood; give them a "place at the table". And then stand back and watch them seize power brutally. Before the 1933 elections, no more than 18% of Germans considered themselves Nazis. In the 1932 elections, the Nazis actually lost seats to the Communists and SPD despite Hitler winning the Chancellorship. By the end of 1933 the Nazis controlled the police, all state bureacracies, shutdown dissident newspapers and radio stations, and forced thier way into about every institution inside Germany.
So, go ahead and preach reconcillation to a group of radicals who want nothing but your head on a platter.