Western Hypocrisy and the Egyptian Tragedy (Die Presse, Austria)
"'Realpolitik' is not objectionable per se. However, once
adopted, one should have the courage to adhere to it. Of course, one is then in
the uncomfortable position of having to support a government that has its
opponents gunned down. Much indicates that the latter was the case - once again
- over the weekend. Or one must stand by a commitment to democracy and human
rights. Doing both together won't work."
A few of the hundreds of thousands of supporters of ousted President Muhammad Morsi, now gathered in Tahrir Square and faced with a military ultimatum to immediately clear the square.
The U.S. and
Europe have a hard time speaking clearly to Cairo's (military) rulers. In the
wake of the deaths that occurred over the weekend, this has become a precarious
attitude.
What
is large, gray, has wrinkled skin, four legs, two tusks and a trunk? Even the zoologically-challenged
would guess "elephant." The governments of the U.S. and of many
European countries, on the other hand, would probably rather say "flamingo."
If one replaces the description of the the thick-skinned pachyderm with the events of recent
weeks in Egypt, and "elephant" with "coup," the
relationship would be correct.
If
it weren't such a tragedy - by now associated with the loss of dozens of lives
- one could smile at the contortions with which the West is trying to avoid the
word "coup," in part using arguments kindly offered by Egypt's
military and civilian personnel who support the coup. The reasonis no secret: Whoever says "coup,"
must also say "sanctions," and that is to be avoided. Egypt is the
key country in the region and its military is a strategic partner, particularly
for Washington, especially with regard to Israel. The trouble is that the
Egyptian military knows this and is downright brazen in the way it is milking
the situation for its potential to extort.
What's
more: Even if no one in Washington, London, Paris, or Berlin openly admits it -
we never warmed up to the Islamists who came to power in Tunis and Cairo. Movements
that inspire sympathy do, in fact, look different. As moderately as its members
often presented themselves during Western media interviews, at its core, the
Muslim Brotherhood maintains a totalitarian understanding of religion. To be
reminded of this, one has only to glance at the program of their Freedom and
Justice Party - and not lose sight of this because of all the smug language. Their
ultimate goal is a social order entirely steeped in (Sunni) Islam, a society in
which religious law always trumps the secular. Toppled President Mohammed Morsi showed how serious the Brotherhood is about democracy
when he issued decrees making him untouchable. In 2012, no one could be faulted
for being confused about whether Egypt had experienced a transfer in power - or
a seizure of it.
Nevertheless,
on July 3rd, a democratically-elected president was overthrown by the military,
and since then, this military has behaved like an occupying power in its own
country, even if as a fig leaf, it installed a puppet government. People like
Mohammed ElBaradei should step down without delay
from their positions and not help legitimize the bloodshed.
Egypt
is back to where it was decades ago: under military rule. And just as the West
lived well enough for years with people like Mubarak, it is now looking for a
modus operandi for dealing with the military leadership. Not much has changed,
except that after the Arab Spring, the hypocrisy of this policy is even more
obvious.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
Not
to be misunderstood: "Realpolitik"
is not objectionable per se. However, once adopted, one should have the courage
to adhere to it. Of course, one is then in the uncomfortable position of having
to support a government that has its opponents gunned down. Much indicates that
the latter was the case - once again - over the weekend. Or one must stand by a
commitment to democracy and human rights. Doing both together won't work.
Saying one thing and doing the other is a level of hypocrisy that Egyptians who
since 2011 have risked their lives for a life free of dictatorship do not
deserve.
A
good place to begin a more concise Western policy would be in Tunisia. The
birthplace of the Arab Spring has conditions best suited to being a success
story: a large number of well-educated people, relatively few deaths during the
revolution, and a political class that is more likely to compromise. For a long
time, it seemed that Tunisia would make it. This is again in doubt. In the
West, we should invest all of our power to ensure that the transition process stays
on track, providing policy makers and civil society all possible support.
Success in Tunisia will not guarantee success in the other countries, but if
the situation tips there as well, it would be a disastrous sign for the entire
Arab world.
