BS: Middle East Unrest

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Jan 11 - 05:53 PM

Good post, Q. It seems to me that the protesters are more or less confined to big urban areas. A Beeb report tonight strongly suggested that rural workers are on Mubarak's side. This has now been going on for too many days for me to think that any apocalyptic change is afoot. We're getting all these platitudes from minnows such as Hillary about the "need for peaceful reform" etc., but just watch all such calls die down as soon as Mubarak is seen to still be in control.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 30 Jan 11 - 05:54 PM

A talk show host from Washington (the State of), whom my wife characterizes as Conservative, said on his show today that the Egyptian Army owns (his words) factories and businesses there. He I check a few pages of google to see if this is true, but came up empty. I could understand individual soldiers or officers possibly owning or running businesses, but army owned...?

I tried to google this, but came up empty; anybody know if it's true?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 30 Jan 11 - 09:32 PM

John on S C.
The officers of the Egyptian military are members of the educated class, at least in part. Something of a tradition from the days when the British ran the upper levels of the government. I wouldn't be surprised if the families controlled some businesses.
(They want stability, but does this necessarily mean support for Mubarek? They could be seeing the handwriting on the wall. Dunno).

Why do so many left-leaners take it out on Hillary? She doesn't make policy; Obama and his advisors do that and she carries it out. Of course if she had been nominated in the primary and won, then she would be responsible. Obama seems to be following the path set down by Bush and his predecessors. Listen to Obama's comments on the situation.
Background-
The U. S. started paying Egypt $2 billion/year starting in 1979 and Obama and Congress have done nothing to change the balance from 65 percent to the military to something better for the people. Only $35 million of that goes toward education.
A detailed study, from Congressional Research Service, prepared for Members and Committees of Congress, by Jeremy M. Sharp: Egypt: Background and U. S. Relations.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33003.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Jan 11 - 11:30 PM

Here's a very interesting article by Eric Margolis about the recent unrest in Tunisia, which preceded and no doubt inspired the mass protests in Egypt. Margolis, as usual, goes straight to the heart of the matter and he correctly anticipates the events in Egypt. He published this column on Jan 17. It is now January 30th, and what he foresaw happening in Egypt has come to pass and it may soon be imitated elsewhere in the Arab world. What we are really seeing is mass popular uprisings against foreign rule of Muslim lands by the USA, France, and the UK through client governments, force of arms, and western-backed dictators....rather comparable in a way to how Russia once ruled the Warsaw Pact through its client governments, force of arms, and Russian-backed dictators.

It's long overdue.

BIG TROUBLE IN TUNISIA FOR AMERICA'S MIDEAST RAJ
January 17, 2011

Oops! Something has gone terribly wrong with Washington's plans for regime change in the Mideast. Wasn't there supposed to be a US and British engineered revolution against Iran's mullahs, followed by installation of a cooperative pro-western government and a bonanza for western oil companies?
The revolution came, all right, but in the wrong place. The explosion of popular fury in Tunisia that ousted its dictator of 23-years is sending shock waves across the Arab world and has alarm bells ringing in Washington.

Pay no attention to President Barack Obama's pious bromides welcoming the revolution in Tunisia.   The US, France and their Arab satraps are deeply worried that Tunisia's popular revolution could spark similar uprising against the dictatorships or monarchies in other members of America's Mideast Raj, notably Egypt.   

It has come to light that Tunisia's ruling elite had dinners and wine flown in from Paris at government expense for lavish parties in their beachside villas. Shades of the Iranian revolution, when women of the ruling elite in Tehran used to send their dirty laundry to Paris for hand washing, or fly to Paris to have their hair done for a soiree.

In a zesty bit of irony totally lost on the US media, just as a people's revolution was ousting Tunisia's brutal US-backed regime, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was in Qatar piously lecturing local oil monarchs on good government and the need to promote democracy.

Tunisia has not had much strategic importance since Carthage – whose ruins and great war harbor lie in a residential suburb of Tunis – fought Rome in the three Punic Wars. During World War II's North Africa campaign, Tunisia was battled over by the British, Germans and Italians.

Since then, little Tunisia has been a backwater, known mainly for sunshine, cheap beach vacations, and as a refuge for Italian crooks.

In 1957, Tunisia "gained" independence from former colonial master, France. But it was a sham independence. The French put their own stooge, Habib Bourguiba, in power, who ran the country for France.

After Bourguiba went senile in 1987, the army commander, General Zine Ben Ali, overthrew him and seized power with the blessing of Paris. Ben Ali as ruled with an iron first for the ensuing 23 years.

The US and France have always hailed Tunisia as a poster-boy for "moderation, stability, and democracy. "   

Translation: 1. moderation: following orders from Washington and making nice to Israel; 2. stability: crushing all opposition, particularly Islamist-oriented parties, muzzling the media, and paving the way for US business; 3. democracy: holding fake elections every few years. The US media soft-soaped Ben Ali and gushed over Tunisia's "moderate" virtues. They did the same for Egypt's Anwar Sadat.

America's other "moderate" Arab clients, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, Oman and some of the Gulf states, followed precisely the same model of ersatz elections, ferocious internal oppression, and absolute obedience to Washington.

Tunisia closely resembled other Arab non-oil states in having very high unemployment, social and intellectual stagnation, lack of free speech or expression, and no hope for the future unless one had links to the rapacious, self-serving, western-backed ruling oligarchy. On top of this, in most Arab states, over 60% of the population is under 25.

Gen. Ali's extended family and business cronies followed a pattern of malfeasance, nepotism and plundering public assets common to most Arab nations.   In the Mideast, such oligarchies are commonly called "mafias."   Their secret police are notorious for torture, murder, mass arrests and sadism. Arab armies are designed to cow their people, not protect the nation's borders.

After the Bush and Obama administrations felt obliged to make a token appeal to their Arab clients for the appearance of at least sham democracy, General Ali obliged by winning his most recent rigged election in 2009 by "only" a razor-thin 89% victory, rather than his usual 94% or 95% win.

Tunisians are known as an easy-going, even-tempered people. US and French aid was supposed to keep a lid on the country and defuse popular unrest.   So just about everyone was caught by surprise when Tunisia went critical.

In a heart-warming finale to Gen. Ben Ali's brutal dictatorship, he fled to France seeking asylum. France's president, Nicholas Sarkozy, showing remarkable ingratitude even for this notorious ingrate,   refused this faithful, long-time French servant refuge. Two other former western plantation overseers who were dying of cancer, Congo's late Gen. Mobutu and the ousted Shah of Iran, were similarly refused refuge by their American patrons.   

As of this writing, Tunisia is in turmoil.   There may be a military takeover, which would greatly please Washington, Paris and Cairo, or further convulsions.

The leader of the most important Islamic-oriented party that was outlawed, Rashid Gannouchi (not to be confused with the current figurehead prime minister of the same name), is due to return and is calling for genuine democratic elections.   His party, Nahda, would likely win any free elections. So would Islamist parties in every other Arab country, if the west ever allowed them to hold free elections, which it won't.

In the only two cases in modern Arab history where truly honest elections were held, moderate Islamists won in Algeria, and the Hamas movement won in Gaza.   The Algerian army, backed by Paris and Washington, crushed the election and imposed martial law. After Hamas won the Palestinian election, the US, Israel and Egypt locked up Hamas under siege in Gaza and sought to overthrow it using Palestinian mercenaries.   

Mainstream Islamist parties in the Mideast have nothing to do with al-Qaida (which barely exists any more) or anti-Western programs. Their primary concern is getting rid of the western-backed oligarchies that keep the Muslim world backwards and in thrall. Their platform is sharing resource wealth, social welfare, education, uprooting thieving oligarchies and fighting endemic corruption.

The big question now is will Tunisia's dramatic events be a harbinger of other explosions across the volatile Arab world?    All eyes are on Egypt, the home of a third of all Arabs. Egypt's 83-year old military ruler, Husni Mubarak, is a giant version of Tunisia's Gen. Ben Ali.

Mubarak was engineered into power by the US after the killing of longtime CIA "asset" Anwar Sadat. Gen. Mubarak and has ruled Egypt like a modern-day pharaoh ever since, crushing both violent extremist and legitimate political opposition.   Mubarak's rigged elections, winked at by Washington, are every bit as egregious as Tunisia's.   

So could the flames of Tunisia's revolution spread to Egypt?   Mubarak's regime is tottering. Egyptians are as restive and disgusted as their Tunisian neighbors. Egyptians, too, are a famously passive, amiable lot, but Egypt's repression, grinding poverty and rapacious western-aligned elite have enraged most ordinary people.

Tunisia's neighbors Libya, Algeria and Morocco are similarly unstable and racked by unemployment, a high birth rate, and ferocious repression by their regimes.   Col. Khadaffi's oil-rich Libya is particularly fertile ground for a major convulsion after five decades of eccentric government.

All these authoritarian regimes have crushed opposition, leaving only underground revolutionaries to replace them when revolution inevitably comes.   Islamists will be the last men standing. By encouraging repression and thwarting the emergence of democracy in the Arab world, the US has sown the dragon's teeth of further violence and rises.

We are now seeing what the "stability" and "moderation" so beloved of Washington in the Arab world really brings.   The mighty American Raj is built on such euphemisms that really mean dictatorship, corruption, torture, and subservience.   

If Washington really wants to foster the democracy that it preaches, then it should help Tunisia's people create a truly democratic government rather than engineering yet another cooperative general and his grasping family into power as it has done so often since the 1950's.


copyright Eric S. Margolis 2011

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,bankley
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 06:04 AM

good article LH... Eric can see the unravelling

my quote of the early day :
"When the pot starts to boil, dick-taters get nervous"

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 07:04 AM

And poor Israel, that bastion of "democracy" in the region (ask any Gazan about that), is getting its knickers in a twist over what's going on in Egypt. Ha bloody ha.

As US and EU leaders urge Egypt to reform in face of popular uprising, Israel voices support for Mubarak's government. Israel has called on the United States and Europe to curb their criticism of president Hosni Mubarak "in a bid to preserve stability in Egypt" and the wider Middle East, an Israeli newspaper reports. The Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Monday that the foreign ministry, in an urgent special cable, instructed its ambassadors to key countries, to "stress ... the importance of Egypt's stability". Increasingly, president Mubarak has been isolated by swift and at times harsh criticism from Western leaders who called for reform. It is unclear how angry Egyptians will interpret Israel's apparent support for their government.

The protests in Egypt have reportedly thrown the Israeli government into turmoil, with military officials holding lengthy strategy sessions, assessing possible scenarios of a post-Mubarak Egypt. Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, said on Sunday that his government is "anxiously monitoring" the political unrest in Egypt, his first comment on the crisis threatening a government that has been one of Israel's key allies for more than 30 years. Israeli officials have remained largely silent about the situation in Egypt, but have made clear that preserving the historic 1979 peace agreement with the biggest Arab nation is a paramount interest. The peace deal, cool but stable, turned Israel's most potent regional enemy into a crucial partner, provided security on one of its borders and allowed it to significantly reduce the size of its army and defence budget.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 08:44 AM

These events have made it clear that, over the last few decades, what leaders of countries like the U.S.A. and the U.K. have really cared about/supported is free-market capitalism NOT democracy, as I published in 2003 - Even After Lincoln, Steinbeck, and King

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Ringer
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 09:17 AM

"...Israel, that bastion of "democracy" in the region (ask any Gazan about that)"

Why would you ask "any Gazan" about Israel's democracy? Would you ask any Canadian about America's, or any Frenchman about Germany's?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 09:38 AM

>>"...Israel, that bastion of "democracy" in the region (ask any Gazan about that)"

Why would you ask "any Gazan" about Israel's democracy? Would you ask any Canadian about America's, or any Frenchman about Germany's<<<

Gaza is not a country like Canada or France. It is a part of the disputed territory once known as Palestine.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 09:59 AM

Why would you ask "any Gazan" about Israel's democracy? Would you ask any Canadian about America's, or any Frenchman about Germany's?

Oh, fer chrissake. Gaza has been occupied (illegally), repressed, shat on, bulldozed, bombed straight to hell and blockaded to near-starvation by that "democracy" next door, with a little help from its friends in the west of course. That's why you should ask them. Or try any other Palestinian under occupation. What's your point exactly?

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Jack Campin
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 11:15 AM

Meanwhile from Egypt:

Press release from Cageprisoners
31 January 2011

PRESS RELEASE: Prisoners in Egypt's Tora Istiqbaal prison under attack by security agencies


Cageprisoners has received news from the Tora Istiqbaal prison complex just outside Cairo, Egypt that hundreds of prisoners are being attacked by the security forces in a pre-emptive action taken against political inmates.

In a phone call to Cageprisoners Director, Moazzam Begg, from inside the prison wing - which houses over a hundred men - sounds of screaming, shouting and banging could be heard as one man, a close relative of a former Guantanamo detainee, described the scene:

"They have entered the prison complex armed and are trying to provoke us into confrontation. I think they want to hurt us badly – or even kill us. They want to exact revenge from us because of what is happening outside, the tyrants we struggled against are about to fall. We have bared our chests and are prepared for the worst they can throw at us, but we want the world to know what is happening here so they are under no illusions about what is happening in our country. We will not allow them to enter. We have risen. Allah is with us."


Several prisoners have already been reported killed by security services during clashes yesterday at Abu Zaabal prison and it is feared that a similar fate awaits the inmates of Tora Istiqbaal.

The Egyptian Government has a notorious record of torture and carrying out summary trials against opposition organisations – particularly in relation to Islamic groups.


This week both US and UK foreign ministers expressed displeasure at the prospect of Islamist opposition taking power in Egypt. Whilst accepting that the west had no business in trying to appoint the leadership of the country William Hague added: "We would not want to see a government based on the Muslim Brotherhood."

The situation at the Tora Istiqbaal prison is at critical level and many more lives could be lost unless a firm message is sent to the Egyptian leadership.

Cageprisoners calls on the Governments of the US and UK to stop using language that endangers the lives of the oppositions groups in Egypt and on what's left of the Egyptian regime to abstain from further harming its own citizens.

(From the mailing list of Scotland Against Criminalizing Communities, sacc.org.uk)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Ringer
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 11:45 AM

"Gaza is not a country like Canada or France. It is a part of the disputed territory once known as Palestine."

But Israel is a country, Jack. To coin a phrase, what's your point exactly?.

My point, Steve Shaw, is that Gaza is not part of Israel, therefore what Gazans think about Israel's democracy is of little importance. Also that Israel's actions do affect that he is a democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 12:13 PM

A democracy, technically speaking, is a place where the majority of the people get to decide on policy.

Given that, I don't think we actually have a single real democracy in the entire world today...though we do have a great number of places pretending to be real democracies.

What happens in those places is that a very small and wealthy power elite controls all the main political parties, and the mass media outlets, and the police, and the government and armed forces....by the power of their money...and through the inter-personal connections long established in that wealthy power elite. The elite holds "elections" at regular intervals, and the public goes out and rubber stamps some of the pre-picked candidates that the elite has selected, funded, and publicized through the media.

The candidates, once elected, do exactly what the wealthy elite has put them there to do. That is, they serve the interests of that same elite. If the elite has created a massive public debt that threatens to break the economy of the nation, then the elected candidates bail the elite out and they pass the bill on to the general public in the form of further national debt.

And the game goes on.

That is not a true democracy. It's an oligarchy of special interests.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Kweku
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 12:30 PM

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he fears that what happened in Iran could happen in Egypt, according to the Reuters news agency. In 1979, the US-supported Shah of Iran was toppled in a popular revolt led by Ayatollah Khomeini, who went on to found an Islamic republic." (BBC)

Obama and the rest of the western leaders should stop that coded diplomatic language and tell Mubarak in the face to step down. All the people want is fresh leadership with fresh ideas even if it means same economic conditions. Are they waiting for the Islamic Fundamentalists to convince the people that the West is never a friend of the Arabs before they learn.

Democracy is sweeping across the globe and everybody wants a share in it, this is just a continuation of the fall of the Berlin Wall and Western leaders must support it for true democracy to be enshrined.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 01:21 PM

U. S. military aid to Jordan, 2010, approx, $850 million in Congressional approvals.
In all, over $7 billion in 2010 to the Middle east.

Israel receives approx. $3 billion (but there are other payments- I can't winkle them out without a lot of work.

I will go one step farther than Steve Shaw (with whom I often disagree) on the Israel-'Palestine' situation. Israel has no intention of ever allowing the Palestinian people a free territory. They will keep to the program of a step here, a step back there, temporarily temporizing on this and that, but never coming to a recognition of a free Palestinian territory.

The 'leaks' of talking points show that Israel wishes to remove any Palestinian 'Arabs' from their country; the aim being a theocratic country.

Figures above from Congressional Research Service, "U. S. Foreign Assistance to the Middle east, .....", Jeremy M. Sharp.
Although from a completely U. S. government point of view, there is much interesting material in the article.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL32260.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 01:31 PM

Little Hawk is quite correct, in his regards to 'Democracy'...then someone posted that 'they won't shut off the internet here'...even thought Obama has been pushing for the 'off switch' for the internet??...and 'Health Care' in its present form, was passed AGAINST the will of the majority of our 'Democracy'?....Jeez, sounds like Egypt...How'd that happen??

What is happening is this, and make no mistake..as America drops deeper into debt, those places in the world which negotiated 'peace' with a price tag attached, such as the Camp David Accords, where Israel and Egypt have a truce and we assured Egypt military aid at 1.5 to 3 BILLION dollars(the figures vary depending on the reports), the enemies of the United States, are kicking the legs out of our allies, who are relying on that aid to maintain 'Peace'....therefore, wearing us down a 'cut at a time'....Meanwhile, our local morons keep asking for MORE spending, and are being obliged by corrupt 'Representatives' who have a profit to make...and while this present administration rifles the Treasury, and beyond, way into the future. All China, Saudi Arabia and others have to do is 'call in their debt, and its all over. By the way, have you noticed how in the news, and in conversations that people are more concerned about a particular politicians 'career' that whether or not the are voting the will of the people they claim to represent???..Then, they work the spin, after the fact, to get you to swallow the bullshit??????

J-Boy, Glad you dug the video....it IS a lot more dialed in than the 'politically correct crowd' would ever allow themselves to admit..even though, it SHOULD scare the shit out of them!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 01:34 PM

"The 'leaks' of talking points show that Israel wishes to remove any Palestinian 'Arabs' from their country; the aim being a theocratic country."

You mean like the Arab countries that dispelled and dispossessed the Jews?

Oh, and it would be appreciated if you could provide a link to those talking points of which you speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 02:57 PM

Some 1.2 million Palestinians are ghettoized in Israel. Reunification of families is prohibited. Although 17 percent of the population, Palestinian penetration into the judicial and legislative branches is about one percent.
All holidays, the calendric observances, etc. are Jewish.

Discussed in one if the Wikileaks papers and mentioned in some newscasts is resettlement of Palestinians in a Palestinian territory (of course unlikely because of the numbers), and discussed by Netanyahu, housing minister and welfare ministers Eitam and Yishai.

Discussion here:
"Ghetto Citizenship: Palestinian Arabs in Israel," Oren Yiftachel. Paper for book by Rouhana and Sabagh, 2009.
www.geog.bgu.ac.il

On 10 Dec 2010, Israel's Foreign Minister spoke at the U. N. General Assembly about the removal of Arab citizens from Israel.
www.alarabiya.net/english

Also mentioned in:
"10,000 Jews, Arabs in Tel Aviv human rights march," David Buimovitch (AFP), Dec. 10, 2010 and report in ACRI's El-Ad-
"srael's foreign minister (Liebermann) speaks at the UN General Assembly about the removal of Arab citizens from Israel and he doesn't lose his position, the chief rabbi of Safed, a state employee, tells people not to rent to Arabs and he doesn't lose his job," he said.
google hosted news article.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 03:28 PM

Q

The first link you gave is in Hebrew and I don't read Hebrew, maybe you can translate for us.

The second link is to the Al-Arabia News Channel front page and I don't see any thing there about the claim you are making.

The third reference is to a "google hosted article"

Please provide a link to the specific source you are citing.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 04:41 PM

Just across the wires: The Health Care bill, as passed, ruled unconstitutional in Federal court in Florida!!..as I've been saying all along!..Now it goes to the Supreme Court!

GfS


P.S. Oh, why do you doubt???

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 04:55 PM

OOOPs, I goofed again! I forgot to cut and paste the other part....:

GfS: "Little Hawk is quite correct, in his regards to 'Democracy'...then someone posted that 'they won't shut off the internet here'...even thought Obama has been pushing for the 'off switch' for the internet??...and 'Health Care' in its present form, was passed AGAINST the will of the majority of our 'Democracy'?....Jeez, sounds like Egypt...How'd that happen???"

Just across the wires: The Health Care bill, as passed, ruled unconstitutional in Federal court in Florida!!..as I've been saying all along!..Now it goes to the Supreme Court!

GfS


P.S. Oh, why do you doubt???

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 05:12 PM

Found by googling the subject, which yields more than one article on a topic, and the way one gets google hosted articles, etc.

The first reference is not in Hebrew alone; English at same site; one of the ways to get it, if you want a single ref.:
http://www.geog.bgu.ac.il/members/yiftachel/new_papers_2009/Arab520citizenship-520print.pdf
(or just enter the subject details in google and get a selection)

One must search the content of El Arabiya but the article content is the same as the quote I gave.
Simply enter title of article, "10,000 Jews, Arabs in Tel Aviv human rights march," and several choices appear; the first one (The Peninsulaqatar) brings up a summary; the full article by Buimovitch may be found at The Daily Star by clicking the 4th entry in google if the title of the article is used.

(A quick way of getting something is by entering the subject in google and then selecting- getting a choice rather than a single 'clicky' item. I often ignore clickys and google for a selection- more content variety.)

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 05:16 PM

More to the subject-
The Egyptian Army has announced that they will not move against the protesters. A sigh of relief!
Expected, but not this soon. Now the military through its leaders in cabinet is the power rather than Mubarek.
Still a long was from a democratically elected government.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 05:38 PM

Yes, Q, I did vary from the main topic. I did that because just moments before, I posted about our own government and a similarity to Mubarak's.. But you ARE correct...back to the main topic, at hand.....

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 05:47 PM

I will go one step farther than Steve Shaw (with whom I often disagree) on the Israel-'Palestine' situation. Israel has no intention of ever allowing the Palestinian people a free territory. They will keep to the program of a step here, a step back there, temporarily temporizing on this and that, but never coming to a recognition of a free Palestinian territory.

I don't recall having disagreements with you. Tell me about 'em and let's discuss it. Unless you're one of those blokes or blokesses who keeps changing their name. I never seem to keep up with that. I agree fully with the quote here.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 05:47 PM

G from S, not to worry, digressions sometimes make the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 07:53 PM

Q: "G from S, not to worry, digressions sometimes make the thread."

Your right, sorry..by the way, what are you having for dinner??

Wink,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 09:19 PM

Braised crocodile tail with Thailand insect garnishes.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 31 Jan 11 - 09:44 PM

Amid the trivia churned up by Don T's trivial (and misinformed) question, some sound analysis from Steve Shaw. Among other things he has exposed a false assumption behind Keith's point about different values being applied to Egypt and Israel.

In terms of realpolitik Israel and Egypt are allies. Hence the huge anxiety in Israel, as cited by Steve, about what is going on in Egypt. Indeed several of the autocrat leaders of the Arab world (Iran being an obvious exception) are broadly pro-Israel at least to the extent that they favour a middle-east settlement along the lines that the Palestinian leadership (as Wikileaks has confirmed) was prepared to accept - ie a settlement that requires the Palestinians to abandon right-of-return for refugees and some other legitimate claims.

Of such countries Egypt is overwhelmingly the most important, with a population of 82 million and the tenth biggest army in the world. Someone above implied that the present crisis will not be a priority in Washington but in fact it is the admin's No 1 foreign affairs concern.

The scale of Egypt's strategic significance is evidenced in the colossal financial support its regime gets from the US. Q's suggestion that this aid could be redirected from tanks and fighter planes to ploughshares is a complete non-starter. The aid is provided speifically to maintain Egypt's strength in the region. (Not only is its military huge, but it is also highly trained and widely respected.) The Washington lobbyists retained by Egypt to maintain the cashflow (PLM) were not chosen by accident. Other lients include Boeing and BAe Systems.

The signs are promising that the US-Israel axis will soon be confronted by a series of Arab states led not by autocrats who sing to Washington's tune in return for cash, but who reflect the desire of their respective electorates to see Israel's wanton excesses to be urbed.

Even if no other country follows Eqypt into revolution, Israel's position has been significantly weakened, and only a few months after it ruptured relations with its other key ally, Turkey, with the flotilla episode. But there is good reason to hope that events have been set in train that will bring about the biggest reshaping of the world order since the Berlin Wall came down.

On the whole, I'm optimistic for Egypt's future. Its army, having today in effect declared for democracy, would now find it hard rtow back from that and impose a military regime in anything but the short term. And unlike, for instance, Iran, there is no strong fundamentalist trend among the country's predominently muslim population. (The strength of the Islamic Brotherhood has been exaggerated, probably in a ploy by Mubarakto maintain his US backing, and is in any case not extremist.) Also fundamentalism breeds less easily in stable and equitable democracies than under repressive regimes.

But for me the best part of the whole affair is that America's right to chose which of its allies should be democracies, and which should be repressive, torturing police states, is facing its severest challenge.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 12:54 AM

Spaghetti.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 04:56 AM

Its the old dilemma.

What is good for the Egyptian people, is probably not in our interests.

In our type of system, we are obliged to rob and exploit other nations.....cooperation is anathma.

In fact our string pullers would probably prefer to see another Islamic republic, than a truly democratic, Egypt.

Never mind, it's all unravelling at last....the internet is the weapon of the poor and dispossed....the first time they have had the chance to unite and fight back against those who divide and rob them.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 05:48 AM

Good stuff, Peter. Things have moved on since I first posted to this thread. The army's apparent conciliatory tone sounds far more optimistic now than could have been hoped for a few days ago. Large numbers of Egyptian men have served in the army as conscripts, so the soldiers on the street seem to have a good appreciation of the hard facts of Egyptian life, which is something. If and when Mubarak goes the army will have to retain control, but who's going to predict the next step after that? The US won't be in any hurry to see elections that might bring a non-army opposition to power (I can currently see only one candidate party there). The army is bankrolled by the US so there will still be string-pulling going on. Egypt lives in interesting times.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 09:08 AM

So it starts:

Synagogue torched in Tunisia

Egyptian protesters promise to destroy Israel

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 09:28 AM

>>My point, Steve Shaw, is that Gaza is not part of Israel, therefore what Gazans think about Israel's democracy is of little importance. Also that Israel's actions do affect that he is a democracy. <<

Today the Government of Israel does not claim it as part of Israel, a couple of years ago when there were Israeli "settlements" there the distinction was not so clear. There are two things that are very clear.

1. In every way that matters, Gaza is governed by the Israeli military.

2. The relationship between the US and Canada or Germany and France cannot be compared to that between Israel and Gaza.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 11:34 AM

Here's Eric Margolis' latest article, which came out yesterday:

THE AMERICAN RAJ IN FLAMES
January 28, 2011

When I wrote my latest book on how America rules its Mideast empire, I chose the title, "American Raj," because this imperium so closely resembled the way Great Britain ruled India.
As I predicted in the book, and in a column here last April, America's Mideast Raj is now on fire.

Are we looking at a Mideast version of the 1989 uprisings across Eastern Europe that brought down its Communist regimes and then the Soviet Union?

There are certainly strong similarities between the old Soviet East Bloc and the spreading intifada across America's Mideast Raj. Corrupt, repressive governments; rapacious oligarchies; high youth unemployment and stagnation; widespread feelings of frustration, hopelessness and fury.

But there is also a big difference. The principled Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the Communist rulers of Eastern Europe, refused to turn their army's guns against the rebelling people.

In Tunisia, where the current Arab uprising began, the army has so far stayed admirably neutral.

But in other Arab states now seething with rebellion - Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, Morocco, Libya - there may be no such reservations. Their ruthless security forces and military could quickly crush the uprisings unless the soldiers refuse to shoot down their own people – as happened in Moscow in 1991. This remains to be seen.

Washington is watching this growing intifada in its Mideast Raj with alarm and confusion. Ignore the Obama administration's hypocritical platitudes urging "democracy." All of the authoritarian Arab rulers now under siege by their people have been armed, financed and supported for decades by the US.

The tear gas being blasted at demonstrators in Cairo bears the mark, "Made in USA." The brutal, sadistic secret police and other security forces of Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Jordan and Yemen were all trained and equipped by the US. The CIA taught them "interrogation techniques," just as it did to the Shah of Iran's secret police, Savak.

In yet another example of shameless hypocrisy, State Secretary Hillary Clinton urges "restraint" on both sides. One supposes she means those being beaten by clubs, raped, or tortured by electric drills must show proper restraint. Washington simply does not understand that this kind of sickening hypocrisy turns even more people in the Muslim world against the United States.

Egypt, as this column has long said, is a ticking bomb. Half of 85 million Egyptians subsist below the UN's $2 daily poverty level. A third of all the Arab World's people are Egyptian.

Husni Mubarak has ruled Egypt with an iron fist since 1981.
All opposition to his regime has been crushed. But now Mubarak's time may be running out. Nobel-Prize Laureate Mohammed al-Baradei has returned to Egypt to challenge Mubarak and his designated successor, son, Gamal. Arab league chief Amr Moussa may also stand against Mubarak.

Washington has previously lauded Mubarak for "wise leadership" and "stability". The US pays Egypt over $2 billion annually not to confront Israel, to jail Islamists, and to keep Hamas in the open air prison of Gaza. The US Congress provides half of Egypt's food. Since Israel gives Congress its marching orders on the Mideast, it also exercises extraordinary influence over Egypt.

So far, none of the intifadas across the Arab world have produced effective leadership. But this could soon change.

Thanks to the bombshell "Palestinian Papers" leaked to al-Jazeera, Mahmoud Abbas' Palestinian Authority has been exposed as an eager collaborator with Israel and its West Bank occupation.   The endless Israeli-Palestinian "peace talks" are shown to be a total fraud. Israel's Mossad and its Palestinian Quislings have worked closely to destroy the democratically elected Hamas government in Gaza.

We also learn from these papers that in 2008, US State Secretary Condoleeza Rice actually proposed shipping millions of Palestinian refugees to Latin America. This after Israel, financed by the US, imported one million Russian settlers, many of them not even Jewish. One is reminded of British proposals in the 1930's to move Germany's endangered Jews to Kenya.

This was Washington's modern version of US-taxpayer financed ethnic cleansing of Muslims and Christians from the Mideast. Small wonder these revelations have produced fury across the Mideast.

The "Palestinian Papers" and Wikileaks show the US government at all times taking Israel's side and defending its interests and policies. So much for Washington being an honest-broker.

The US-Israeli backed Palestinian Authority has lost its last shreds of credibility.   This news will surely fan the flames now spreading across the Arab and greater Muslim world as their peoples realize the full extent of the betrayal of the Palestinians.

These dramatic events are poorly understood by most North Americans. The US and Canadian media frame news of the regional intifada in terms of the faux war on terror, and a false choice between dictatorial "stability" and Islamic political extremism. Much of what's happening is seen through Israel's eyes, and is badly distorted.

Platitudes aside, there is little concern in the US about bringing real democracy and modern society in the Arab world.   Washington wants obedience, not pluralism, in its Mideast Raj.   As with the British Empire, democracy at home is fine – but it's not right for the nations of the Arab world.

Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2011

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 12:57 PM

Margolis is well known as a useful idiot of the Islamists. He would like nothing better than to see the disappearance of Israel and the Middle East ruled as an Islamic paradise à la Iran.

Here are some thoughts on what's going down in Egypt from five people who don't have an anti-West axe to grind: http://www.themarknews.com/articles/3929-five-solutions-to-the-crisis-in-egypt

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 01:14 PM

One man's "useful idiot" is another man's voice of reason. It's all a matter of which set of cherished beliefs you choose to filter reality through. Every conquering empire hates people who interfere with or question its conquests and considers them traitors to the cause. Nothing new about that. Israel's conquests began in 1948 and have been expanding ever since (with a brief recoil after 1973) at the expense of all Israel's neighbours. Great Britain and France's imperial conquests in the Middle East began much earlier, but suffered great setbacks after official colonization became politically unacceptable, so now they do it through Israel, the USA, and Muslim proxy governments (compliant dictators). The USA's imperial conquests in the Middle East got going after WWII as they basically took over the old French-British position. Their interests and Russia's collided in Afghanistan, and the Russians eventually lost out in that one as the USA-backed Mujahedeen took over. The Mujahedeen fractured into several fighting factions and the Taliban came out on top. The USA eventually had a falling out with their former buddies, the Taliban, (just like they did with their former buddy, Saddam Hussein) and the imperial crusade entered a new and far bloodier phase that is continuing to play itself out in Afghanistan, Iraq, northern Pakistan, Yemen, etc...

It is nothing more than great imperial manuoveres by those with the most guns and money over the bodies of the local people, and those with the most guns and money at present are the USA, Israel, the UK, France, and Russia. They are the imperial powers. The Middle East is their battleground. The ordinary people there are the ones who suffer the consequences. And the prize is: OIL (and regional control)

The Chinese, of course, are also quite concerned. They have need to be, because they too need the oil. They too must therefore play the imperial game, but in a more subtle fashion, most likely.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 01:36 PM

Eric Margolis' spew does not seem at all rational or balanced.

I think the title "American Raj" says it all. The man is an idiot if he does not see that America does not rule Egypt. It is bribing Egypt's government with billions per year of my tax money so that it will not attack Israel. Personally I think that money could be better spent on just about anything else.

>>In yet another example of shameless hypocrisy, State Secretary Hillary Clinton urges "restraint" on both sides. One supposes she means those being beaten by clubs, raped, or tortured by electric drills must show proper restraint. <<

No useful idiot, this one supposes she (Mrs Clinton) means that the Army should not shoot people down like the National Guard did at Kent State and that the civilians should not loot and destroy infrastructure and precious cultural treasures as they did in Iraq under the George Bush/Haliburton occupation.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 01:52 PM

Certainly a "useful" perspective from Margolis. Quite understandable that bobad can do no better than bluster insults in response.

I don't think, JtS, that "American Raj" was intended to be taken literally, but it was a neat way to make a simple point - that through its colossal munificence the US has, for generations, empowered a regime that towed the line in respect of US (Israeli) interests.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 02:17 PM

The ripples keep spreading -- wikileaks credited as the pebble that got things started: Growing protest movement across Middle East prompts crackdowns, vows to reform

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 02:30 PM

"VICTORY to the people of Egypt. Mubarak won't run in election again. 6.40pm: Al Arabiya TV is now reporting that President Hosni Mubarak will say in a speech that he will step down at the next election but will stay in office till then to meet demands of protesters in that period."

Facebook post.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: bobad
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 02:33 PM

Mubarak will not run again: TV report
Cairo— Reuters
Published Tuesday, Feb. 01, 2011 1:49PM EST
Last updated Tuesday, Feb. 01, 2011 2:02PM EST

President Hosni Mubarak will say in a speech that he will step down at the next election but would stay in office till then to meet demands of protesters in that period, Al Arabiya TV said on Tuesday.

It sourced the news to unnamed reports.

It said the president would make the comments in a speech later on Tuesday.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 03:59 PM

"I chose the title, "American Raj," because this imperium so closely resembled the way Great Britain ruled India. "

My point was that the Americans DO NOT rule Egypt in the Great Britain ruled India. Even though Eric Margolis says that it does.

Bobad, I will be very surprised if today's announcement will have any real effect. I think Eqyptians will be in the street until Mubarek is gone.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 04:03 PM

Margolis is not saying that American rules Egypt in a direct sense, Jack, he's saying that America has in the last few decades secured dominance of Egyptian policy and of the rest of the region (except Iran) through a combination of bribery, intimidation, and force of arms...his use of the term "Raj" to describe it merely draws a parallel between onetime British domination of a region and present American domination of a region. It describes a sphere of influence. You don't need direct political rule to control a region. It can be done by less direct means, and that's how it's been done...except in Iraq and Afghanistan, where it has been done by very direct means.

I do agree, though, that his intemperate remarks which you quoted i regards to Hillary Clinton are unreasonable and out of line. He took it too far there and stretched his point to an unreasonable extreme, as you have indicated.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 04:07 PM

>>Margolis is not saying that American rules Egypt in a direct sense, Jack<<

Hawk, I am just reading what you have posted and there he says exactly that.

Perhaps he is being hyperbolic or metaphorical, but that is exactly what makes me discount his opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 04:52 PM

Well, yes, I think he is using metaphor, Jack.

He says: "my latest book on how America rules its Mideast empire"

He can't mean it literally, because there is no officially established American Empire in the literal sense, so he means it metaphorically. I've read some of Margolis' books, and I know he means it metaphorically.

Americans grow up in a society that claims not just to stand for freedom...but seems to also pretty much assert that it invented freedom! ;-) Given that mental conditioning for Americans from the youngest age, their government can hardly go out into the world and establish official colonies and an official empire. It wouldn't look good. So other means are found of doing it, and those other means take a variety of forms.

Be that as it may, America has established indirect control over virtually all of the Middle East and North Africa and central Asia, with the exception of Iran, which is why America is so bent on somehow "taking out" Iran and achieving regime change there. Iran is like the one store left in Al Capone's city which hasn't been frightened into paying for "protection", thus they are potentially under the American gun at all times. Only the sheer cost and risk of engaging in a war with Iran has saved them thus far, given that the USA has its hands very full already with 2 military occupations in Muslim lands and a financial crisis at home. Fighting Iran is an expense the USA can't afford at present. (but the same excuse for doing it as was used for Iraq is being held at the ready: rumors of alleged WMDs).

America has (with Israel as a partner) established an unchallenged sphere of influence over the entire Middle East with the exception of Iran. That is the "American Raj" which Margolis is referring to. It is an empire, for all commercial purposes, but it's not an official empire. There aren't really any official empires in the world anymore, just some unofficial ones. China's unofficial empire, for example, extends into Tibet, and I believe they're pretty cosy with North Korea and Myanmar too.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 05:48 PM

Margolis, I think, carries matters a step too far, but his statements can't be dismissed out of hand.
Going back as far as WW2, the Western powers have pursued a policy of stability for the Middle East, regardless of the oppressive regimes of some and the expansionist desires of others.
Israel has been looked upon as the regional enforcer, keeping the region stabile with its large military and control of the only atomic arsenal.
Israel, with the support of the West, uses its threatening stance to keep the region from developing independent, viable, growing economies with peoples becoming democratized and demanding of equality.
The west also fails to see that Israel is slowly expanding into the west bank, a step forward, half a step back, and that they will never allow a viable Palestinian state.

Peter K. and Steve Shaw's statements I largely agree with, but I have the hope, perhaps mis-guided, that the western powers will wake up and re-direct their billions to development rather than to military purposes used for stability through suppression.

Iran is making an effort to grow and become a counter to Israel; the West has no coherent plan to cope with another strong power in the region except to squeeze it into compliance.

The western powers have all done little more than encourage Mubarak to step down (but leaving the same systems in place under new names) and to give the people placebos.

This may prove to be Obama's worst failure historically; failure to support more liberal regimes although giving lip-service to the idea of democracy. His (and the other western leaders) inaction here could lead to bloodshed rather than to reform.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 06:07 PM

Would you agree, Q, that the primary purposes of the West's efforts to achieve "stability" in the Middle East have been to secure a steady supply of relatively cheap oil and to achieve other commercial and political advantages in the region?

If so, well, that's basically what empires always try to do. They try to achieve access to valuable resources and engage in profitable trade. If military force is required to do it, then they use military force.

It was the search for strategic resources that basically drove Japan into war with China, and ultimately to war with the Western Allies in WWII. Japan needed large supplies of oil and steel, supplies which could not be secured domestically, so they went to war over it.

The USA is willing to go to war at any time to protect its access to the enormous strategic resources in the Middle East, but it must convince its people that there is some other reason for going to war, as the public is not ready to have their sons and daughters die for oil. So...other reasons are found.

non-existent WMDs
the "War on Terror"
Iran's nuclear program
"creating democracy" (a laughable lie, but I'm sure some people believe it)

I don't think the USA is particularly evil for doing what it's doing, because it's just behaving exactly as large empires have always behaved, going right back to Greece, Rome or Egypt. It's doing what imperial ambition requires, and telling its public whatever it thinks will best motivate them to support an aggressive foreign policy and initiate wars not of national defense, but wars of choice.

Again, that's what empires do. When a war erupts between a small power and a great power, it is very seldom, if ever, the small power that planned it.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: pdq
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 06:18 PM

"This may prove to be Obama's worst failure historically; failure to support more liberal regimes although giving lip-service to the idea of democracy. His (and the other western leaders) inaction here could lead to bloodshed rather than to reform." ~ Q

Yep, it's Jimmy Carter Part II.

Subject: RE: BS: Middle East Unrest
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 01 Feb 11 - 06:52 PM

Little Hawk, the part about keeping political and commercial interests viable is right, but petroleum is not the primary mover for the U. S. although many people blame it. It is for the European economies (or was until the recent turn to Russian area oil and gas). The 'strategic resources' of the Middle East are are of much greater importance to the EU that to the U. S. and Canada; and you do not mention the Suez Canal.

The sole important petroleum source in the Middle East for the U. S. is Saudi Aramco. There have been no real threats to this supply.
Currently, the U. S. gets less than 20 percent of its petroleum from Aramco, and a small amount from Iraq (most going to Europe); the U. S. gets most from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela; a fair amount from southern Africa and South America.

Also of greater importance is the Suez Canal, important to the flow of all commodities world-wide. Perhaps the primary reason the Egyptian army is important to the West.