Egyptian Revolution Or American Creeping Coup?
In other words, Mubarakâ€™s successor must be, like Mubarak, an American puppet and lackey. The Suleiman government would have an out-and-out criminal at its head. The Egyptian vice presidentâ€”appointed to that post only last week by Mubarakâ€”is responsible for the torture of thousands of political prisoners, a role for which he was especially prized by the CIA, which regularly shipped prisoners to Egypt for treatment that could not be treated in Guantanamo Bay or the CIA owns network of secret prisons.
As we see the dynamic of the popular masses of Egypt move against the Hosni Mubarak government, one has to put the recent events into historical context and oppose any enterprises and proposals by the American government to replace Mubarakwith a military-dominated “transition” government.
For this move is only about protecting the interests of American imperialism and the Egyptian ruling elite, and trying to call a halt the growing Egyptian revolution in power. While we see and witness a whole host of loquacious and sentimental platitudes as explanations, one would think that Maya Angelou was a pontificating member and representative of The State Department given the colorful propaganda.
President Barack Obama during a joint press conference Friday with the visiting Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, urged Mubarak to “make the right decision” to resolve the crisis in Egypt. Vice President Joseph Biden had called Egyptian Vice
President Omar Suleiman on the phone to discuss, according to the White House a “credible, inclusive negotiations" to "begin immediately in order for Egypt to transition to a democratic government that addresses the aspirations of the Egyptian people.”
Suleiman is and was a long time person in charge of the Egyptian intelligence services who is now most preferred person by Washington. The Obama administration envisions a regime based on the military and headed by Suleiman, Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the defense minister, and of the top Mubarak aides, with the addition of representatives of the corrupt and money inspired Egyptian opposition—figures such as Mohammed ElBaradei, the former head of the UN nuclear weapons inspections program, Amr Moussa, secretary of the Arab League, and big business spokespersons like the Wafd Party.
The State Department spokesmen have also suggested a role for the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist bourgeois party that has long been outlawed in Egypt, but whose candidates have been running as independents, and won 20% of the seats in the 2005 legislative election. After years of singing the “threat” of the Islamic fundamentalist to justify support for the Mubarak dictatorship, Washington has decided to cultivated the Islamists as a bulwark against the main danger—of secular radical social revolution.
Back in November 2007, the New York Times had published an article and analysis of the coming manipulation of the succession to Mubarak. The article was to go and say that: “Mr. Mubarak has not always been the perfect ally, but American officials a say that he is invaluable for his historical perspective and the importance he places on the relationship with the United States and peace with Israel. An American official here said the hope was that Mr. Mubarak’s ultimate replacement would be someone who maintains the same historical appreciation for peace and relations with Washington.”
In other words, Mubarak’s successor must be, like Mubarak, an American puppet and lackey. The Suleiman government would have an out-and-out criminal at its head. The Egyptian vice president—appointed to that post only last week by Mubarak—is responsible for the torture of thousands of political prisoners, a role for which he was especially prized by the CIA, which regularly shipped prisoners to Egypt for treatment that could not be treated in Guantanamo Bay or the CIA owns network of secret prisons.
The journalist Robert Fisk had described Suleiman bitingly and caustically as Mubarak’s “chief negotiator with Israel and his senior intelligence officer, a 75-year-old with years of visits to Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and four hearts attacks to his credit.” For it was under Suleiman direction that Gaza had become systematically blockaded and starved for the past four years, since the coming to power of Hamas in that territory. Suleiman is a confidante of the Israeli regime, the most highly regarded Egyptian in the eyes of Mossad and the Israeli military.
For it must be noted that Suleiman and the military would have a civilian fig leaf in the forms of individuals like ElBaradei, who are equally hostile to the revolutionary movement in the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and other cities. ElBaradei had argued for delaying elections further than the September date set by Mubarak. ElBaradei had proposed instead a three-member ruling council, presumably
himself, Suleiman and a top military officer, to hold power for a year while the electoral system was “reformed.”
The main job or undertaking of such a “transition” regime would be to mislead the popular movement against Mubarak with the illusions of reform, and then diffuse the mass protest rallies and marches, including the domination of all those who rightly refuse to accept such US-brokered transition as a genuine democratic development. In that context, Obama's words Friday have a menacing ring. Obama had restated earlier statements that the US government opposes the use of violence either by the government or the protesters—as though there was an equivalence between the brutal military, which is armed to the teeth, and with a long record of
torture and murder, and the Egyptian masses, who successfully defended themselves in Tahrir Square with their bare hands and the sheer force of their numbers.
When Mubarak is replaced by a caretaker person based on the military, both the Obama administration and the American media will swing behind the new ruler in charge, vilifying all popular opposition as “terrorism” and endorsing the bloodiest measure of state of repression.
Far from representing a concession to the democratic demands of the masses, such a regime would represent a carefully constructed roadblock. It would cement the role of the Egyptian government as a servant of US imperialism, collaborator with Israel, and enemy of the Palestinian people and the oppressed masses of Egypt itself.
The Mubarak regime is not simply the product of a criminal dictator and his exclusive group of gangsters. It was, rather, the instrument of the ruling elite of Egypt and its imperialist clients. The history of this Egyptian regime has shown the fact that it is incapable of addressing the social needs of the people and carrying out the basic task of a democratic revolution. For it must be noted that this cannot be achieve through electoral formalities—which Egypt has in abundance—but semi-feudal landlords who still dominate the countryside.
The course of events in Egypt has shown a powerful justification for a qualitative change of actual power or revolution. As we see a century of bitter experiences of the role of the comprador leadership can play a healthy or progressive role in Egyptian society.
Class divisions in Egypt constitute the dominant reality of social life. Particularly over the last 20 years, a powerful, but brutally oppressed working poor has grown up in Egypt, taking on a series of militant and bloody clashes with the Egyptian police-state.
At this point an impassable social gulf separates the working poor and the impoverished fellahin from the privileged elite and its political representatives, from Mubarak and Suleiman to ElBaradei and the Muslim Brotherhood. For at this moment these divisions have already been manifested in the spontaneous formation of neighborhood committees—in the communities of the poor, to
ward off attacks by Mubarak thugs, which in the comprador bourgeois gated communities, to guard against so-called “mob rule.”
For at this point the burning questions that the Egyptian poor must face and tackle is the approach of self-organization of the working poor and workers in general, that is independent of all parties of the Egyptian elite. This means building up working and community councils to mobilize the immense social power of the Egyptian masses.
They need to develop a program of mass distribution of wealth for housing, education, health care, retirement, and whatever the contradictions that the Egyptians masses face after years of being put under the rule and exploitation of a comprador ruling elite that has used the wealth of the country for the West.
For the Egyptian people history may be on their side, but, not time.
"Speaking Truth To Empower."
No Record Exist!!