THE US APPEARS TO BE CULPABALE OVER EGYPT

Published in Tribune magazine 04/02/11
By Marjorie Smith

The on-going demonstrations in Cairo's streets and squares have shaken the Mubarak regime's foundations. Washington is now on the horns of a dilemma, all of its own making. Yet it looks like it wants to preserve as much as possible of the status quo.

Foreign policy analysts believe that what started as a strategic cold-war decision to wean Egypt away from the Soviet Union's sphere of influence in the 60's became a lynchpin of America's policy of activist globalism. The Arab world's most populous state (by far) is now perceived by many Egyptians as an adjunct of the US State Department.

Even at the beginning of the current crisis Hilary Clinton and the Obama administration's response was widely seen as pathetic, the initial reflex called for stability, i.e. an attempt to shore up Mubarak. Most informed commentators in the Arab world believe that when push comes to shove, the architects of US foreign policy prefer a strong man in thrall to Washington rather than allow the Egyptian people to decide their own future.

Yet Mubarak for the past 12 months has been more concerned about a dynastic succession for his son Gamal, than addressing the profound economic challenges Egypt faces. Most Egyptians believe that the 30 years of brutal repression and what many see as a nepotistic kleptocracy under Mubarak has been consistently indulged by the US.

Driving through the Cairo suburb of Heliopolis, one can see the how the elite in Egypt live. It consists of plush houses, wide avenues, state-of-the-art hospitals, exclusive clubs for the military and others, all surrounding Mubarak's palace. Most Egyptians see it as stark evidence of the ruling class indulging itself in a confident display of conspicuous consumption.

Yet, it seems that despite the rampant cronyism, the control of civilian enterprises by military leaders, the supreme indifference to the worsening conditions of the working classes, the growing lumpen proletariat, Washington would prefer stability to democracy. It is becoming apparent to many that the CIA and others are working on a plan to implement a palace revolution, where Mubarak goes and the elite stay in place, rather than a rapid move to open democracy.

Mubarak's power is entirely based on the support of the military and US indulgence was largely delivered through massive military aid. The large transfers of military resources to Egypt had a multi-faceted role, mainly to keep the military happy and to heavily influence Egyptian foreign policy.

Most Egyptians now believe that since Sadat's peace deal with Israel in 1975, the US has ensured that Egyptian foreign policy is predicated on the interests of Israel. Even now Benjamin Netanyahu is currently scaremongering about how the crisis in Egypt could rapidly escalate to the level it did in Tehran when the Shah was ousted. This is clear evidence of what some commentators see as an attempt by the Israeli tail to wag the American dog.

The continued siege of Gaza, the craven attitude of Mubarak to Tel Aviv's machinations and the long  repression of the Egyptian working class have been and still appear to be central tenets of US foreign policy. Many in the Middle East believe that the repression, the chaos, the anarchy and the numerous dead and injured in Egypt are the direct responsibility of Washington.