By
Barry Rubin June 7, 2013
In the Middle East, to paraphrase President Barack Obama’s mentor,
the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the dodo birds are coming home to roost.
At this moment, the administration’s policy team consists of CIA
director John Brennan, father of the “”moderate” Islamism-and-the-Muslim
Brotherhood-are-good school; the Secretary of State John Kerry who
thinks he
is going to make Israel-Palestinian peace in one month; the
know-nothing Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel; the chilling ideologue
Samantha Powers as UN ambassador; and the dupe of the Benghazi scandal
Susan Rice rewarded by being made national security adviser.
Can things get any more Alice in Wonderland? But what’s really happening in the region.
In Egypt, the country is falling into anti-Americanism and tyranny,
the United States is embarking on a new policy in Syria that one can see
won’t work. What is the solution? Simply to support moderate and
anti-Islamist forces while opposing Islamists and terrorists. Except if
you wait too long there will be no good forces left to help anymore.
Egypt first. The Supreme Constitutional Court, the country’s highest court, has
now ruled that
the January 2012 Shura Council election for the upper house of
parliament was unconstitutional. The same decision was rendered for the
Islamist-dominated body that wrote the new Constitution. But the chief
judge said that the Constitution was not annulled.
In short, there is total confusion. Indeed, it isn’t even clear that
the new election for the lower house of Parliament will be held. Egypt
is in maximal mess phase.
Meanwhile, what allegedly friendly country just sentenced the son of a U.S. cabinet official to five years in prison?
Answer: Egypt,
to the son of Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. Crime: Supporting
democracy. Four more Americans received the same sentence.
The Egyptian Islamist regime does not fear America nor does it show
gratitude for President Obama’s help in its taking and consolidation of
power. Offices were closed and prison sentences of up to five years—for
27 people–were meted out. Many of those charged fled the country. Among
the groups closed were the International Republican Institute and the
National Democratic Institute.
Secretary of State John Kerry
said the
United States was “deeply concerned” but of course the Egyptian
government knew America wouldn’t do anything except keep shipping in
tear gas and provided financial and political support.
After getting into power in part due to U.S. help, the Egyptian court
called the promotion of democracy a form of “soft imperialism.” Get it?
They get into power by a vote and then that’s the end of free
elections.
History shows,
says the court’s verdict,
that U.S. policies believes that its “interests as best served by
totalitarian dictatorships and harmed by genuine democracies….The
U.S.—fearing democracy ushered in by Egypt’s popular revolt—has used
funding to take the revolution off its path.”
So even as the U.S. government supports the Egyptian revolt and
regime, the ruling elite claims that it opposed them. Thus the
pro-Muslim Brotherhood policy doesn’t win any influence or benefits
since the Brotherhood accepts the help and then declares that America is
its enemy.
Thus, for friendship toward America; how about peaceful intentions
toward neighbors? Here we have possibly the most embarrassing open
microphone scandal in history. The televising of a meeting held by
President Muhammad Morsi
allowed listeners to hear
plans for military attacks on Ethiopia because of a dam that country is
building on the Nile in order to generate electricity. Participants
didn’t know the meeting was being aired on live state television.
Egyptian leaders discussed covert operations to destroy the dam or
giving covert support to rebel groups. This gives some hints of what
longer-term policy toward Israel might well be. Advocates of aggressive
action included moderate politicians.
How about
cultural news?
Well the Culture Minister Alaa Abdel-Aziz has just installed an
Islamist professor of Arabic literature by firing the head of Egypt’s
National Library and Archives. Also fired were the heads of the opera
house, book publishing, and fine arts sections of the ministry.
The ministry’s foreign relations’ director resigned in protest,
saying that the minister was seeking to Islamize Egyptian culture and
put religion in place of national identity.
What other trends are visible? How about the
sentencing of a Christian lawyer to
one year in prison and a fine for allegedly insulting God and the
Quran? This is one of many such trials. The complaint was brought by
Islamist lawyers. Previously, a Christian schoolteacher had been
sentenced to six years for, among other things, allegedly insulting
Morsi. Last December it was the turn of a Christian who posted a short
film claimed to be derogatory to Islam and who was sentenced to three
years. Two Christian children, aged nine and ten years old, were put in
juvenile detention for allegedly tearing up a Koran.
But perhaps the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood supports “Arab Spring” type revolts elsewhere?
No. Leaders
asserted that the demonstrations against the Turkish Islamist
government that have broken out on a grassroots’ level are in fact a war
against Islam by showing that Islamist regimes have failed. It’s
interesting that the Muslim Brotherhood considers the Turkish
counterpart of being that kind of government while the U.S. government
doesn’t.
So, opposing the spread of democracy, viewing the United States as an
enemy, putting Islamist power as the highest value, oppressing
Christians, and fundamentally transforming Egypt into an anti-American,
anti-Christian, oppressive dictatorship. These are the hallmarks of
contemporary Egypt. And there are scores of other examples that can be
cited.
In Syria, reports Reuters on May 31 from Beirut, the Saudis have now
clearly changed policy in line with the United States. The Saudi
government is now frightened of its own support of radical Salafist
Islamists in the rebel forces. They are pressuring Qatar to stop backing
the hardliners though it is not clear how successful this effort is at
present. Qatar has become the main backer of the Muslim Brotherhood
financially.
The new policy is being influenced by military failures now that the
Assad regime has more Russian, Iranian, and Hizballah backing. But it is
also prompted by worries that Syria might be taken over by
anti-American, anti-Saudi Islamist radicals. This concern was heightened
by American observance of what was happening in rebel-held northern
Syria. Another factor is the disorder in rebel ranks seen at the recent
summit meeting in Turkey and the intransigence of the Muslim Brotherhood
exile leadership to accept other forces into the direction of the
battle.
At a critical moment when the United States and European Union were
going to send arms directly, fear of the dominant Islamist forces—which
also include a growing al-Qaida presence—is holding up this escalation.
And without more arms the rebels cannot win.
This has led the United States from handing over $63 million dollars
in promised aid to the rebels Syrian Opposition Coalition which is
dominated by the Brotherhood.
U.S. policy is still in disorder but has now changed. Up to now, the
Obama Administration has favored a rebel victory, disregarding the
growth of Muslim Brotherhood, Salafist, and al-Qaida forces as well as
worrisome signs of ethnic massacres. Amazingly enough, it backed a
Muslim Brotherhood dominated group as the rebel leadership even when
that organization kept out others!
Now, in theory, the Obama Administration is switching to support for moderates,
the policy that this column has advocated for almost two years and had
been disregarded. It is too late, however. The rebel groups have formed;
they control much territory, ideological blocs have hardened; and there
are relatively few moderates. Moreover, the Free Syrian Army controls
few forces on the ground.
Note by the way that the domination of the rebels by the Islamists
have kept Christians and Druze, as well as Alawites, on the regime’s
side. That is more than 25 percent of the population. Another 15
percent, the Kurds, are in effect neutral seeking to maintain their
autonomy won by their militia in the civil war. It is probably too later
to change these positions
So the real alternatives of the Western states may be reduced to three:
–Withhold aid and live with a long-term civil war in which the Assad
regime controls half the country while Russia, Iran, and Hizballah claim
a partial victory.
–Give strong backing to rebel forces regardless of ideology and see
Syria taken over by a radical Islamist government in which the
Brotherhood rules, the Salafists operate freely, and al-Qaida
establishes a strong base.
–Say that they are supporting moderate forces which have few soldiers
and relatively little support within Syria. This policy won’t work but
will look good. Meanwhile, Sunni Islamist radicals and a pro-Iran
dictatorship batle for predominance.
The likely option is the last one.
Isn’t it time for the U.S. government, journalists, and academics to
admit that they’ve been getting the Middle East all wrong? That they
have often reversed the good and bad guys so that they have been backing
the bad guys, anti-Americans, and even terrorists? Haven’t the
contradictions gotten to be so obvious that they cannot be denied any
more?
American interests are with the rebels of Turkey and Iran; the
moderate Muslim-Christian opposition in Lebanon, with Israel and the
Kurds; with the real moderates in Egypt; with Jordan’s kingdom which
small amounts of money would help enormously; and, yes, often even with
the Gulf Arab states (except Qatar) if only given the American
leadership they are begging for.
Western and American interests are not with the Muslim Brotherhood in
Egypt, Tunisia, and Syria; not with the stealth Islamist regime in
Turkey for which the Obama Administration
just renewed
a waiver on sanctions against Iran (!); not with the rejectionist
Palestinian Authority, not with some “moderate Islamist” faction of the
Iranian regime.
It is past time that this be recognized. But it is a task requiring a Churchill, not the churlish.
