peacefare.net

Mubarak’s order

Tuesday was the peoples’ day, yesterday was the regime’s day. What will today and Friday be?

Let there be no doubt.  Wednesday afternoon’s rioting against the demonstrators was organized and paid for by the Mubarak regime, which at the very least could have stopped it.  I imagine Mubarak hesitated to use his uniformed police for the crackdown, presumably fearing Washington’s wrath, so he had it done in civilian clothes, but many of the rioters carried Interior Ministry identification.  They targeted especially the news media, in an apparent attempt to intimidate them from covering the malfeasance.  If these are the forces of law and order, why not try chaos?

The demonstrators have done well to hold Tahrir Square, but physical contests with their antagonists are not a good idea.  Sometime in the middle of the night the number of demonstrators declines, making another Interior Ministry attack all the more likely.  Last night it was sporadic gunfire aimed mainly at legs and feet.  Officially five killed.  Tonight it may get worse.  Mubarak will try to intimidate as many as possible from joining the demonstrations Friday.  There is no substitute for a massive presence in Tahrir.

Washington naturally turns to the question, “what should Barack Obama do?”  White House spokesman  Gibbs was seen today in the twittersphere as less than forceful in condemning the regime violence, but at the same time he was pretty good in insisting that change had to start right away.  My sense is that the White House needs to play hard ball with Mubarak in private, but not get  too far out in front in public.  This shouldn’t be about the United States.  The Egyptian Foreign Ministry, in a statement that will be the shame of every professional Egyptian diplomat I know, was only too happy yesterday to reject foreign calls to incitement.

I’m not keen on recalling ambassadors, especially the American one, because it hurts communication with both protesters and the army, not to mention with the regime.  Nor do I like blanket aid cuts, though if we can find juicy items the regime is particularly interested in I would be happy to see them cut.  I trust Admiral Mullen is making it clear to the Egyptian army that we won’t be able to be as helpful as in the past unless the rioting against the demonstrators stops.  This revolution still has to be made, or unmade, in Egypt, not inside the beltway.

It will however have effects within the beltway, and throughout America.  The implications are admirably outlined in a piece by Steve Clemons. The big worry is the impact on Egypt’s peace with Israel.  While I would not be surprised if Egypt adopted a more pro-Palestinian voice, it seems highly unlikely that a democratic government in Cairo would prefer to pick a serious fight with Israel rather than tend to its own citizens’ needs.  But that is precisely what Tehran did after its nondemocratic revolution, so who can predict?

The Egyptians seem remarkably willing to keep up their efforts.  If they can hold Tahrir square today, we’ll know Friday whether they can defeat autocratic thuggery with democratic commitment.

Rope-a-dope it is, for this round

This morning President Mubarak is playing rope-a-dope, letting the protesters tire themselves out while he offers a vice president, reform, political dialogue, a new cabinet, food and other subsidies, promises of jobs and 10% discount coupons. The big crackdown may not come as soon as I had thought–he might wait a few days, making sure the army is in all the right places and hoping the crowds thin as people start to worry more about protecting their property in the absence of the police, who are playing hide and seek (or maybe cops become robbers).  He could then use the discovery of weapons (or maybe al Qaeda?) among those who remain as an excuse for reestablishing law and order.

Meanwhile, former IAEA chief Mohamed El Baradei has emerged as the leading figure among the demonstrators.  That may be an American illusion caused by his appearance Sunday on Fareed Zakaria’s CNN program calling for Mubarak’s resignation rather than real enthusiasm among the demonstrators, who seem to regard him more as a bridging figure for a transitional arrangement.  He, Ayman Nour and other luminaries of the opposition are said to have formed a 10-person (let’s hope there are some women included) “People’s Popular Parliament” (sounds good!) to manage the crisis, including security and negotiations with the army.  El Baradei is hardly your usual Jacobin, but he has a lot of experience handling delicate situations, joined the demonstrations (better late than never) and could well help to bring about a relatively nonviolent end to the regime.

Washington hasn’t quite pulled hard on the rug beneath Mubarak’s feet, but talking about transition rather than reform and thinking about blocking aid has its implications.

My twitter feed tells me the million Egyptian march is scheduled for Tuesday, so maybe we’ll all have to hold our breath until then.

Even pharaoh knew when to let people go

While the U.S. may be trying to engineer a smooth transition, my guess is that Mubarak has something else in mind.  His devotion to order was apparent in last night’s speech. He regards himself as essential to order.  The appointment of intelligence chief Omar Suleiman as vice president seems far off the mark if the objective is reform. It is more likely a precursor of crackdown, at which he is experienced and successful, than a smooth transition. Ditto with the appointment of the Aviation Minister, Ahmed Shafiq, as prime minister. Unless there is a negotiated solution, the regime will be tempted to try, likely tonight and if not tomorrow, the kind of brutal dispersal of demonstrators that has worked in the past.

Will it work this time?  I doubt it.  Crowds in Cairo today stayed on good terms with at least some of the soldiers, many of whom are presumably conscripts and therefore less subject to command and control than the professionals, while the Interior Ministry seems to be a focal point of police violence and the main TV station is heavily guarded.  The objective of the demonstrators has become increasingly into focus:  they want Mubarak out.  If the mid-ranking army officers are smart–and there is every reason to believe they are–they will be wondering whether they really want to crack skulls to save Mubarak, who in any event is starting to look like someone packing his bags. BBC is reporting that his two sons are already in London.

It is of course possible that Egypt will suffer a period of disorder, with or without Mubarak in place, providing opportunities for extremists to push the country in directions inimical to U.S., and most Egyptians’, interests. This would not be pretty and could veer in very dangerous directions.

But it is also possible that the constitution, which calls for new elections within 60 days of the president stepping down, will be respected (Article 84):

In case of the vacancy of the Presidential Office or the permanent disability of the President of the Republic, the President of the People’s Assembly shall temporarily assume the Presidency; and, if at that time, the People’s Assembly is dissolved, the President of the Supreme Constitutional Court shall take over the Presidency, however, on condition that neither one shall nominate himself for the Presidency. The People’s Assembly shall then proclaim the vacancy of the office of President. The President of the Republic shall be chosen within a maximum period of sixty days from the day of the vacancy of the Presidential Office.

This choice of the president is presumably done within the People’s Assembly, as provided for in Article 76.

It is hard to picture the demonstrators tolerating the choice of a new president by a parliament elected last fall in blatantly unfree and unfair elections, though I suppose they might accept if it is clear that the choice will be a transitional one, i.e. not Omar Suleiman or some other Mubarak appointee (former IAEA chief Mohamed El Baradei for example).  But it is going to be hard to satisfy anyone seriously interested in democracy in Egypt within the current constitutional framework, which is tailored to suit the likes of Hosni Mubarak.  Writing a new constitution will not be an easy, or quick, process.

In the meanwhile, lifting of the emergency law and formation of a government free of Mubarak’s military buddies would be the clearest signals that whoever is in charge is serious about moving ahead with democratic reform.  We are not there yet, and we may never get there–if the crackdown is successful, something like the previous system might be restored, with or without Mubarak as president.

An NPR correspondent told what I would regard as a good Egyptian joke this morning.  Informed by a speechwriter that his farewell address to the people was ready, Mubarak asks “why? are they going someplace?”  Even pharaoh knew when to let the people go.  In the modern version, the pharaoh leaves.

Two presidents try to contain the damage

First an uninspired Mubarak, who promises ill-defined reforms and fires the government but sees no problems in the regime and only chaos in the demonstrations (someone sell him a teleprompter please!):

Then an almost animated Obama, who favors universal human rights, peaceful demonstrations and concrete reforms (he didn’t use a teleprompter either, but he is better at it!):

Nothing Mubarak said suggested to me that he understood what real reform meant, and quite a bit of it suggested a willingness to crack down. Obama did not sound as if he wanted to put up with another day like today, when the Egyptian security forces were clearly unleashed and encouraged to trash the demonstrators.

Mubarak’s choice: step down or crack down

We’ll have to wait for more than one Ph.D. thesis before we understand all that has happened today in Egypt, but it seems clear that the police attacked quickly as worshipers left the mosques in Cairo and continued to do battle for most of the rest of the day. Demonstrators are reported to have welcomed the army this evening.

This is not surprising, and it may even be encouraging.  If the demonstrators can convince the army to abandon the regime, we could see a lot of fast reform in Egypt. That is more or less the current situation in Tunisia–the army abandoned Ben Ali and is now saying that it will protect the reform process (pray that it does).  The difference is that Egypt’s army has more privilege left to defend–it will not be easy to get them to abandon that, even if they abandon Mubarak. 

In Alexandria, the demonstrators and police seem to have made their peace much earlier in the day, with at least some police refusing orders to use tear gas and to attack the protesters. This too is encouraging.  Violence against the security forces plays into an autocrat’s hand, by enabling the use of force and depriving the demonstrators of at least some of their popular support.

Whatever the differences, one thing is clear everywhere:  it’s about the regime.  If Mubarak ever hoped to retire peacefully like Diocletian to his villa in Split, he seems to have missed the opportunity.  Nor will he be able to easily pass the baton to his son, who is the day’s biggest loser.  The Mubaraks have lost their best opportunities to make peace.  The President faces a starker choice than yesterday:  step down or crack down.

My guess is he will try crack down first.  It has worked for him in the past.  Washington, which as The Guardian says is wobbling on a tightrope, needs to get ready for one of the biggest foreign policy choices of our time:  back Mubarak or go for change.