In the era of “neo-terrorism,” or micro-terrorist groups, this increasing hostility only means a threat to American national security. With the rapid boom in technology and communication, it takes no more than a connection to the Internet and a few dollars to develop a bomb and threaten the security and lives of innocents anywhere. Therefore, relying on the strong relations with Egypt’s dictator as a substitute for building bridges of understanding with the Egyptian people is a strategic mistake.
The current and next American administrations have one of two possible alternatives. The first is to continue supporting a regime that complies with all their demands yet spreads embedded anti-Americanism on the domestic level, and suffer the possible consequences of that, which will be devastating to everyone. The second alternative is to support real democracy in Egypt, and realize that the outcome would be a government that would not necessarily serve America’s short term interests in the region. The outcome will be a government that pursues Egypt’s interests, and manifests the people’s will, yet does not fuel widespread inherent hostility towards the United States.
On the other hand, the MB is not exactly known for its pro-US rhetoric either, is it? So the message is, if you encourage democracy in Egypt, even if it will inevitably strengthen the MB (at least initially), Egypt will continue to play more or less within the limits imposed by American regional hegemony. And presumably refrain from doing things like sending soldiers to defend Lebanon from Israel. Or am I reading it wrong?
So the message is, if you encourage democracy in Egypt, even if it will inevitably strengthen the MB (at least initially),.
That backward organization is quite reactionary, they lack a reliable vision of the futire. They are only skilled at taking advantage of the deterioration of Egypt’s cultural and political life to charge the masses with a religous zeal . Hence they put themselves forward as the vanguads of Islam. Their sharpest intllectuall tools are ” zebibas, beards, sebhas as well as the “Hajs” business class. they have a historical resevoir of patriotic and religous figures tht grants them a quasi mythical status among Egyptians.
What is interesting about them is that they are quite metamorphic. I think their thought at the present is quite influenced buy the Irani shiisim,as they they have embraced the shiite Taqueya principal” that expalins thei willingness to deal with regime and to maintain relations with the Americans, unlike the hardcore Wahabi ones.
What really counts here,is that once those retards have lept into power, they are to create in Egypt a state similar to that in the republioc of demagogus and stupids in Iran.
Alas, Egypt lack oil resources, unlike Iran. Thus, the country won’t be able to put with their ignorance. And it will take the Egyptians 60 years to relaze what sort of crap they have thrown themselves into.
One has got to keep on mind that Inetia in Egypt is gigantic, the country doesnt change easily and smoothly- but once a change takes place, it becomes impossible to reverse it in a convennient time.
I hate to say this, but for the fuTure of Egypt- Mahdy Akef and the rest of the retards must be giveN a NASSERITE TREATMENT”. THEY HAVE TO BE SENT TO CONCENTRATION CAMPS IN THE WETERN DESERT. THEIR KEY FIGURES MUST BE EXECUTED
The comment above is nuts. Whoever that person is, they need to get a grip on themselves.
Unfortunately, though they go utterly crazy, their sentiment of suspicion is probably well founded. I think they are right that the brother are reactionary. And though the brothers do have a vision, as the person above says, it is not based on political considerations first, but they adjust for political situations as they arise…
That said, I both agree and disagree with what you said about the article you posted. I do not think that the Brothers would play within the rules that the USA sets, except that the rules that the USA sets will not directly impact the Brothers in their political considerations. Because they are reactionary, they have no intention to be forced to react to a situation, and they know that they are weak when they do react… So, my assumption is that they would take positions similar to Hamas positions in relation to the occupation. Hamas knows they are weak and knows they can’t substantially change things now, and they also know that they are at the mercy of the occupation, so Hamas continues to beg Fatah for political recognition and beg Israel for a medium term ceasefire… The brothers would do the same, they would take positions that would keep them alive for the short term, until they came to enough strength where they though they could be more bold. as they come to power, i am sure they will over judge their power and lose their humility… Therefore, i am sure they would abide by american power, but not because of american power, but for their own calculations…
[…] * Ibrahim Al Houdaiby of the Muslim Brotherhood argues that Egyptian opposition groups like his would like direct relationships with the American government, but that Hosni Mubarak and Condi Rice prevent this from happening. He further claims that the Mubarak regime’s method of repressing opposition contacts with the US – painting them as traitorous tools of Washington – stokes anti-Americanism in Eqypt. That part is least convincingly drawn. Note the tacit “global guerrillas” thesis of his penultimate paragraph, though. (Via The Arabist.) […]
Amre, how’s the medical marijuana thing going with you? Give any thought to it?:-)
Joe, your comment reveals stupidity . before you pleasure us with what you suppose to be well-informed deep , comprehensive assessments of political life in Egypt, go and learn Arabic forst. You have to a least spend 10 years studying Arabic language and culture, before your opinions are top be taken as credible in any way whatsoever.
secondly ,learn some manners trailer trash before you adress me with your stupid omment
I cannot imagine what the U.S. could do that would encourage democracy in Egypt. Would it end up with another Iraq?