spinning egypt

07 February 2011

the spin is in.   the economic losses are being blamed on the youth protests rather than on the tyrant’s intransigence.  and the opposition is now engaged daw in negotiations with mubarak’s vp.   are the youth protesters represented in these talks?   some say yes, some say no.   but the impression being created is that there’s a consensus, mubarak stays to shepherd the transition and save egypt.   so it’s time for the protesters to go home, be patient, change is in the offing.   but it would seem that the protesters are digging in, too.   and smartly so.  they are not the problem, mubarak is.   to pack up and leave liberation square would be to play right back into the tyrant’s hands.

15 Responses to spinning egypt

  1. February 7, 2011 at 3:25 am

    This is a sad reality. The military, which has long been plotting to get Suleiman to succeed Mubarak (they hate Mubarak Jr., the anointed one)has hi-jacked people power. The result is that Suleiman has the upper hand in the negotiations for transition while Mubarak, although now powerless, might end up still playing a role in the transition if he plays his cards well.

    The US

  2. February 7, 2011 at 3:27 am

    … the US, meanwhile, is trying to strike a balance between not being on the wrong side of history on one hand and ensuring Israel’s security on the other; hence, it’s playing by the military’s rules.

    For the US, it’s ok if 80 million Egyptians would live in chains as long as 8 million people on Israel would be more secure. Unfair, no?

  3. February 7, 2011 at 7:56 am
    UP nn grad

    People power can be hijacked??? Has people power ever been hijacked?? Pilipinas EDSA 1 has not been hijacked, has it?? I mean, the bloodline Aquino still has presidency, that’s good, right?

  4. February 7, 2011 at 11:04 am

    The spinning of events in Egypt is that the protest in Cairo’s Tahrir Square is the protest of the Egyptian people.

    It’s not.

    The protest in Tahrir Square is a protest by the brainwashed Egyptian people, the minority of the Egyptian people…brainwashed and manipulated by the western media.

    A people power by the brainwashed, hehehehe.

  5. February 7, 2011 at 11:37 am

    “For the US, it’s ok if 80 million Egyptians would live in chains as long as 8 million people on Israel would be more secure. Unfair, no?”-J

    What’s 80 million Egyptians, or 250 million Muslims, to Israel? Israel is always secure, not by the US, but by its vast nuclear firepower.

    Do you think it’s safe for the whole world for the Muslim governments, or any Muslim government for that matter, to try annihilating the land of Israel?

    If your answer is ‘yes’, please think again.

  6. February 8, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    Israel is always secure because of its nuclear deterrent? Dude, it’s no longer the Cold War. Threats no longer linear. Israel’s nuclear deterrent has failed to secure it against rocket attacks from Hamas.

    I never said it’s safe for the world if Muslim governments to try to annihilate Israel.

    And please prove to me first that the Tahrir protests is just a protest by the noisy minority.

    @UpnGrad, as I said on my blog ( http://thenutbox.i.ph/blogs/thenutbox/2011/02/06/egypts-calibrated-revolution/#more-280 ):

    “The protests, which was sparked by the Tunisian people power revolt, was not a result of mobilization by any of the four political actors we have mentioned. Instead, it was spontaneous and therefore a people power movement in the most genuine sense of the term. But it seems that this unique feature is also the bane for the movement itself. Firstly, the uprising is leaderless. The Brotherhood and the El Baradei coalition rode into the protests only in the third or fourth day. El Baradei is a mere consensus figurehead, not a real leader like, say, Corazon Aquino of the Philippines. Secondly, being composed of a very wide spectrum of ideologies and groups, the uprising is united only in ousting Mubarak but not on who or what should follow him.

    My take is that, thanks to this leadership vacuum and lack of coherence, the Egyptian uprising only resulted in changing the surface of the political landscape, but not the fundamental political context. The name of the game is still the struggle for succession among the four groups we have mentioned above. The only thing that changed is that the balance has been tilted from Hosni and Gamal Mubarak towards the other three players, most notably Suleiman and his military ilk. In a way, therefore, these players have hi-jacked the uprising from the people on the streets.”

    Thats how it was hi-jacked.

  7. February 8, 2011 at 2:00 pm

    “And please prove to me first that the Tahrir protests is just a protest by the noisy minority.”-J

    I’m happy to oblige, J.

    The proof: Now almost empty Tahrir Square. :)

  8. February 8, 2011 at 8:41 pm

    How’s that a proof?

    Did you take up Logic 101? LOL

  9. February 8, 2011 at 9:33 pm

    Now, J, since you wounded my pride, let’s talk logic this time.

    Isn’t it logical that if the protesters in Tahrir Square numbers to only a few thousands, it can be deduced that those are the minority of the Egyptian population? And further, if those few thousands protesters are also noisy, then, logically, they can be called ‘noisy minority’, am I wrong?

    Now, if you can convinced me that the other 80 millions Egyptian people who are not in Tahrir Square are the minority of the Egyptian population, then I guess I’ll be forced to admit that I flunked my Logic 101, ;).

    What say you, J?

  10. February 9, 2011 at 1:29 am

    Love is blind. God is love. Therefore, God is blind. Logical, right?

    Bert, just because the Tahrir protesters numbered just in thousands (which is even disputable and, also, the Tahrir is not the only site of the protests) doesn’t mean the rage of the people there don’t represent the views of the majority. Ofcourse, we cannot have SWS to come over and verify, but anecdotal evidences presented by people who actually live in Egypt (one expat there even related the story of a stranger spraying Oust Mubarak in a train station and the people spontaneously applauding him) point out that most likely, majority are not for Mubarak.

    For indeed, if majority are for Mubarak, how come they didn’t rise up a la Edsa Tres? Right, Bert?

    And what do you say about Israel’s nuclear deterrence not the sole guarantor of its security, Bert?

    Let me ask, what’s with Mubarak that the people of Egypt would love? Or perhaps you don’t like Mubarak to go because you think if he goes MB would take power? LOL.

  11. February 9, 2011 at 10:56 am

    “Love is blind. God is love. Therefore, God is blind. Logical, right?-J

    I don’t think so. Please review again your Logic 101, J.

    “Ofcourse, we cannot have SWS to come over and verify, but anecdotal evidences presented by people who actually live in Egypt (one expat there even related the story of a stranger spraying Oust Mubarak in a train station and the people spontaneously applauding him) point out that most likely, majority are not for Mubarak.”-J

    J, please take note of your words ‘anecdotal’ and ‘most likely’. That seems to indicate that you are just speculating, believing that hearsay and testimonials are facts before seeing the actual picture. Maybe you’re right, maybe you’re wrong, who knows. The fact is that the protesters in Tahrir Square presently is not the majority of the Egyptian people. Were you saying it’s the majority?

    “For indeed, if majority are for Mubarak, how come they didn’t rise up a la Edsa Tres? Right, Bert?”-J

    Logic again, J. How can you expect me to know why they didn’t rise up a la Edsa Tres at a time when my crystal ball is down. Fact again, J…they did not. Not yet, anyway, :).

    “And what do you say about Israel’s nuclear deterrence not the sole guarantor of its security, Bert?”-J

    I am saying that Israel’s nuclear capabilities secure it from any threat to annihilate it coming from the Muslim world, if any. I said ‘Israel’s vast nuclear firepower’ secures it from this threat, not the US as you said.

    “Let me ask, what’s with Mubarak that the people of Egypt would love? Or perhaps you don’t like Mubarak to go because you think if he goes MB would take power? LOL.”-J

    Now, J, you’re forcing me to speculate, well, let me try.

    Mubarak was there because of the US and western government’s intervention, he’s still there because of it, and he’ll be replaced by another same government because of the same US and western government’s intervention. The Egyptian people are now used to it, they are having a good life under that system, and they’re now used to that good life. Take away the influence and the interventions of the US and the west from the equation and you leave the Egyptian people to their own element. The Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood will take over, then a new system of government very different from the Egyptian people were used to, will prevail. Do you think the Egyptian ready for that? Then Jordan will follow the toppling of the domino, then Palestine…all neighbors of Israel.

    If that happened, Israel will be at a grave threat, and if threatened, Israel will be forced to defend itself for self-preservation, and knowing the great overwhelming odds against them, will surely use that vast nuclear arsenal. Is the rest of the world threatened as well? You bet.

    Will the US and the West allow that? The answer is no.

    And so, this events happening in Egypt today is not about Mubarak being a despot nor is it about what the Egyptian people want.

    There, J…my two-cents.

  12. February 9, 2011 at 11:54 am

    The contending ideas presently prevailing in Egypt are whether Mubarak go down now or on September, the election time.

    Mubarak wants to stay longer until election time. Obama, on the other hand, wants the transition to happen now, the reason why western media are focusing their coverage of the protest on Tahrir Square where the bulk of protesters is concentrated, brainwashing, pressuring the Egyptian people to go out now. Let’s see if the majority can be brainwashed. We will see in the coming days.

    Based from what are happening on the ground, it seem that Obama is standing on tenuous ground.

    If the majority will be swayed by the western media and there will be massive turn out at the protest sites, then the Army will have no other recourse but to go with the people’s wish. End of Mubarak’s rule.

    If not, then the majority wants Mubarak to stay until election time in September.

  13. February 9, 2011 at 4:57 pm

    LOL, you didn’t get it, did you? My God is blind line was a swipe to your “logic” of the Tahrir crowd being the minority. At any rate, have you read this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110209/wl_nm/us_egypt

    I said “most likely” and I used “anecdotal evidence” to point out that, most likely than not, the protests represent the majority view. That’s because, as you said, there’s no way to really measure the real views of the majority Egyptians.

    You simply don’t say that the Tahrir crowd don’t represent the majority simply because it doesn’t number to 80 million. Hello, you can’t expect the poor people who are anti-Mubarak to be at Tahrir everyday since they have to earn their 2 dollars a day everyday.

    Now, I agree about the US wanting post-Mubarak transition to begin now. But my take is different. For me, Mubarak is already not fully in charge. Suleiman and his ilk are now waiting to govern, but is negotiating a transition that would, on one hand, try to include the opposition in one way or another and, on the other hand, prevent an opening for the MB. Indeed, I have it on very good authority that Germany and Mubarak are negotiating for his exile there.

    Your presumptions on the MB taking over, however, is a stretch. Did the Philippines turn Communist after Marcos? No. In Egypt, the MB is most organized, but it’s clout is not enough to take over the reins of government unilaterally. Which is why it has shown pragmatism by forging tactical alliance with the ElBaradei coalition.

    “If that happened, Israel will be at a grave threat, and if threatened, Israel will be forced to defend itself for self-preservation, and knowing the great overwhelming odds against them, will surely use that vast nuclear arsenal. Is the rest of the world threatened as well? You bet.”

    Really? Israel will nuke Egypt if it turns Islamist? How come it had not nuked Iran, which had called for its destruction? There are many forces at play here, Bert. You don’t oversimplify things like that.

    Even if MB takes over Egypt, MB is no Hamas, Hezbollah of Ayatalah. It is Islamist, but not extremist; kind of like the Chrsitian evangelical conservatives in the US. It advocates not total Taliban- or Iran-like Islamic state but a Malaysia-style democracy with strong Islamic shariah influence. The Brotherhood has shown pragmatism and political maturity in the last three decades, and I don’t agree that it will invade Israel the moment it takes power, if indeed it would take power.

  14. February 12, 2011 at 2:32 am
    UP nn grad

    The clock ticked and Bert’s wish — Mubarak to stay — got denied.

    Now the world will have to wait what happens next, in the next months (will it be peaceful elections???) and in next decade (will “Tahrir square” be hijacked and Egypt oligarchs of 2010 return to power ala PeoplePower-Pilipinas style? or will be Iran-with-Ayatollah fundamentalists??? or will Egypt be a Turkey). Abangan ang susunod na kabanata.

  15. February 12, 2011 at 3:20 am
    UP nn grad

    One of the things that happened in Pilipinas after Marcos got ousted is this — the El Baradei’s of Pilipinas started to stream in, with some of them met by Pinoys-in-Pinas who said “… huwag na, maganda na ang buhay ninyo sa ibang bansa… sa amin na lang ito.”

    I wonder how many expat-Egyptians return to Egypt now that Mubarak is gone, and what awaits them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

twitter

follow @stuartsantiago on twitter

recent comments

  • © Angela Stuart-Santiago