This has been a weekend of political unrest in several countries, most notably in Egypt. It would seem that the society in Egypt is totally out of control, and I would think that the only way that things will be calmed down will be by the removal of President Mubarak. As a sort of Political/News/Geography junkie, I have been keeping a close eye on the happenings in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan and elsewhere over the past week or so. It is quite surprising to me how quickly all of this came to pass in the Middle East region, and I wonder where it will stop.
All of these happenings have really reminded me of the happenings in the Philippines in January 2001. During the last quarter of 2000, there were Impeachment hearings against President Estrada in Manila. By the end of 2000 and into the beginning of 2001, it became obvious that the Impeachment hearings had turned into nothing but a whitewash, and no real justice would prevail. The Filipino people, for the second time in less than two decades took to the streets with a “People Power” movement. Within just a few days of massive protests, President Estrada was removed from office, and a new President took the helm, President Arroyo.
In the previous paragraph, I said that January 2001 was the second time that the Philippine people had taken to the streets and brought an administration down. The first incident, which is very famous, was the People Power Revolution in 1986, which was lead by Corazon Aquino, and deposed President Ferdinand Marcos.
As I watch the events in Egypt on TV, the similarities to what I witnessed in 2001 are very clear to me. The tanks in the streets. The masses of people. Some of the military forces actually switching sides and joining the people in protest against the government. Yes, I’ve seen this before, and I expect that it will end in Egypt the same way it has ended twice in the Philippines, with the removal of the leader.
On Sunday, as I was watching the demonstrations in Egypt, I saw one person holding a sign that said:
America, stop siding with Mubarak. We don’t want to hate America.
Well, I suspect that there are some who want to hate America and there are some who do not. But, the US is in a very touchy position in Egypt. Mubarak has been a staunch US ally for 30 years, and Sadat before him. Yet, if the US continues to support Mubarak, it will lead to a lot of negative feelings among the Egyptian people. Here in the Philippines, 25 years after Marcos was ousted, I still have Filipino people ask me why the US supported Marcos. So, US support will lead to hard feelings after Mubarak is ousted, I have no doubt about that. It has been said on the news that tear gas canisters being used in Egypt to keep the crowds under control have writing on them that says: “Made in the USA”. That will be a hard image for the United States to overcome. How could a person who came under attack with those US made tear gas canisters feel postive toward the USA? It would seem to me that it would be very difficult to have positive toward the USA after seeing those canisters.
So, with a number of countries in the Middle East facing such demonstrations, how many governments do you think will be overthrown? Will they become democratic, or turn to another dictator? Will they be like the Philippines – go toward democracy, albeit a democracy riddled with corruption? It’s hard to say right now, but I fear that they will either be ruled by another set of dictators, or they will go the way of the Philippines and face generations of corruption. What do you think?
The Suez canal handles 8% of global sea trade, 35.000 ships per annum. If is closes trade will be forced to add 6000 miles to their journey, it is obvious why the US gives 1.3 billion in aid to receive priority in the canal. The USA and other traders will have no choice but to deal with Mubuarak or a new regime. The only country I have visited where the people seem to “Like” is the USA is the Philippines and maybe Mexico.
Ha ha… your last statement is probably true for the most part. But, a lot of people like Americans, just not the policies of the USA. Those are two different things, though.
Bob
The price of oil is spiking due to the violence in the Middle East. That is not good for people in the US. The value of the dollar is also rising. Jordan is friendly towards us so it will be interesting to see how that plays out. I would like to see the Iranian people start up the protests again and overthrow the government. I think Israel really has the biggest stake in this due to the peace treaty with Egypt and if the next government will be friendly towards them. I visited both Tunisia and Egypt while in the Marine Corps in 1980, but both countries have completely changed since than. Good Topic!
Hi Randy – I saw that Donald Trump commented that the crisis could actually make the price of oil tumble in the longer run, because the crisis could lead to the breaking apart of OPEC. I had not thought about that, but he is right, over the longer term that could happen!
My prediction is the price will spike but will come because they need to sell oil to finance some of their expensive infrastructure–they need our money, then we really need to Drill, Baby, Drill! We have a lot of reserves in oil, natural gas and coal.
correction: price will come down because…….
I saw a TV show the other day that oil was found in North Dakota, and they said it is the Saudi Arabia of North America!
Yes, the Bakken shale fields in North Dakota and eastern Montana. The government estimates there are 4.3 billion barrels of oil in the fields but Harold Hamm, the CEO of the Continental Resources oil company, says the formations in North Dakota and Montana hold about 20 billion barrels of recoverable crude.
Now, will anybody be allowed to extract it?
Hi Gary – Actually, in the show I saw, a documentary, they are pumping away already. The show is called “Boomtown” and is about a small town in North Dakota which has truly become a boom town due to the oil. And, yes… they did say the fields are called “Bakken”. They have a slogan there called “Rockin’ the Bakken”.
Blaming the rise in oil prices on the conflict on Egypt at the time isn’t totally true. The price of oil peaked at $91 before this crisis in Egypt. The cost jumped from around $75 a barrel to $86 a barrel when the Federal Reserve announced that it was buying $600 billion of US Treasury Bonds. I read an internet article with a quote from Ben Bernake that inflation was under control when he was justifying the purchase. The price fell to about $86 a barrel after the Christmas holidays. The latest 5% increase from $86 to $90 a barrel and blaming Egypt is a way for Saudi to justify the cost of $90 a barrel.
All true, Jack, but there is an additional spike due to the Egypt situation.. oil is up over $100 now.
Oops. I guess that I am wrong. I just learned about Brent Crude Oil. Brent Crude Oil has topped $100 a barrel.
Yep! 😉
Awwwright! So, when do you think we’re gonna start seeing the price of gas at the pump?
Just to be clear, I did not say that the price would fall, I said that Donald Trump said that. I don’t necessarily believe that to be the case.
Should have been, “drop of prices at the pump”
Yes, they are already pumping away. I knew that but I was wondering if the government and the enviromentalists would let them go all out.
From what I saw on the show, it seemed like they were pumping full speed ahead! It seemed like there was a real big well there too, I hope that they get to keep on pumping!
Well Bob…It will be intesting to see what takes place. But I would bet that there will not be any kind of democratic goverment in Egypt after the dust clears.I belive the Radical Muslims will probably take over sooner or later and the people there will in the long run have less freedom than they do now and their women will wonder what happened when they have to comply to Radical Muslim law. Israel will have something else to worry about, also if Egypt changes as it may well do, there are a few other Arab countries that are near there also for the same thing….could be a real mess over there…Time will tell.
Hi Dan – Your words have a ring of truth to them. I hope it goes the other way, but it’s way too unpredictable now to have any idea.
Statistically when one regime is forcefully replaced it is replaced with one that is worse. What concerns me is this could be along line of revolutions driven by adverse economic tides in numerous Countries around the globe.
I totally agree, brian. I don’t think this will be limited to the Middle East either, it could happen anywhere on the Globe, especially if there are economic problems.
However, some countries have lost a war and have become major powerhouses, Germany, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea. I guess it could be debated if Vietnam lost or won, but after a change some countries seem to blossom.
John..I would say that Vietnam won..The USA never had any real intention of wining any way and they didn’t.In fact as far as I am concerned the USA has not had any real intention of winning any of the wars they have been in since World War 2.,but sure a lot of wasted lifes.
I’m divided about as to who won. Some say it was a political defeat for the U.S. (we were losing the battle of public opinion both in the U.S. and internationally), but certainly not military defeat for we could have bombed the North “back into the Stone Age”, as the favorite saying went back in those days. In hindsight, historians are saying that the Vietcongs and the North Vietnamese Army won and they have a point. We pulled out of Vietnam in 1975 ignominuously defeated, like a dog with its tail between its legs. The embarassing image of Americans and South Vietnamese atop the American Embassy in Saigon, trying to reach the ladders of a military helicopter hovering above to escape, while North Vietnamese Army tanks were closing in is forever etched into the national consciousness.
History has shown time and time again that military might cannot defeat a people’s will and determination. You can decimate them physically with your bombs, but, guess what, the more you punish them, the more determined they become. That’s what the North Vietnamese had going for them, and it paid off.
Ricardo, the US military won all the battles during the Vietnam war, the politicians lost the war.
Did I not say above that it was a political defeat, but certainly not a military defeat, Mars?
Yes.
Not a military defeat? I’m astounded that anyone with the ability to write and therefore even a modicum of intelligence would say that. America is historically poor at land wars. Yes, they can bomb things from the air and from a distance, but when it comes down to being down on the ground running around fighting the enemy face to face, in an even battle, they have always been defeated. That’s what happened in Vietnam folks, and the guys who were fighting there know that, and with the wisdom and maturity of age that they now have, many of them will even admit it.
Vietnam was a war our troops fought with one hand tied behind thier backs due to politics. If you compare the vietcong tactics they were very similair to the japenese gorilla tactics in WWII and our ground troops prevailed in the majority of battles. Our ground troops are the model for most Countries.
I’m not sure but didn’t the US pullout when the Southern Army raised the white flag? It’s no use for the US continuing the battles when the South Vietnam surrendered.
But no doubt, the Vietnam war was one of the most unpopular overseas war of the US. It’s just like they prolonged the unification. I wonder how much that cost US taxpayers
Katrina, the US has already pulled out when North Vietnam invaded the South in 1975 and violated the Paris Treaty signed maybe a couple of years prior. The south had enough arms to defend themselves but just run out of will to fight. As a part of the US pull-out, agreement in Paris included promise by the North not invade the South and the US will back the South if the North does not hold the part of the bargain. The North invaded and US did not back the South. The picture of the Embassy transporting personnel from the roof are mostly for Embassy staffers, Marine Corps security and South Vietnamese who had close connection with the US.
Around ’72, we started giving them arms in the program called Vietnamization so they can fight their own war. I was part of a squadron to ferry destroyer type cutters to transfer to the SV Navy in Guam but at that time you can tell that they are not really enthused about fighting their own war as the guy assigned to me said ” tired of fighting war, been fighting war since 8-years old”, so I could see their weariness.
At the same time, their was a continued bombing of NV 24-hours day by US air forces. As a result, the NV returned to the negotiating table when they only and less than half a dozen anti-aircraft missile left resulting in the the Paris Peace Treaty.
In ’73 or so, US and NV signed to end the war and started completely withdrawing, but as I said above the NV invaded the SV in ’75.
Short history of the pull-out you mentioned above. But contrary to what Gordon B said above, all major battles in Vietnam was won by US forces even though they are handicapped by the rules made by politicians.
As General Maxwell Taylor, one of the principal architects of the Vietnam War has said, “First, we didn’t know ourselves. We thought that we were going into another Korean War, but this was a different country. Secondly, we didn’t know our South Vietnamese allies… And we knew less about North Vietnam. Who was Ho Chi Minh? Nobody really knew. So, until we know the enemy and know our allies and know ourselves, we’d better keep out of this kind of dirty business. It’s very dangerous.”
As usual the US supported corrupt right wing governments that did not have the support of the Vietnamese people.There are 2 books that are a must read about Vietnam – The Ten Thousand Day War and A Bright And Shining Lie.Both of these books give a tremendous insight into the war .
Well… not sure I would count Vietnam as a “major powerhouse”. They are moving in the right direction, but I don’t think they have reached powerhouse status on any front yet.
Not Powerhouse status yet, however when you consider the turmoil 35 years ago and now their status they are on the right track. I was merely saying change in a regime isn’t always a bad thing, it takes time but most of the countries seem to do well post change.
I really don’t understand why the RP hasn’t enjoyed the tremendous growth other countries seem to have once change happens. You can’t run a country like you would as high school class president.
As for Egypt, let’s hope they are able to find an accord that its citizens and global allies are happy.
Yes, it is moving in the right direction, I was just surprised that in the previous comment you said it was a Powerhouse! Thanks for clearing up your thoughts on that.
Why the Philippines hasn’t enjoyed tremendous growth? Too much corruption. No transparency.
HI BOB
ALL THE US AS GOT TO DO IS DROPJUST ONE BOOM ON THEM RAG HEADS AND IT WOULD BE ALL OVER MATE ONE DAY THAY MAY SEE IT WAS THE BEST WAY TO GO……….PETER MARTIN TASSIE
Hi peter – Well, hopefully it would end in a different way than that. 🙁
It’s because the line between “entertainment” and “politics” has been totally blurred. Politicians become entertainers, and entertainers become pseudo-politicians. LOL.
Do you recall what happened right after we left vietnam? I would hardly call that a civilized progressive regime.
In time they got their act together and are on the right track. With everything the US did for the RP in terms of aid why are things still in shambles. I wonder if there is actually a department for begging? I see so many bridges donated by XXXXX and there seems to be pride when thier Navy or Army or Police get another handout from the west.
Having lived and worked in the middle east for many years, this is the only type of government the Muslim countries can live in. I have no doubt that another authoritative person will take control in Egypt and rule for many years. Democracy just doesn’t work over there. I may be going out on a limb and suggest that it (Democracy) doesn’t seem to work here in the Philippines to well either in that there is just too much fredom and very little law so lawlessness can go unimpeded as does corruption.
Hi Dwayne – What is happening in the Philippines is not working… you may be right.
I think it boils down to implementation of laws…politicians in the Philippines always come up with new laws but hardly enforce it. Just look at the lack of “traffic rules”. How can politicians implement such bigger laws, mandates, reforms when they can’t work with the small ones.
And for the Filipino voters, they seem to take politics as if it’s some “American Idol” thing.
I’m betting you will be proven wrong
I am hoping you are right, Jon, but we can only wait and see.
to clarify…I’m referring to Dwayne’s statement that democracy will not take hold in Egypt. Just listen to the people….they will not stand for anything less. The people really are in charge this time. Iran has just cut all internet and cell phone contact with the outside world.
Iran will be next and this time the Obama administration will not be passive as in 2009. Cutting off internet and cell networks will soon become the “canary” that indicates a regime is about to go down. I am wondering what China is making of all this.
Hi Jon – Yes, I understand what you are saying, and I hope you are right. I hope that we don’t see Egypt go the way of Iran in 1979.
Hi Bob – Am hearing some similar mumblings in the background regarding PNoy. A national morning program on one of the networks voiced an opinion that PNoy may not last a full term but might be removed for incompetence. Talk about grabbing one’s attention!
Wow, Paul, I had not heard that one. I really hope that the Philippines can avoid such “adventurism” – it’s already played out here, and following the constitutional remedies is the way to go, IMHO.
True enough. LOL. I have not lived the Marcos era so I can’t comment on that but I have lived Estrada’s presidency. The problem with people “ousting” presidents in spur of the moment, is that they do not think of someone that would replace the “corrupt” one. They ousted Erap only to be replaced by someone not trustworthy. That given, it’s not a surprise why Arroyo wasn’t ousted: who are they gonna replace her with? There sure are people who wouldn’t want to repeat the same errors.
/off topic /Though I’m not a fan of Cory and Gloria and not a hardcore feminists, but I gotta give credit to these ladies for being able to withstand coup d’etats and rebellion from the military, while their two predecessors got their butts kicked.
I wonder how the Egyptian military would go here. I’ve read reports of some soldiers cheering for the protesters.
You are right that it always comes down to “who’s gonna replace” the leader.. and often that is not thought about in advance!
To me, as an outsider, Gloria seemed to be the first person who governed the Philippines who actually seemed to be properly qualified to do so, with a good education etc. Ex singers and actors MIGHT have the intelligence to surround themselves with people who actually do know how to run a country, but then again, they might just be a popular personality and be pushed around by various factions. People said this and people said that; but I say that Gloria had a near impossible job anyway, and all in all, I don’t think she did too badly. Her Successor, however, seems to be a little lacking on the intellectual front; a silly comment here, another there, etc., and no, he doesn’t seem to have surrounded himself with high achievers. And because your Granny and your Uncle or whoever drove a bus doesn’t mean that you can drive a bus, so on what basis was he elected I wonder.
My biggest complaint on her successor, he seem to have been voted by the people sure to popularity. He may not be an actor or singer but wasn’t the year before the election the year of his mother’s death and not to forget he comes from an economic giant and political family.
And I wonder how he will deal with the “land issue”. Yknow hacienderos and farmers. But I think he will evade that given the strong conflict of interest. And I’m a bit concerned of him appointing some leftist esp people from the left never condemned the NPAs terrorizing the barrio folks (I’m getting convinced that several leftists do have ties to the NPA)
I wonder what these politicians think when they go to places like Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam and look around and see the organized prosperity , then step off the plane back in MNL .
Brian, I have taken my wife to Hong Kong, Thailand, Macau and Singapore and each time when we returned to NAIA in Manila, she asks me why the Philippines can’t be like those places.
They are like every single one of us thinking God here I am again, take a deep breath and try to survive another week until our next journey out. I look at planes arriving everyday and say in the back of my mind poor folks, and the planes departing the lucky ones.
After so many years of poverty and unemployment, one has to wonder what took the Egyptian people so long to rise up against Mubarak, but it’s better late than never, I suppose. With the way the daily protests have been going on with no end in sight, the Egyptian people are not going to be denied. They’ve committed themselves to this revolution with only one thing in mind: they are not going to stop until Mubarak steps down, reform or no reform.
For Mubarak to think that by firing his cabinet, promising social reforms, and appointing a vice-president for the first time in 30 years, he is only deluding himself. For he, himself, was appointed by Sadat as the vice president and later succeeded him upon Sadat’s assassination, But the fact that he recently appointed a vice-president as a result of the crisis could very well be an indication of his state of mind – that he realizes that his days are numbered. The appointment of a vice-president has been one of the hallmarks of Egyptian presidency since Nasser because it ensures an orderly succession in the event of the President’s death or removal from office by other means.
Meanwhile, across the Occupied Territories from Egypt (Gaza and the West Bank), a very nervous Israel bites its fingernails. They have a reason to be nervous. Egypt, along with Jordan, have peace treaties with Israel. Egyptians are generally and historically pro-West, but should a fundamentalist mullah takes over Egypt like what the Ayatollah Khomeini did in Iran in late 1970s, it would put the Egypt-Israel peace treaty in great jeopardy. Further, the border between Egypt and the Gaza strip has been known as a lifeline of the Palestinian Hamas in its fight against Irael. It is a pipeline that supplies Hamas in Gaza with rockets and munitions (from Iran?) with which to shell southern Israel. The border is heavily monitored by the IDF (Israel Defence Force) since they also discovered a tunnel there, but with a religious fundamentalist faction governing Egypt, that could present a problem for Israel. And, the U.S. as well. But, definitely not Iran for sure.
Should the Egyptian people succeed in toppling Mubarak, don’t expect a domino effect on the rest of the Middle East authoritarian regimes. With their oil, I don’t think the Saudis or Syrians are exactly hurting economically.
Hi Ricardo – You are right, the Egyptian people are not interested in a shuffling of the deck chairs, they want a new captain for the ship.
But, the poverty and unemployment in Egypt is no worse than in the Philippines. Why has change not come to the Philippines?
Beats me, Bob. They seem to keep changing chairs, but they seem to be dancing with the same partners. LOL
That’s true for sure, Ricardo.
When your greatest export is the ‘educated masses’ its no wonder its politics as usual in the RP.
Brian, everytime I am at NAIA and I see these kids leaving I get a lump in my throat. What other country would a Father have to go to the airport to send his son off for work?
good point !
Yep, no doubt about that, brian!
Hi Bob
Its quite obvious Mubarak will have to step down soon. The interesting thing is who will take his place in the long run. Will it be someone from the Muslim Brotherhood or someone who supports democracy and freedom or religion (10% of the population is Christian). I think Israel is quite concerned because even though it was a cold peace between Egypt at least Egypt tried to mediate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and helped to some degree preventing of supplies to Hamas in Gaza. I think Yemen or Jordan could be the next country whose leader may fall. I think the persian gulf countries are safe because of their oil and natural gas wealth and social safety net.
I think a more apt country to compare to the middle east is China and not the Philippines. They need between 8-10% growth to keep employment high and people content with their lot in life or they would put a lot of pressure on the government and start mass protests. There are already many small protests in the country side over government policies.
The Philippines democracy has a lot of flaws, but the economy is growing and and with many people leaving for other countries for work, it really takes the pressure of the government. I don’t see anyone planning a coup against President Aquino, because people will tolerate incompetence but not wholesale corruption that Estrada showed.
Bob one thing I think you should have mentioned with both EDSA protests that Marcos and Estrada lost the support of the military and with it any chance of staying in power. Something very similar is happening in Egypt both which compares to the Tiananmen square protest and subsequent massacre of them by the Chinese government.
Hi Neil – Yes, I don’t think there is any doubt that Mubarak can’t remain in office. His time is limited, for sure. The thing with China is that they have the power and the money to blow off what everybody else thinks, and have shown that they don’t mind handling unrest with bullets.
The Philippine economy is barely growing. When growth is the same rate as inflation, there is no real growth.
I agree that growth is very unequal in the Philippines so that many maybe even most don’t feel the benefits of it. Arab countries have a faster growing population then the Philippines so that they have many more young people unemployed and with an education that does them little or no good. Many young Filipinos get an education that they can use overseas such as nursing or accounting. I also believe many more Filipinas are working and helping to support the family compared to Arab women working. Just like in the U.S. where 50 years ago many Woman stayed home to manage the house, they are now needed to work in order to help support their family.
I have mixed feelings about our labor export. From professionals to “manual workers”, it doesn’t seem right but on the other hand, I understand the financial need of these people. I just don’t like how the government are selling our people as if they’re commodities (I mean encouraging people to work outside — which tears apart Filipino families — to keep the economy afloat). Heck, didn’t Gloria have that “supermaid” thing?
What the Philippines is doing the opposite of what our neighbors has done and been doing and became more successful than the Philippines. We used to teach Thailand and Vietnam in our IRRI and they brought back what they have learned in their countries, now they produce more rice than us and ironically, we import from them.
I just did a search and the data would indicate that the population growth in Egypt and the Philippines is identical – 1.8% annually.
Well..I am thinking that Israel better get it back together…a few years ago that little deal with Lebanon should have taught them that they were a little weak from what they used to be.Now I am not saying they do not have it pretty much together, but that little deal with Lebanon over all I would think showed they had relaxed a little to much. I also think that Israel better understand that they do not have a real friend in the White House now..(I am sure they all ready know that ) Now that being said I think the USA better get it together because over all I do not think they really accomplished much in the Middle East..Iraq is really not very stable and Afghanistan is a mess and not really getting any better. Now Egypt is making some big changes soon. Changes that I belive will not be that benifical to the USA at all..so..its all going to be interesting for sure as the days and weeks unfold……
Yeah, Israel is in a very precarious position right now! I am sure they have both eyes peeled on Egypt!
Hi Bob,
Why does the US side with dictators?
Because the dictator that you know is better that the revolutionary that you don’t.
In the case of Egypt, It is concerning that the Muslim brotherhood may gain power, and set back decades of progress.
If you look at all the interventionisms that the U.S. has done around the world following WWII, the U.S. has always sided with whoever is in power regardless of whether that individual is a dictator or an elected leader because it is with those who are in power that the U.S. has diplomatic relations with. It is simply a canon of diplomacy and foreign relations that must be observed by every civilized nation. While the strategic interests of the U.S. are always at the forefront of diplomacy, however, history has shown that the U.S. will intervene officially or clandestinely when those interests are threatened by the actions of a dictator or an elected leader.
Hear, hear. Countries like to blame the USA for all their problems but like you say the US has it’s own interests to look after and why not? After all those same countries like the taste of the greenback. For all the criticism the policies of the USA gets I would rather have them onside any day.
As I was tucking into my grain fed T-bone steak and chips and king prawn salad for lunch I was watching the news from Egypt on cable TV unfold. When I heard the daily wage is about 1.7 euro I actually felt a tinge of guilt, the restaurant value of my meal here in OZ would have been about 35 euro. Then the penny dropped, the Egyptians are hungry and they simply don’t have the opportunities to progress. They want change for the better. Whatever the result good luck to Egyptians. Whatever will be will be.
That steak sounds good, Boss! Shame on you! 😉
Hahahah being in a first world country does have it’s benefits.
Of course!
Ricardo- are you saying that when the US intervened in Iraq that they sided with who was in power ie Sadam Hussein ??
We unfortunatly ‘made’ Saddam. To use an Arab saying: ” My enemys, enemy is my best friend” the 7 year Iraqi – Iran war we supplies Saddam with most of the weapons.
Ian, with due respect, your question is really a no-brainer. Had you taken the time to read my post in its entirety, you would have gained a comprehensive perspective of what was actually said, instead of dwelling exclusively on selected portions of the message, i.e.,
“While the strategic interests of the U.S. are always at the forefront of diplomacy, however, history has shown that the U.S. will intervene officially [post WWII by U.S. Armed Forces: Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Somalia, Persian Gulf wars], or clandestinely [by CIA/Special Forces: Ghana, Bay of Pigs, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, ad infinitum] when those interests are threatened by the actions of a dictator or an elected leader.”
Of course, the US and every other country always sides with whoever can serve it’s interests today. Tomorrow is another worry.
…and with consequences, Bob. I’m quoting General Powell again “If you break it, you own it”. We are paying for the decision of our leaders, supporting friend or foe.
No need to worry about borrowing your quote from General Powell… he borrowed it from somewhere else, that’s an old, old saying! 😉
You see that sign at almost every antique store. LOL
I’m not quoting Gen. Powell for the quote itself, but the decision to invade Iraq to get rid of Saddam have consequences if everything does not go smoothly as planned and he was right.
Ha ha.. very true! So, can we assume that General Powell collects antiques then? 😉
No, he got out of the antique business and got of dodge quick.
😉
Hi Bob,
Mubarak is a goner.
The Egyptian military is waiting for Washington’s instructions.
The ball now really rests in Obama’s hand. It’s Sunday night here in the U.S. and Washington is still silent. It looks like they are waiting for ElBaradei to gain support by the Egyptians.
Hopefully, before the opening bell at Wall Street tomorrow Mubarak is gone and ElBaradei is at the helm….otherwise it will be a financial market bloodbath tomorrow.
Bill Clinton, Hillary and Obama won’t be sleeping tonight.
If Mubarak can hold out for a few more days, he may withstand the heat. I doubt he can make it, though.
I think the real loser here would be the US and Israel. If Egypt change leadership, every “west minded” leaders here will be on suspicious mode. Here, we feel the monarchy is becoming jittery because there’s also a rising unemployment rate among the locals which might result to uprising if not controlled. Honestly, it’s so difficult to ascertain if what they’re doing is right or wrong, because they have to choose a leader and that leader might make or ruin them. Just take a hard look at the Philippines as Bob pointed out.
Hi jonathan – Are you in Egypt, or somewhere in the Middle East?
Bob, I’m in Saudi Arabia.
Ok, jonathan.. thanks for reminding me! Do you foresee any demonstrations there?
Sorry for the late reply Bob, but there’s no protests on the grand or small scale here. Although locals are increasingly becoming discontent with the way things here. Please see link below.
http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/495/saudi-arabias-silent-protests
Glad to hear that everything is calm there, jonathan, hope it stays that way!
Bob
I believe he lives in Saudi Arabia. I see Mubarek has cut off all cell phone service and the rest of the internet service. A million person march is scheduled to start shortly there.
Link to an update
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-02-01-egyptregion01_ST_N.htm
It’s an interesting news on how the rest of the middle east view the current Egyptian crisis.
Hi Randy – Last week he cut off cell phones and internet. It is reported that the cell network has been at least partially restored.
Hey Bob – You’re a political /news junkie. Coolness. I think I am too but not the politics here in the Phils. Anyway. I watched Fox the other day (I think), Bill O Reilly said to the effect something about we will have world war if Arab nations like Egypt and Tunisia fall into the hands or taken over by Muslim fanatics. Yikes! Mubarak has been the leader for decades! I guess the young Egyptians has had enough. Middle class, and educated ones seems to have started all this protest. As for the Phils is concerned, you know the country, it will support whoever US is supporting. It’s been like that.
If Egypt goes to a radical leader, let’s say if it follows in the footsteps that Iran took in 1979, it is a really scary thing, sugar. I hope we don’t see a scenario like that.
A country that aspired and accomplished in overthrowing a dictatorial regime, it isn’t likely they would allow the new government to be succeeded by another set of dictatorial leaders. If this new democracy in the making is lucky to choose good leaders to run the new government and if also lucky enough that there’ll be no adventurous military people to contend to (which unfortunately seemed not the case here in in the country during that time) then there’s a big chance they’re going to have a good government in place to start with. Having said that, I’m still positive the Philippines will overcome all obstacles to future success.
There’s truth in what many have said here that there are histories of U.S. in protecting its interests or maybe of the world too would intervene in a foreign country. Saddam were ousted by same government who supported him before. Philippines’ Marcos was an ally. There were reports post EDSA revolution that the family of the late strongman in their last days in Malacanang were made to believed they’d be airlifted by U.S. helicopter going to Paoay Ilocos Norte , but instead airlifted to Hawaii against their will. Those things are maybe right or maybe wrong depending on the people’s perspective. We might also take in consideration that after WWII and the cold war that follows things were different because there were threats of communism spreading, so it was maybe be a choice between democracy or communism. The former being the good choice because later saw disintegration of communist countries. Or maybe to some it could just be choosing the lesser evil. It depends on how people sees it. In Egypt, if it were to be based on what Bob’s saw in one person’s holding a sign, it seemed they still want U.S. and just no longer want their Pres. Mubarak.
Hi Louie, that’s always been the tenet of the US foreign policy, in advancing democracy all over the world, that if there is no clear good choice, we pick the LESSER OF ALL EVIL in the belief that in the two bad choices, at least one is not as bad as the other, therefore it should be chosen over the one that is a greater threat.
This principle has been employed by other power brokers centuries past, from the ottoman empire to Vietnam. We backed Diem even though we know that he regime is brutal, but then he is anti-communist and against the other dictator of the North. We also based some the choices in forwarding capitalism, Even China decided at least to pick the US than the Soviets as the lesser threat to them. That also holds true for Saddam Hussien, in the ’60s, when he showed anti-communism against the other guy.
In simple terms of this principle, if you give somebody a two plates of “unhealthy Filipino foods”, as been derided in the other thread (with due respect to Ziggy), you probably will not eat either, but when the choice is between a plate of a “unhealthy Filipino foods” and a dose of poison, the choice is clear, even though Dwayne may have other opinion….just kidding Dwayne, enjoy the sunshine there…we are getting ready for another ice storm here in the East Coast.
@ Dwayne, BTW, agree on post earlier about what next on governing Egypt. Other scholar said democracy and Islamic Sharia will never work together, so this bloggers who started this demonstration must get ready, like Gen. Collin Powell said: “Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.”
Hi louie – I don’t know that I’d agree that a second dictatorial government is unlikely. Look at Iran in 1979.
Hi Bob. Did you see the news item that is supposed to have come via Wikileak that US Government has been backing leading figures of the Egyptian uprising. Front page of Saturdays Daily Telegraph.
The trouble is these days ‘who or what do we beleive.
Maybe the new leader is already waiting in the wings.
Could be, marjorie. I did hear that there was some influence on this uprising due to the Wikileaks site. What a fascinating world we are living in. It’s never boring.
Hi Bob,
It’s high time the US put meaning to its talk about freedom and democracy. If not they will be left high and dry as the world moves on. The dictators in North Africa and the Middle East will be toppled one after the other and, I hope, one day soon Palestine too will be a country where all its inhabitants, Muslim or Jew or Christian, share equal rights.
I agree, Goran, the US should really stand for freedom and democracy first, always.
I am afraid that the USA lost its reputation as a defender of democracy and freedom some time ago. They supported regimes in South and Central America that were right wing dictatorships that murdered and tortured their own people,Do some research and find out what the United Fruit Canning company did in Dominica with the help of the CIA. They tried to depose the legally elected government of Nicaragua by financing the Contras. Mines were laid in Nicaraguan waters at the same time as President Reagan was complaining that the Iranians were mining the Gulf.Terrorists were financed and when the UK asked for the extradition of Irish terrorists who had entered the USA illegally we were told that they could not be extradited because the offences were political! We had 3000 people killed in Ireland -bombings that killed mainly innocent civilians,but when Americans began to be killed by bombs it was no longer a political offence. The USA has always had a policy of self interest but has a history of backing the wrong horse.
Bryan G.
The Nicaraguan government was run by a dictator named Daniel Ortega and is again run by Daniel Ortega who sides with Chavez.
I was in Iran throughout the 1979 revolution – it was much like what is happening in Egypt now except with more bloodshed.My house was hit with gunfire several times -never been so frightened in all my life! The big difference is that there was a new government standing by to take over which prevented total anarchy – it was bad enough but it could have been worse – there was no looting of shops that I know of. The revolution in Egypt seems to be a case of spontaneous uprising with no political leadership.It seems to be a case of the people have had enough.When Mubarak goes I suspect some general will announce that for the good of the country the military will take charge until elections will be held.The unfortunate thing is that within a short time another bunch of corrupt self servers will be in power and not much will change – as in Iran. This is all very familiar to the Filipino people.
You are right, Bryan, it seems that there is nobody ready to jump in and take control in Egypt… that makes it even scarier, nobody knows what will happen.
Randy,
The fact is that is Ortega – like Chavez was elected,the fact that he and Chavez oppose the USA is irrelevant – they were the choice of the Nicaraguan and Venezuelan people.I personally think Chavez will destroy the Venezuelan economy but again that is an irrelevance – it is up to the people of the country to vote him out of office. The Contras,financed by the illegal arms to Iran deal by Col.North ,committed atrocities against their own people and were armed and supplied by CIA aircraft – remember the crew member captured to the great embarrassment of the American government.Do not forget the CIA led coup against the elected leader of Chile -Salvador Allende,which led to years of oppression by the military junta which killed,tortured and disappeared thousands of its citizens .Allende was deposed for being the first democratically elected Marxist and also for wishing to remove the power of the American copper mining companies in Chile.As they used to say about South American leaders “He may be a bastard but he is our bastard.”
It really is worrying as you say Bob – if a functioning government is not installed soon the country could dissolve into absolute anarchy which could lead to even more strife in the region.There are a lot of weapons in Egypt – much of it supplied by the USA – which could get into the hands of the lunatics with results that can only be guessed at – we are living in interesting times!
Arrived in Manila last night -will be in Davao in a few days, hope we can get together.
Give me a shout when you are in Davao, Bryan. My cell number is (0915) 216-0300.
Will do – had long day today,immigration etc.
Yep, this was so clearly demonstrated in Iraq in the aftermath of the coalition forces’ military victory. A vacuum was created into which the opposing sects – the Sunnis and the Shiites – AND nationalist insurgents and foreign freedom fighters, moved in. The vacuum that was created resulted in total chaos and anarchy. To exacerbate the situation, the Bremer-led provisional government was so inept in re-establishing basic infrastructures and a semblance of effective administration of the provisional government, which led to Bremer’s dismissal. Welcome home, Bryan!
I know exactly what’ you’re saying, Mars, and I agree with you. To expand your quote, Gen. Colin Powell, in referring to the quaqmire that had been Vietnam, issued an edict while he was still the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that if the U.S. should go to war in the future, it should (1) identify the mission; (2) go in with overwhelming force to win the war; and, (3) have an exit strategy.
With respect to the second Persial Gulf war with Iraq, the first two requirements were met; however, it seemed that the third, involving exit strategy, was not met, or ignored by the Bush administration. The U.S. prosecuted the war “on the fly” (constantly improvising while on the run) in the succeeding months and years following Saddam’s defeat, resulting in many lives lost and at a cost of almost a billion dollars a day, if not mistaken.
There apparently was no advance planning on the part of the U.S. military about what to do upon completion of the stated mission, which was to depose Saddam and make Iraq a beacon of democracy in the Middle East. As a consequence, a vacuum was created in the aftermath of the military victory which provided an opportunity for the insurgents and opposing religious sects – the Sunnis and the Shiites -to carry on the fight relentlessly, confident in the knowledge that, like in Vietnam, the U.S. will eventually “cut and run” in the end.
Had the U.S. war-gamed a post-invasion scenario that would have addressed every possible scenario, from which a viable exit strategy could have been drafted by the JCS and implemented on the field, there was a strong likelihood that an Iraq quagmire could have been prevented, in my opinion.
Incidentally, the Afghanistan war may be another Vietnam in the making. Just ask the Soviets. Today’s modern army – U.S. or otherwise – is built, trained, equipped and indoctrinated in the art of linear warfare, where infantry is pitted against infantry, and tanks against tanks in tactical combat. With determined guerillas as your enemies, the modern army simply does not have a chance against an enemy that hits and runs, sleeps during the day and fights at night. And this may explain Gordon B’s assertion that U.S. forces do poorly in land wars.
Ricardo
I don’t believe that will be the reason in Afghanistan. Its the Afghani government that handcuffs our military from doing the job!
Bob;
As history has shown when the US has weak leaders and is in a state of upheavel its self.
Other evil or power hungry people or organizations take full advantage of the situation.
So much for seeing the Cairo Musuem and have unrestricted passage in the suez canal for or Navy and commerce.
If you look over events like this, it would seem so, Bruce. I hope this plays out better than I expect it will.
Trying to turn Afghanistan into any kind of rational self governed state is doomed to failure – it is impossible to make a 500 year jump in a few years.It is basically a medieval,tribal society governed by local tribal leaders and warlords. To my knowledge it never had a functioning national government.The invasion was to remove terrorist training camps and kill or capture Bin Laden. The first has basically been accomplished so best thing is to get out and leave the Afghanis to live in the middle ages,warn them what will happen if camps are set up again and bomb them flat if required – these people are not worth a single human life,they are little more than barbarians.The PC brigade will not like this but it is the truth.Women are regarded as chattels,it is acceptable to sodomise young boys – we have all seen the stoning and beheading videos.Our leaders in the west have no idea how to change things and are just having young soldiers killed and maimed for nothing.The brother of President Karzai was stopped entering Dubai recently with 55 million dollars in cash in suitcases – this is money donated by the western countries to keep the country afloat not to buy villas in Dubai for when they are exiled.It is in some of the British press today that 900 million dollars is missing from the Kabul Bank and we are sacrificing our young men for this?
Up to now Washington remains silent- a tacit support for Mubarak.
The Egyptians are waiting for Obama to openly support the protesters.
America has become old and so entangled with self-preservation that expediency is more important.
The young Spirit of 1776 had left.
It seems that Washington has been working in a more “behind the scenes” role. Very slowly though.
It’s one of those “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situations. Obama has to be threading a very thin line here, not exactly an enviable position. Many people do not realize how much Mubarak, a moderate and a long-time ally, means to the U.S. In 30 years of Egyptian rule, he proved that he could prevent the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Egypt. Would Obama openly support Mubarak? Perhaps Obama could afford to dilly-dally a little now that pro-Mubarak demonstrators have gone to the streets and see in which direction the wind blows before openly committing himself.
Hi Bob and Ricardo,
Yesterday’s New York Times headline Op-Ed by Senator John Kerry telegraphed the official Washington lines: Mubarak can stay for now. This was reiterated by him on the PBS News Hour. Obama said some general statements…but basically didn’t stipulate for Mubarak to step down.
Hence today Mubarak unleashed his Gestapo.
It’s been widely known that the Muslim brotherhood didn’t start these protests. The Egyptian youths did. Now though the former had highjacked these demonstrations and not only piggyback on them but has grabbed the leadership of this present Egyptian phenomenon.
The Obama administration has made a major policy move here. The U.K. , France and Germany are very silent. Even the U.N. is eerily quiet.
All of a sudden it has become a more dangerous world.
Mubarak’s Gestapo. LOL I love that…
This youth-initiated movement hasn’t been hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood yet… and I don’t see them being in a position to do so. This movement is doubly revolutionary — by not being anything at all like Iran back in the late 80s.
You mean Iran in the late 70’s. They didn’t have any uprising that I am aware of in the late 80’s.
Yup…my bad.
No problem, Jon… just wanted to make sure I didn’t miss out on anything! 😯
Being in Egypt this is my first time to get to read LIP in a week. The internet has been off till just a few minutes ago, gosh I have a lot of reading to do to catch up.
Hi Tony – Glad to know you are back online!
If Egypt is LUCKY it will end up like a famous country where 1% of the population owns a third of the nation’s wealth, and where half the population owns only 2.5% of the nation’s wealth, and where investment banks get tax-payer funded bailouts to stay alive and give bonuses to CEOs.
Well, I for one certainly hope they end up with better than what the Philippines has.
Bob,
The “famous” country was of course the USA, so I guess that is better than what the Philippines has. I would like to see the Philippines initiate reforms that help it’s people prosper and add to the wealth and success of the masses and of the nation as a whole. The country has great natural resources, many English speaking and well educated young people, and a great location. The only challenge for us expats would be a rising standard of living and higher cost of living. But the fact remains — show me a country with 2-10% of the country being rich, and 70-90% poor or in absolute poverty, and I’ll show you a country ripe for a revolution.
Jon
Ha ha… what you described sounded like the Philippines to me!
Was Obama too slow or Mubarak was just too stubborn?
Either way, congratulations to all freedom- loving Egyptians.
And Good Luck…the journey to full democracy is very rough as most Filipinos can attest to.
Dictatorship destroys all institutions of democracy…i.e. the legislature, the courts…the bureacracy….Three decades lost and there is no iota of incorrupt institutional memory left on these entities.
Hopefully, the UK will lend a hand to Egypt to rehabilitate democratic governance.
Allahu Akbar.
Hi Dr. Long – I personally think it was a combination. The US mishandled the situation, and Mubarak was very stubborn. Hopefully now that Mubarak has stepped down things can move forward without extremists taking power!
That is the easy bit over – now for the hard part.Creating a democratically elected government in a country that has never had one is no easy task, more so in an Arabic society where acceptance of majority decisions is not really part of the culture.Let us hope that we do not have another Iran where the aspirations of the people were dashed by the religious extremists.
Hi Bryan – Yeah, forming a democratic system will be the hard part, especially since there really have never been anything like that in the region. Iraq has started down the road, but is still very young.
The people got what they wanted the President is gone, but I pray they will get the democratic government they want. I do not think the removal of their president necessarily guarantees a better government.
I would think that the U.S. (present and past) administrations would have had more control over a man that they have been sending 1.3 billion dollars a year. I saw on television the other day that he has managed to put billions of dollars in family accounts outside of Egypt.
Once again the U.S. has backed the wrong government (person) for too long – Iran, Cuba, Vietnam, Philippines, Pakistan, Haiti, El Salvator, Nicaragua and Venezuela are other countries where we made the same mistakes. I do not quite understand why we Americans who are so in love with democracy will support a government for years that we know are denying their people their human rights – do you suppose it may be GREED?
Only time will tell if the people really got what they wanted… I hope they did.
America backing Mubarak? It was Obama and his muslim brotherhood cronies who ousted our long time ally Mubarak. Most here think Obama funded and backed the muslim brotherhood because the Egyptian land was critical for the muslim brother hood to attack Israel and destroy the Jews. Remember many members of Obama’s cabinet are members of the muslim brotherhood. Whether you are pro Obama or anti Obama one thing is clear: since Obama took office and started reading speeches from his teleprompter………..the middle east has been on fire. I think it is appropriately called an Islamic caliphate.
Tom, we support anybody that would advance our foreign policy, so we support the lesser of two evils hoping we can change them, making the enemy of our worst enemy our friend in most cases by using the almighty dollar.
“Once again the U.S. has backed the wrong government (person) for too long – Iran, Cuba, Vietnam, Philippines, Pakistan, Haiti, El Salvator, Nicaragua and Venezuela are other countries where we made the same mistakes.”
I believe that at the start of many of the foreign interventionisms that the U.S. has undertaken post WWII, governments that the U.S. has chosen to support were the right choices at that particular time in history when their cooperation were crucial to serving U.S. foreign policy interests in that particular region. It does not support a regime it knows to be “wrong”. However, the world does not remain constant, and there is just no way on earth anyone can predict what the future holds. What may be the right choice back in the 50s would not necessarily be the same 20 or so years later. The second guessing is reinforced by the fact that once the U.S. commits itself into supporting a regime, it remains loyal to that commitment until almost to the end even when the signs of unrest begin to develop against the government it supports, and finds itself painfully unable to extricate itself from the commitment with its credibility intact.