Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Thu 05/29/2025 View Wed 05/28/2025 View Tue 05/27/2025 View Mon 05/26/2025 View Sun 05/25/2025 View Sat 05/24/2025 View Fri 05/23/2025
2011-02-01 Africa North
U.S. open to a role for Islamists in new Egypt government
Washington — The Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.
What could possibly go wrong?
The organization must reject violence and recognize democratic goals if the U.S. is to be comfortable with it taking part in the government, the White House said.
And after all, the Muslim Brotherhood is famous for their tolerance and democratic ways...
But by even setting conditions for the involvement of such nonsecular groups, the administration took a surprise step in the midst of the crisis that has enveloped Egypt for the last week.
It's not a surprise if you know Bambi...
The statement was an acknowledgment that any popularly accepted new government will probably include groups that are not considered friendly to U.S. interests,
The Egyptian people appear to 'support' the Brotherhood because they were the only opposition group that was even semi-tolerated. No other group has any traction, and few had any right to exist at all. Give the Egyptian people some time and space to organize after Hosni is gone before one concludes that one must accept the Brotherhood in the government.
and was a signal that the White House is prepared for that probability after 30 years of reliable relations with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
It's one thing to prepare, another to acquiesce...
Monday's statement was a "pretty clear sign that the U.S. isn't going to advocate a narrow form of pluralism, but a broad one," said Robert Malley, a Mideast peace negotiator in the Clinton administration. U.S. officials have previously pressed for broader participation in Egypt's government.

The George W. Bush administration pushed Mubarak for democratic reforms, but a statement in 2005 by then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did not specifically address a role for Islamists.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that a reformed government "has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors that give Egypt a strong chance to continue to be [a] stable and reliable partner."

Gibbs said the U.S. government has had no contact with the Muslim Brotherhood because of questions over its commitment to the rule of law, democracy and nonviolence. But the group is not listed on U.S. terrorism lists, as the militant Hamas and Hezbollah organizations are.

Gibbs' remarks came after a White House meeting at which administration officials briefed outside Middle East experts, leaving some of the participants with the impression that the administration was not counting on the 82-year-old Mubarak remaining in power.

U.S. conservatives such as former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have warned about its rise, and many draw comparisons to the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran. But others say fears of the Brotherhood, which has been suppressed for decades by the Egyptian government, are overstated.
A big chunk of the article then devotes itself to reciting the virtues of the Muslim Brotherhood. They run orphanages. They provide social services. They are of the middle class. They look after the poor. Oh, they're also just a touch out of sync with modern Western society in their treatment of Christians and wimmin, but don't let that bother you as you consider their goodness.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, who has become the leading symbol of the effort to oust Mubarak, has said the group poses no threat. The Muslim Brotherhood on Sunday announced its support for ElBaradei as a transitional president if Mubarak was toppled.
Quid pro quo.
Posted by Steve White 2011-02-01 09:25|| || Front Page|| [11135 views ]  Top

#1 Insanity. Pure insanity. Nothing good can come of this.
Posted by Whiskey Mike 2011-02-01 10:54||   2011-02-01 10:54|| Front Page Top

#2 let's see now... in the 2 years since 0bama has been in office we've lost Turkey, Lebanon, Tunisia and soon Egypt - all to Islamic radicals.

Now the world is a much scarier place.

I think we will be at war before 0bama's one term is up.

All modern wars are fought for two reasons:
1) access (or lack thereof) to shipping lanes
2) access (of lack thereof) to natural resources

Losing Egypt to radical powers qualifies on both counts.
Over 1 million barrels of oil pass through the Suez Canal daily.
Look for gasoline prices to " necessarily skyrocket"
Posted by Mikey Hunt 2011-02-01 11:34||   2011-02-01 11:34|| Front Page Top

#3 A mistake to invite the camel into the tent. You soon end up with many camels in the tent.
Posted by JohnQC 2011-02-01 11:39||   2011-02-01 11:39|| Front Page Top

#4 The Muslim Brotherhood is the group that got Ayman al Zawahiri started on the path of jihad. Why doesn't Obama just invite him to take over?
Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2011-02-01 13:00||   2011-02-01 13:00|| Front Page Top

#5 Here you can see why the term 'War on Terror' is not only a factually incorrect weasel word but also truly dangerous.

If the method 'terrorism' is the true enemy then the war can be won by giving in to islamofascistic demands. Once they're satisfied they won't engage in warfare anymore, 'terrorism' will have ceased, 'terrorism' will be defeated.

In the real world however this amounts to a surrender to the political enemy 'islamofascism,' a political movement whose goal is anything but non-violence.

Churchill's plan to win the 'War on Military Aviation' in 1940:

Britain gives in to all of Hitler's demands, without conditions. Hitler reins in the militants participating in 'Military Aviation' aka the Luftwaffe. 'Military Aviation' is defeated. Victory!

Unfortunately nearly the entire political class(*) seems to see this conflict through this prism. Hence the appeasement of islamofascists in Egypt and elsewhere.

(*) To my knowledge there's only one western politician who has repeatedly spoken out against the term WoT:
Rep Allen West.
/rant
Posted by Glavirong Wittlesbach2141 2011-02-01 13:22||   2011-02-01 13:22|| Front Page Top

#6 BHO sees no role for the Tea Party in the US government, but has no problem with the Muslim Brotherhood in the Egyptian government.
Posted by Matt 2011-02-01 14:29||   2011-02-01 14:29|| Front Page Top

#7 Whoa whoa whoa.

Mr. Gibbs, you say that no members of the US Government have been in contact whatsoever with the Muslim Brotherhood? No envoys to the OIC, no meeting in 2009, no meeting a couple months ago, none at all?
Posted by swksvolFF 2011-02-01 15:21||   2011-02-01 15:21|| Front Page Top

#8 swksvolFF, there is a rumour reported by World Net Daily that there was a meeting yesterday at the American embassy in Cairo with representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood to discuss the fall of the Egyptian government.
Posted by trailing wife 2011-02-01 16:40||   2011-02-01 16:40|| Front Page Top

#9 But Gibbsy just said no such thing! (thanks for the link). That line pegged my bs meter and I'm starting to smell something. Between the number of meetings with the MB, them being rather quiet on the whole thing, and El Baradei so willing and available so quickly. Perhaps this had been planned since/during the first infamous trip to Cairo but timetable accelerated to match the riots? Perhaps the best thing for Egyptians would be for Mubarak to stick around a couple months until proper and outside monitored elections - anyone trustworthy and neutral enough for that one? And no, not the UN and I don't think the US on this one.
Posted by swksvolFF 2011-02-01 18:11||   2011-02-01 18:11|| Front Page Top

#10 And especially not Jimmeh Carter.
Posted by Rambler in Virginia 2011-02-01 19:49||   2011-02-01 19:49|| Front Page Top

#11 Not so sure it helps Bar-a-day to be linked to the US.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2011-02-01 20:10||   2011-02-01 20:10|| Front Page Top

#12 But being in the pocket of the Iranians is just peachy.
Posted by Heriberto Shusonter9790 2011-02-01 21:12||   2011-02-01 21:12|| Front Page Top

#13 PEOPLES DAILY FORUM > WHY EGYPT UNREST THREATENS AL-QAEDA?

ARTIC = Despite supporting or having many Pro-Islamist sentiments, the new generation of real or potential Muslim Brotherhood Leaders are highly educated, tech-saavy, + AGZ VIOLENT JIHAD TO SETTLE LINGERING DISPUTES.ITS QUITE
POSSIBLE THAT ONCE IN POLITICAL POWER, THE SAME AS EGYPT-CENTRIC ISLAMISTS WILL DO THEIR UTMOST TO PRESERVE THE 1970's SADAT-BEGIN PEACE TREATY, ESPEC IN UTILZ EGYPT'S HISTORICAL ROLE/PSOITION AS A MAJOR ARAB-MUSLIM POWER TO DETER OR PREVENT THE REVOLUTIONARY INFLUENCE OF ISLAMIST IRAN???

and

* NEWS KERALA > EXPERTS: ISRAEL SHOULD NOT PANIC [fear] A HEZBOLLAH-RUN LEBANON, AT THIS TIME as the latter is curr preoccupied wid consolidating its power + other Internal Affairs.

IIUC, IOW DESPITE ITS "HARDLINE" PUBLIC RHETORIC HEZBOLLAH'S POSITION IN LEBANON IS NOT SECURE ENOUGH AT PRESENT TO CAUSE IT TO SEEK NEW MIL CONFRONTATION + WAR WID ISRAEL.

versus

* DER SPEIGEL > A"NEW [more]DANGEROUS PHASE OF INSTABILITY"[ME Region], as per US-West + Israel + Middle East Arab-Muslim democracy.

* NEWS KERALA > ISRAEL FEARS ISLAMIST/RADICALIST TAKEOVER IN EGYPT WIDOUT FAIR POLLS [national elections].
Posted by JosephMendiola 2011-02-01 21:37||   2011-02-01 21:37|| Front Page Top

18:44 magpie
18:44 magpie
18:33 Frank G
18:33 badanov
18:26 Hellfish
18:23 Hellfish
17:40 swksvolFF
17:34 Ebbuger Whuque4103
17:30 Ebbuger Whuque4103
17:02 Melancholic
16:27 Gravilet Snanter4154
16:20 Chaise Speaking for Boskone7897
16:02 Skidmark
16:01 Skidmark
15:46 Skidmark
15:41 Skidmark
15:37 swksvolFF
15:36 Skidmark
15:34 Skidmark
15:27 Skidmark
14:48 NoMoreBS
14:31 NoMoreBS
14:16 NoMoreBS
14:15 NoMoreBS









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com