Hardball In Egypt And Yemen Goes A Bit More Down The Tube

As expected, the anti-government demonstrators took to the streets in large numbers following Friday prayers.  In an important change the Muslim Brotherhood got off the sideline fence and came down on the side of the demonstrators.  This may mean the leadership cadre has concluded the anti-regime movement has a chance of winning.  Or it may indicate simply an unwillingness for the Brotherhood not to get its fair share of abuse during the protests and concomitant crackdown.

Also without surprise was the decision of the Mubarak regime to order the army into the fray with instructions to support the police.  This may mean a tipping point will shortly arrive.  While the army has been sent on riot control duty twice before during the Mubarak years--once to quell the bread riots and once to suppress a strike by police--it has not fired upon Egyptian civilians during the thirty years of Murbarak's rule nor during the terms of this two predecessors.

The big unknown is simply what will be the response of the senior army commanders--or the snuffies in the streets when--or if--the order to open fire is given.  The entrance of the Muslim Brotherhood into the contest complicates answering this question as the Brotherhood has significant support within both the enlisted men and junior officers of the Egyptian armed forces.  This reality implies that there may be a split between the senior leadership and those down the food chain should the Mubarak dictatorship order the use of live fire on demonstrators for any purpose other than immediate self-defense.

If the high command refuses the order or--as is more likely--the men with guns down on the streets say, "Hell, no!" the days of the Mubarak regime are numbered.  And the number will not be a large one.  The governing ground truth in this is that while the internal security police have a vested interest in the continuation in the status quo, the army below the most exalted levels has no such motivation.

In addition to dispatching the army "in aid of the civil power," the regime has taken other measures.  It is widely known that Egypt has ceased to exist in the world of internet.  It is equally well known that Egypt has blocked mobile phone service.  These moves will cripple the capacity of the anti-government demonstrators to enlist the understanding and support of foreigners.  To a lesser extent it impairs the ability of the demonstrators to organize their efforts.

Beyond the blocking of internet and mobile phone services, the government has mounted a wave of preventative arrests.  Among those either detained or put under house arrests are leading figures of the Muslim Brotherhood and Mohamad ElBaradei.  The former head of the IAEA and current presidential candidate was placed under house arrest only hours after he returned from Vienna with the announced intent of joining with the demonstrations and sharing the fate of the demonstrators.

The arrests and blocking orders are not fatal to the anti-government movement.  In fact the arrests may rebound against the interests of the Mubarak regime by granting status to both the Brotherhood and Mr AlBaradei.

While these events were taking place, the Obama administration continued its imitation of their Carter days predecessors during the fateful days of 1979.  The Secretary of State like the President have made all the usual boilerplate appeals for peace, non-violence, the universal rights of Egyptian citizens, the desirability of reform, of transparency, of democracy, of yadda-yadda.  This can be seen either as a statesmenlike detachment of the US from the internal affairs of a sensitive Arab state or the clueless act of an administration adrift at the policy level.

The demonstrators know the US is involved in the demonstrations as tear gas projectiles clearly marked "Made in the USA" are littering the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, and other cities.  This is the dismal consequence of the years of American military aid.  Unless the US administration undertakes some form of compensatory action, the narrative of a Mubarak-USA linkage will be developed from the fragments of tear gas canisters.  In the estimate of most people, physical evidence trumps distant, diplomatic verbiage.

President Obama has convened his ":foreign policy team" for discussions of the events on the streets of Egypt.  Well, ain't that something?  A question for the "team:"  Is Joe Biden representing your official view when he dissented from characterizing Mubarak as a "dictator?"

As soon as the "team" has decided if Biden was right, it must consider a very alarming situation: Right now the only factor separating the Muslim Brotherhood from power in Egypt is the stance of the Egyptian army.  Specifically, what is the army likely to do if given the order to shoot on demonstrators--Shoot, don't shoot or shoot on the police?  That is the single most important subject for the "team" and president to consider. It is also the issue they must get right or pay the consequences should we get it wrong.

The administration must take a stance on the matter of the army pulling the trigger.  There is every probability that the Egyptian government either has or will shortly test American support for a use of force order.  Even if Mubarak does not order use of force, it is inevitable that should the army open fire, a narrative emphasizing US support for the status quo and therefore responsibility for any army inflicted bloodshed will explode across the Arab world.

Should the opposite happen--should for example, the army in the field oppose the police and take sides with the demonstrators, the administration best consider what, if anything, can be done to prevent the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power, either de facto or de jure.  The emergence of the Brotherhood to power would exceed the impact of the Iranian Islamic Revolution as the Brotherhood has branches or subsidiaries around the world in Muslim and non-Muslim states as well as an outward looking stance infinitely broader than that possessed by the Iranian clerical establishment.

While the Deep Strategic Thinkers of the administration are meeting they might spend a few nanoseconds reviewing the situation in Yemen.  The "Jasmine Revolution" has inspired an offshoot movement in Yemen which has sponsored demonstrations in the capital of Yemen, Saana, the other day.  It is unclear at the moment if the demonstrators want to end the current regime or gain some reforms.  In either event, the demonstrations add one more facet to the deeply fractured and desperately poor country.  The divisions are so profound, the rivals for power so extreme, that any change in the status quo would be in the direction of making Yemen a failed state.

The strong possibility of Yemen going all the way to failed state status is not remote.  And, even though Yemen does not have the international sex appeal of Egypt, it remains a key venue in the Saudi Peninsula.  A failed Yemen would be a perfect launching point for both regional and global terror attacks by al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula and others of their ilk.  This is what makes Yemen important to the US--and even more so for states such as Saudi Arabia.

Before leaving for the day, it is only fair that a moment of silence be observed.  The moment of silence is on behalf of President Obama.  It has been terribly wrong for all these pro-reform, anti-status quo demonstrators dotting the Arab world to have raised their ugly heads and cause just now.  Mr Obama would much rather be focusing on his "Sputnik moment" and convincing Americans that they can have growth if and only if We the People "go green" en masse.  The poor clueless guy never expected this and wonders just what the hell he ever did to deserve this.