Egyptian coup another example of Muddled East politics

The army and its secular government (perhaps figureheads for generals who are really in charge) will maintain the peace treaty with Israel and the US aid that comes along with it; Israeli commentators–some of them retired generals–have been saying that while Morsi was more cooperative in practice than in his rhetoric, it will be even easier talking with the new-old regime led by senior military personnel.

Against this optimism is a view that it will be impossible for the army to quell an uprising led by the Moslem Brotherhood, which may have 30 million supporters out of the country’s total of more than 80 million.

Poverty rather than religion or ideology may have been the moving force behind the anti-Morsi demonstrations. However, the army and its civilian allies will not be able to supply what is lacking in the economy, especially with tourism unlikely to rebound any time soon, and poverty may spur a continued series of demonstrations with the Islamic element assuring violent confrontations between demonstrators and soldiers.

The soldiers come from the people, and will not be a reliable force over time when used against them. Unlike Syria, there are not ethnic and religious divides between army units and the mass of the population.

The Bedouin of the Sinai are inclined toward the Muslim Brotherhood, and will provoke wider problems for the military-based regime by attacks against Israel. Israel cannot respond against Sinai targets without threatening the peace treaty with Egypt. Relations with that country have not been ideal, but the lack of an Egyptian military threat has been at the heart of Israeli strategic thinking for more than three decades.

Poverty in Egypt may produce a mass march toward the Israeli border by people hungry for food and work, perhaps also motivated by Islamic desires to destroy the Jewish state.

Against this scenario are commentators who scoff at the prospect of an unorganized mass without logistical support walking across 100 miles of desert. If such a trek would begin, there would be ample warning for Israeli forces to organize non-lethal crowd control with even more forceful responses in reserve.

Take your pick from the above, and keep your eye on the news. The most recent reports are of mass demonstrations by Morsi supporters against the military and demanding a return of the Morsi government, along with mass demonstrations against Morsi supporters, with numerous deaths. It is not the same story as in Syria, where there are ethnic as well as religious motivations, heavy weapons used against civilian concentrations, and numerous outsiders involved in an all out civil war where some anti-regime forces are fighting among themselves. Yet it is not a time to be certain about what has happened or what is happening, much less what will happen in Egypt.

It is difficult to name the good guys, or even who is on top, in what has developed to date from Arab spring.

One might see recent events in Egypt as the onset of a counter revolution against the ascendance of Muslim extremism, but there remains some doubt as to how extreme was the Morsi government.

The army has moved against the Muslim Brotherhood, but is still a long way from pacifying the country and addressing  popular demands.

Could such a counter revolution spread to Turkey, where the military has a history of being the guardians of a secular state, but where secular officers have been neutralized by the current Islamic government? Morsi seems to have tried the same in Egypt, with the results we are not seeing.

Russia has been the champion of the status quo in Syria, where the Assads have a history of opposing Islamic extremists, but the current Assad is getting considerable aid from the Islamic extremists of Iran and Hezbollah.

The US government appears to be at sea, torn between praiseworthy sentiments in support of democracy, an insistence that Islam is not a problem, action against figures who themselves opposed Islamic extremism (Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi, Hosni Mubarak), and its own crusade against Islamic extremism.

A leaked document purporting to explain John Kerry’s persistence in pushing the Palestinians and Israelis toward discussions concedes the lack of American leadership in the mostly chaotic Middle East. Kerry’s purpose is to assert American leadership in the one place where it may produce something.

The report indicates American pressure on Israel to release prisoners, and to freeze settlements outside of the major blocs and perhaps elsewhere. It promises considerable financial aid to Palestine, but may not demand anything of the Palestinians other than to participate in talks.

If Kerry succeeds, it may be good for his place in history, as well as adding a feather to the cap of Barack Obama. But will it also be good for Israel?

The Israeli Prime Minister appears to be responding with “yes, but.” He is going along with the American initiative, but insisting on conditions that the Palestinian leadership will have difficulty accepting.

If there is anyone out there still kvelling over Barack Obama’s Cairo speech, insisting that he has no responsibility for the nastiness that came after it, and believing that Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Libya and the Gulf States are on the road to democracy, I can recommend looking at this example of how others see the Nobel laureate.
http://www.youtube.com/v/erYpXzE9Pxs%26

The clip is more funny than profound, but raises as clear as anything the question about the emperor’s clothes.

The American State Department and the General Secretary of the United Nations are calling on all Egyptians for moderation, an end to violence, mutual respect for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.

With all of those sentiments and somewhere between $2 and $5, depending on location, you can buy a cup of coffee at a Starbucks.

The civilian leadership, even if it is a fig leaf for the generals, may be enough for the Obama administration and Congress to continue financial aid. If the US actually stops the financial aid on the basis of Egypt faulting the rules of democracy, the resulting unrest will gain the US even more condemnation for its management of foreign affairs.

Democracy aspirants may be sad, frustrated, and angry at the failure of Egyptian democracy, as defined by a party winning an election and later deposed. Such people should dry their eyes and sign up for Political Science 101, or take it again with another teacher.

Democracy is more than election victories. There are lots of those throughout the world, many of them certified by Jimmy Carter and other observers. However, no less important than elections are a respect for opposition parties, a commitment to moderation, a recognition of minority rights, an independent judiciary, a critical media that is also responsible in avoiding incitement, mechanisms of defense against religious and ideological extremism, and enough wealth spread throughout the society so that the mass of the people are not heavily dependent on government for their standard of living. One of the reasonable tests of democracy is that there be two instances of an opposition party winning an election, and then able to take office and rule peacefully.

These elements of democracy are absent from the Middle East outside of Israel, and have little prospect for developing where an aggressive variety of Islam is ascendant.

*
Sharkansky is professor emeritus of political science at Hebrew University.  He may be contacted via ira.sharkansky@sdjewishworld.com