Unlike the Bush administration, which seems to have forgotten it had ever emphasized democracy and reform – i.e. change – in Egypt, the EU recently, and rightfully, blasted Egypt’s human and civil rights record.

I’m not an expert on fancy latin but i.e. means “that is” right? You are equating change with reform? A change for the worse, is still a change.

Off topic, but what do you think the EU is up to? They don’t exactly have a history of criticizing Arab governments. What do they want from Mubarak?

But to hear the regime’s response, you would think such criticism was the product of evil forces conspiring against Egypt. At least that’s how the head of the Egyptian parliament put it when he was interviewed by a television talk show.

He’s probably right. Egypt has a horrible human rights record, but I can’t think of another time off the top of my head the EU (or the Euros in the UN) have gone after an Arab government about Human Rights. They don’t even complain about Human Rights abuses in Iran. Why Egypt, and why now?

No matter who wins the U.S. elections in November, I remain highly skeptical that they will encourage either competence or change in Egypt. Successive inhabitants of the White House have always preferred stability there.

I agree. What Egypt needs (from a US perspective) is a credible opposition that can offer both reform (change) and stability. A few well intentioned individuals won’t do that for Egypt, if Egyptian society is unready to support them. I think the US has decided in the last couple of years, that Egyptian society is not there yet. I think an assessment has been made that any change in Egypt that occurs now, will be for the worse, from our viewpoint.

PS-Glad to see you are blogging now, and that you’re on iToot! Don’t let my criticism fool you, I like your ideas. I just question their practicality. Egypt needs more people like you, in my American opinion

While setting up refugee camps in Northern Iraq, one thing that I noticed was that when someone was placed in charge of pretty much anything, he often began behaving like a despot. I.e.: he would take more than his share of supplies, appoint his friends and relatives to lesser positions, and generally began oppressing “his” citizens.

Someone else concluded that it was because of the examples he’d had in the past. In much of the Middle East, this is considered normal behavior for any bureaucrat. Things hadn’t changed in that regard since the time of Christ when tax collectors were pretty much on the same level as any harlot.

My own conclusion is that all people are basically evil creatures. This was borne out at Abu Graib prison. The so-called “leash girl” and her cohorts, as a rule, did not have leadership setting that kind of an example. That they had weak and ineffective leadership was certainly evident, but their bad behavior came from the evil within them. I know that it sounds like a plot from a bad zombie film, but it rings true nevertheless.

The behavior of Mubarrak is much the same, I suspect. He’s had both despotic examples in charge of things as an example all his life, but the evil comes from within.

How to break the cycle? I’m just another American, and not a very important one. I have no idea other than to suggest a bloody rebellion, a world-wide one, which will be coming along any day now, with or without my sanction.

Then again, I might just be insane. Your call.

Dale,

Someone else concluded that it was because of the examples he’d had in the past. In much of the Middle East, this is considered normal behavior for any bureaucrat. Things hadn’t changed in that regard since the time of Christ when tax collectors were pretty much on the same level as any harlot.

In this example, I would say it was a leadership failure on the part of whoever was appointing people to positions of authority. Most people don’t have much in the way of leadership skills. What you describe is not the behavior of a good leader. It’s the behavior of a bad leader. and once you get bad leaders in place, they select more bad leaders as their own subordinates. Why? Because if they put somebody who actually HAD some leadership skills under them, that person would be a dissident – because a good leader would not approve of the methods his boss was using. They’d try to get some changes made. It’s a cycle that can go on forever.

My own conclusion is that all people are basically evil creatures.

I came to that conclusion a long time ago, for somewhat similar reasons. But I’ve since changed my mind. I now believe that most people are neither good nor evil, but are easily swayed one way or the other depending on their situation.

What Egypt needs (from a US perspective) is a credible opposition that can offer both reform (change) and stability.

What Egypt needs might not be what America wants it to need; and an American idea of what constitutes a credible opposition might not actually be that credible to Egyptians.

I suppose I am really saying that Egypt will remain a lolcountry until it starts having real elections that anyone who gets the most votes can win, even if they are the the Muslim Brothers.

Ian, that’s fine, but Mona’s post had a lot of criticism for the US in it, in regards to Egypt.

This for instance:

No matter who wins the U.S. elections in November, I remain highly skeptical that they will encourage either competence or change in Egypt. Successive inhabitants of the White House have always preferred stability there.

The US position makes perfect sense to me. Do you find it confusing?

By the way, Ian:

I suppose I am really saying that Egypt will remain a lolcountry until it starts having real elections that anyone who gets the most votes can win, even if they are the the Muslim Brothers.

What kind of county will Egypt be, if the Muslim Brotherhood does control the government? An omfggetmethehelloutofherecountry?

Unlike the Bush administration, which seems to have forgotten it had ever emphasized democracy and reform -

I don’t think the Bush administration has given up on the ideas of democracy and reform in Egypt. Rather, they have given up on the current batch of Egyptian democratic reformers. Condoleeza invites them in to her office and tells them with the barest of diplomatic fig leaves (or none at all) that the U.S. wants a democratic Egypt, and the message the “reformers” tell afterwards is, “The U.S. supports Mubarak”.

Something is very wrong with the way these people process information. They do not have a sufficient grasp of their own personal political responsibility. Under such circumstances, why shouldn’t the U.S. simply shrug its shoulders and do the best it can with the current regime?

If anyone needs evidence of the corruption of the current Arab elites, you need look no further than the impact that high energy prices are having on the poor of the world. That’s one reason why food prices have doubled as cited in her article. Also, poor people don’t use cars, but they use bottled gas for cooking, and kerosene for heating in some areas. If they can’t afford it, they will revert to burning wood or animal waste- which greatly contributes to air pollution and is much harder to gather and utilize. We in the West can help to bring down demand for petroleum resources by using smaller cars and being more energy efficient.