In the fourteenth day of anti-government protests in Egypt, the U.S. administration has, Sunday, Feb. 6, his final touches on nearly two weeks of diplomatic dithering. "I want a representative government in Egypt, said the president Barack Obama in an interview with the conservative TV channel Fox. We have said, you should immediately initiate the transition (...).
An orderly transition. " The term "orderly transition" has been shaped especially for Egypt, said the Washington Post, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has taken all day Saturday scouring the television shows - five in total . What happened to your farm, without stonewalling or neologism used by the spokesman for the White House, Robert Gibbs, who, on February 2, wanted a change "now"? And "now", he insisted, "it means now." Already Saturday, Ewen Mac Askill wrote in The Guardian: "The official position of the United States on the Egyptian uprising has changed almost daily." Is this evidence of a real and welcome diplomatic flexibility or a reflection of mere procrastination? Everyone looks at his door: "The Obama supporters have explained that the apparent sudden changes in policy were needed to allow Mubarak to leave with dignity.
Opponents have them considered that it reflected the uncertainty at the heart of the Obama administration, "the journalist. Editorialist Ross Douthat, where" to govern is to choose, "edge:" It procrastination is not soft peaceful. These cold-blooded realpolitik, "he wrote in The New York Times.
Looking at the facts and sayings recent U.S.," it is clear that the real purpose of the Obama Administration was to dispense with Mubarak while keeping in place the subordinate military dictator. "One might wonder, then see the U.S. give up their favorite argument in diplomacy, that bring freedom and democracy to all peoples the world.
There are two reasons for choosing this "realpolitik." On the one hand, Mr Douthat points out, if, in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan stood him without a shudder on the side of democracy is that it could count on Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel to support locally. But today, Egypt, supporters of Obama would be the opponent Mohamed ElBaradei, the Muslim Brotherhood and the crowd.
"The first is doubtful as is the being a local leader, the second and the third is dangerous dangerously disorganized, "he writes. No local support, no struggle for democracy. On the other hand, this" democracy promotion "has become too closely associated George W. Bush and, especially, "tarnished by the U.S.
commitment in Iraq," said Fred Hiatt, the Washington Post. Finally, and this could be a third reason: the place of Egypt in the geopolitical game in the Middle East is too critical to take full part for democracy and therefore against Mubarak. In another Washington Post article appears in the watermark intimate connection between the two countries: journalists Joby Warrick and Scott Wilson tells how, every morning since the beginning of the uprising Egyptian administration Obama meets to discuss a "script of the day" ("Play of the Day").
The relationship is so intimate between the two countries that the United States have established themselves for an exit plan that details Mubarak Carl Bernstein in The Daily Beast. "During a short period, Mubarak would remain at the head of state but have more power. It would remain until a new mechanism, perhaps a new constitution is in place for a transition stable, which would also prevent people from authoritarian and corrupt machine Mubarak to have his hand on the succession process, "he writes.
In fact, conflicting messages and reversals of U.S. policy is mainly a reflection of a policy "made on the fly", caused by the unpreparedness of the United States to such a scenario, says a U.S. official under cover of anonymity to the New York Times. "We had strategy sessions continuously for the past two years, peace in the Middle East on how to contain Iran.
How many of them foresaw the possibility that Egypt moves from stability to turmoil None. " For the British newspaper The Independent, there is no "realpolitik" or "policy on the fly" in the American game. "The U.S., once again, working undercover to serve their own interests in the Middle East," deals a newspaper editorial.
In this article, we learn in fact that Frank Wisner, U.S. envoy to Egypt has pleaded Saturday for that Mubarak remains in office, would be employed by a firm of lawyers and lobbyists working for the regime of Mubarak and several "families more influential in the affairs in Egypt. " "It is nothing short of a conflict of interest," says the editor.
Yet, said Fred Hiatt of The Washington Post, "with the leverage that can be 1.5 billion dollars in annual aid, the United States could push harder on that Mubarak shows more tolerance." Saturday, Clinton said he had to push authoritarian regimes to open because "the status quo is not sustainable." And M.
Hiatt recalled the conditions of existence of freedom of speech in China, where the Nobel Peace Liu Xiaobo was jailed and the case of Azerbaijan, where another dictator, Ilham Aliyev, "played on fears of U.S. Radical Islam and the need for Americans to save oil in the indulgence of the United States when he faked an election or close the press.
" "The U.S. will they tell him that this status quo is not viable?" 
An orderly transition. " The term "orderly transition" has been shaped especially for Egypt, said the Washington Post, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has taken all day Saturday scouring the television shows - five in total . What happened to your farm, without stonewalling or neologism used by the spokesman for the White House, Robert Gibbs, who, on February 2, wanted a change "now"? And "now", he insisted, "it means now." Already Saturday, Ewen Mac Askill wrote in The Guardian: "The official position of the United States on the Egyptian uprising has changed almost daily." Is this evidence of a real and welcome diplomatic flexibility or a reflection of mere procrastination? Everyone looks at his door: "The Obama supporters have explained that the apparent sudden changes in policy were needed to allow Mubarak to leave with dignity.
Opponents have them considered that it reflected the uncertainty at the heart of the Obama administration, "the journalist. Editorialist Ross Douthat, where" to govern is to choose, "edge:" It procrastination is not soft peaceful. These cold-blooded realpolitik, "he wrote in The New York Times.
Looking at the facts and sayings recent U.S.," it is clear that the real purpose of the Obama Administration was to dispense with Mubarak while keeping in place the subordinate military dictator. "One might wonder, then see the U.S. give up their favorite argument in diplomacy, that bring freedom and democracy to all peoples the world.
There are two reasons for choosing this "realpolitik." On the one hand, Mr Douthat points out, if, in the 1980s, Ronald Reagan stood him without a shudder on the side of democracy is that it could count on Lech Walesa or Vaclav Havel to support locally. But today, Egypt, supporters of Obama would be the opponent Mohamed ElBaradei, the Muslim Brotherhood and the crowd.
"The first is doubtful as is the being a local leader, the second and the third is dangerous dangerously disorganized, "he writes. No local support, no struggle for democracy. On the other hand, this" democracy promotion "has become too closely associated George W. Bush and, especially, "tarnished by the U.S.
commitment in Iraq," said Fred Hiatt, the Washington Post. Finally, and this could be a third reason: the place of Egypt in the geopolitical game in the Middle East is too critical to take full part for democracy and therefore against Mubarak. In another Washington Post article appears in the watermark intimate connection between the two countries: journalists Joby Warrick and Scott Wilson tells how, every morning since the beginning of the uprising Egyptian administration Obama meets to discuss a "script of the day" ("Play of the Day").
The relationship is so intimate between the two countries that the United States have established themselves for an exit plan that details Mubarak Carl Bernstein in The Daily Beast. "During a short period, Mubarak would remain at the head of state but have more power. It would remain until a new mechanism, perhaps a new constitution is in place for a transition stable, which would also prevent people from authoritarian and corrupt machine Mubarak to have his hand on the succession process, "he writes.
In fact, conflicting messages and reversals of U.S. policy is mainly a reflection of a policy "made on the fly", caused by the unpreparedness of the United States to such a scenario, says a U.S. official under cover of anonymity to the New York Times. "We had strategy sessions continuously for the past two years, peace in the Middle East on how to contain Iran.
How many of them foresaw the possibility that Egypt moves from stability to turmoil None. " For the British newspaper The Independent, there is no "realpolitik" or "policy on the fly" in the American game. "The U.S., once again, working undercover to serve their own interests in the Middle East," deals a newspaper editorial.
In this article, we learn in fact that Frank Wisner, U.S. envoy to Egypt has pleaded Saturday for that Mubarak remains in office, would be employed by a firm of lawyers and lobbyists working for the regime of Mubarak and several "families more influential in the affairs in Egypt. " "It is nothing short of a conflict of interest," says the editor.
Yet, said Fred Hiatt of The Washington Post, "with the leverage that can be 1.5 billion dollars in annual aid, the United States could push harder on that Mubarak shows more tolerance." Saturday, Clinton said he had to push authoritarian regimes to open because "the status quo is not sustainable." And M.
Hiatt recalled the conditions of existence of freedom of speech in China, where the Nobel Peace Liu Xiaobo was jailed and the case of Azerbaijan, where another dictator, Ilham Aliyev, "played on fears of U.S. Radical Islam and the need for Americans to save oil in the indulgence of the United States when he faked an election or close the press.
" "The U.S. will they tell him that this status quo is not viable?"
- Obama, the foreign-policy realist (07/02/2011)
- Cairo protests: The west has a duty to nurture democracy (06/02/2011)
- Professing My Ignorance About Egypt (28/01/2011)
- Amid Egypt crisis, West rethinks its Arab realpolitik - Ha'aretz (06/02/2011)
- Analysis: After Egypt, West rethinks its Arab realpolitik (06/02/2011)
Egypt (geolocation) Egypt (wikipedia) Mr Mubarak 26 yrs is Enough - كفاية -Kefaya Song 2.0- (youtube) Barack Obama (answerscom) Barack Obama (homepage) Barack Obama (wikipedia) Barack Obama's Presidential Announcement (youtube) Obama-Caucus4Priorities (youtube) Barack Obama (youtube) President Obama's Afghanistan Speech pt.1 (youtube) Senator Obama sees benefits in Horn of Africa mission (youtube) Barack Obama (musicbrainz) Realpolitik (wikipedia)
No comments:
Post a Comment