Egypt is a bubbling cauldron ready to explode and what do we get from our President? A cryptic message about “change” and “now” that no one understands. Politicos around the world over are trying to figure out exactly where the Obama Administration stands.
Is Obama calling for Egyptian President Mubarak to step down immediately? Probably. Does he recognize the danger should Islamic extremists conquer Egypt. Probably not. What is his vision for the way forward? Your guess is as good as mine.
Like Jimmy Carter before him, Obama waffles while the Middle East burns. Rather than using the power of the presidency to influence positive change in Egypt – namely facilitate an orderly transition of power from Mubarak to a democratic, pro-Western leadership in a workable timeframe - he remains on the sidelines while the most extremist elements of an Islamic society run rampant.
Obama seems surprised that Mubarak has unleashed thugs on the streets to crack down on dissent, but back in the real world this sort of thing has been commonplace in Egypt for decades. Dictators don’t remain in power because they’re nice guys.
The simple truth is the United States needs Mubarak to remain in control until the next Presidential election. Dictator he may be, he is still a far better alternative than the complete breakdown of society like what happened in Iraq not so long ago. When Saddam Hussain was overthrown by the American military, the power vacuum was filled with bloodthirsty fundamental Islamists, Iranian saboteurs and the centuries old Shiite-Sunni divide. The consequences were terrible as thousands of Iraqis and American soldiers were killed in the resulting chaos.
Egypt could easily face a similar fate should Mubarak lose power in a disorderly fashion. The Muslim Brotherhood has already pledged to reignite the war with Israel, Islamic fundamentalists from throughout the Middle East will flood into Egypt to bring their war against modern world with them, and the Iranian Mullahs remain ready as ever to support terrorism in the region.
While Mubarak is hardly a standard bearer for human rights, he is no Saddam Hussein. He has been our ally for 30 years and remains firmly opposed to Islamic extremism. While Saddam refused to stand down, Mubarak has already committed to relinquishing power this September.
The best option for the United States would be to back Mubarak until then and help set the stage for an orderly transfer of power. We would be better served by encouraging Mubarak to adjust the Egyptian constitution to include term limits and ensuring equal rights for woman remain in place after his departure rather than pushing him out the door.
Obama may be willing to throw Mubarak under the bus and back whatever faction comes out on the top after a bloody revolution, but chances are those who will triumph under such circumstances will not be on the side of freedom and democracy.
The Muslim Brotherhood and other radial Islamists will burn Egypt to the ground if given half a chance. Even though they are a minority of the population, they will murder and destroy on a scale not seen since the worst in Iraq. Jihadists throughout the region will go to Egypt seeking martyrdom and murder. The stage will be set for an Islamic revolution stretching from the Mediterranean to China.
This is not change that would be good for the United States or the average Egyptian.
Sometimes it’s better to deal with the devil you know. Mubarak may not be above sending thugs with clubs and knives to attack protesters, but at least he won’t explode cars packed with explosives outside markets filled with shoppers or throw acid in the faces of young girls attending school.
Under Islamic rule things really could get a whole lot worse.
Fred Dardick got a BS in Biology at Boston University and MS in Biology at Stanford University before deciding that science bored him. He now runs a staffing company in Chicago where he is much happier now.
