In the past two days, I have been stunned and awed by the news coming out of Egypt. It was so inspiring to watch the Egyptian people defying their tyrannical government this morning, defying the curfew and bravely attacking the Interior Ministry (home of the hated police forces) in spite of armed policemen guarding it.
What wasn't inspiring was the diplomatic response to Egypt's moment. This morning on CNN one of the anchors was interviewing a former U.S. Ambassador to Israel. She posed the question to him, "How do we stop this?" and that surely he agreed that it had to be stopped. He nodded, adding that the U.S. is walking a fine line right now, not wanting to throw such a good ally as Hosni Mubarak under the bus but aware that he must change. The Ambassador informed the viewing public that the U.S. has supported Mubarak while urging reform since 1992.
Hardly the inspirational moment that I had hoped to get from the diplomatic corps.
This is the wrong angle to take, that these protests, not only in Egypt but also in Yemen and Algeria, thus far, are a "problem" to be stopped rather than a new and wonderful opportunity. The "problem" is not the protests; they are a shining example of what the human spirit will do when it has finally been pushed too far. No, the problem is the diplomatic corps itself, and U.S. foreign policy. In looking for allies against, first Communism and now international terrorism, America has continually pursued a myopic policy that seems to work in the short term but undermines us in the long term. The allies of today become the enemies of tomorrow, because we seem incapable of taking a position that will aid us for more than a few years into the future. We support dictators with abominable records of oppression, all because we find them useful against the enemy of the day. We throw allies under the bus when it becomes convenient. The Shah is our friend until the people finally can take no more of his brutality; then we support Saddam Hussein against the mullah's who replaced the Shah; then when Saddam proves no friend he becomes the enemy of the day. We prop up Hosni Mubarak, the Saudi royal family, Saleh in Yemen; we supported Pinochet, the Marcos family in the Philipines, Ngo Din Diem in South Vietnam, and yet we seem to learn nothing.
Can we, finally, make now the time where we stop being a hypocrite in our foreign policy, when we decide that all the talk about freedom and human rights doesn't just apply to ourselves but to all peoples in all nations?
Will Egypt still be our friend when Mubarak is gone, as he eventually will be whether through resignation, revolution or natural death, after we supported him for so long? That remains to be seen, but if we would stop our policy of supporting dictators friendly to us, then perhaps we would not have to keep re-learning this lesson.
What wasn't inspiring was the diplomatic response to Egypt's moment. This morning on CNN one of the anchors was interviewing a former U.S. Ambassador to Israel. She posed the question to him, "How do we stop this?" and that surely he agreed that it had to be stopped. He nodded, adding that the U.S. is walking a fine line right now, not wanting to throw such a good ally as Hosni Mubarak under the bus but aware that he must change. The Ambassador informed the viewing public that the U.S. has supported Mubarak while urging reform since 1992.
Hardly the inspirational moment that I had hoped to get from the diplomatic corps.
This is the wrong angle to take, that these protests, not only in Egypt but also in Yemen and Algeria, thus far, are a "problem" to be stopped rather than a new and wonderful opportunity. The "problem" is not the protests; they are a shining example of what the human spirit will do when it has finally been pushed too far. No, the problem is the diplomatic corps itself, and U.S. foreign policy. In looking for allies against, first Communism and now international terrorism, America has continually pursued a myopic policy that seems to work in the short term but undermines us in the long term. The allies of today become the enemies of tomorrow, because we seem incapable of taking a position that will aid us for more than a few years into the future. We support dictators with abominable records of oppression, all because we find them useful against the enemy of the day. We throw allies under the bus when it becomes convenient. The Shah is our friend until the people finally can take no more of his brutality; then we support Saddam Hussein against the mullah's who replaced the Shah; then when Saddam proves no friend he becomes the enemy of the day. We prop up Hosni Mubarak, the Saudi royal family, Saleh in Yemen; we supported Pinochet, the Marcos family in the Philipines, Ngo Din Diem in South Vietnam, and yet we seem to learn nothing.
Can we, finally, make now the time where we stop being a hypocrite in our foreign policy, when we decide that all the talk about freedom and human rights doesn't just apply to ourselves but to all peoples in all nations?
Will Egypt still be our friend when Mubarak is gone, as he eventually will be whether through resignation, revolution or natural death, after we supported him for so long? That remains to be seen, but if we would stop our policy of supporting dictators friendly to us, then perhaps we would not have to keep re-learning this lesson.
the fear, of course, is that the extremist Muslim Brotherhood might rise to power and create another "Iran" in Egypt. Still...you're right. America should get fully behind the movement and thus earn a place with the emergent regime. Remember also that the military will play a major role in this and, at least for now, from what I have read, the military is not going to promote a super-fundamentalist move. Lets hope not.
ReplyDelete