|
U.S. must be willing to live with ambiguity in Egypt |
|
|
|
|
Written by Byron Williams
|
|
Thursday, 17 February 2011 |
 Make no mistake, what happened last week in Cairo has reverberated in Riyadh, Jerusalem, throughout the Gulf States, into Tehran, and even in the mountain regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The only thing missing was Charlton Heston going in to the royal palace demanding that Yul Brynner, "Let my people go!"
Egypt is the sequel to the surprise blockbuster in Tunisia. Now it seems that Yemen and Bahrain are in negotiations for similar performances in their respective countries.
In a portion of the world where many Americans hold negative stereotypes, for 18 days we witnessed people engage in the practice of peaceful assembly.
Without a large arsenal or a cohesive strategy, Egyptians used the sheer power of their numbers to transform their nation by ousting Hosni Mubarak as president.
How ironic that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would praise the Egyptian protesters for successfully achieving what he squelched in 2009.
As President Barack Obama alluded last week, real change does not happen because of terrorism, inflaming people's fear; it happens when people cast off their fears and embrace the collective power of moral force.
Egypt is now at the point that confronts all revolutionary efforts. It is the obvious, but challenging question raised in the closing scene of the movie "The Candidate;" what do we do now?
For all the punditry predicting Egypt's next move, all anyone knows with certainty is that an overwhelming majority coalesced around the notion that Mubarak should leave office. With that goal achieved, are there shared desires for what Egypt will be in the future?
It's one thing to say you want free and fair elections, but Egypt is currently a country with a dissolved constitution to be governed, possibly for the next six months, by a Parliament that holds office based on a rigged election.
Moreover, history repeatedly bears witness to the corruptive nature of power and its ability to rationalize the moment for its own interests. Will the Egyptian military freely return the unbridled power that it is now possesses?
If it does, that might send shock waves throughout the Middle East greater than anything already displayed by the people of Tunisia or Egypt.
The initial steps toward democracy in Egypt are promising; the military officers governing the country already have convened a panel to revise the constitution that includes the Muslim Brotherhood, which was outlawed by Mubarak.
These are the type of steps needed if Egypt is to have international support during this uncertain journey.
The nutrients of emotion that could sustain a revolution are empty calories when it comes to creating a framework for governing. Self-determination is tricky business; it does not always turn out in the manner that those on the outside would prefer.
How will America react to these unpredictable challenges that await Egypt? Will American foreign policy be based on its own ideals or its interest? Will it view Egypt through the lens of its democratic rhetoric or real politik?
It is the ideals of America that must prevail. The president and his team must find comfort in the potential discomfort of ambiguities that might result from this process.
Do American ideals have room for the Muslim Brotherhood?
With Mubarak gone, the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's largest opposition group and the oldest and largest Islamic political group, has already stated it will register as a legitimate political party once party restrictions are lifted.
The Muslim Brotherhood is another in a long line of foreign institutions that the U.S. knows little about. In the past, ignorance has not prohibited American foreign policy from involving itself -- sometimes to its detriment.
If American interest is the driving force, it could create deeper problems for the U.S. regardless of the immediate outcomes.
American interest has produced an alliance with such notable ruffians as Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, the Duvaliers in Haiti, and perhaps the most egregious in the Middle East region, the Shah of Iran.
Restraint, pragmatism and prudence -- not always embraced by American foreign policy -- will be required in an unprecedented manner as nations comprising the Middle East seek an alternative vision.
For as much as the world will be watching Egypt and other countries forge ahead, it will also be watching America out of the corner of its eye.
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Post a Comment. 
