The previous posting started off with a bit of Boehner bashing, followed by a few perspectives related to Egypt. This posting reverses that order, Egypt first and then a bit more on Boehner who is making bashing him relatively easy so far. This posting was based originally on the assumption that Mubarak would announce later today that he was resigning, at least that's what the media had been reporting all day today (Thursday). It didn't turn out that way; he said he was staying although turning his presidential power over to his Vice President Suleiman. Regardless, the perspectives on Egypt in this post have some staying power if the resignation takes longer, although the longer it takes the thinner the ice on which U.S. policy in the region skates.
While strongly supporting the reform demands of the demonstrators, the bottom line problem for the U.S. has been how hard to push for Mubarak to exit. In the early stages of the pro-democracy, anti-Mubarak street demonstrations, the U.S. seemed to be urging that the sooner Mubarak leaves the better, but without joining the protesters in their demands that he leave NOW. Then, as the street demonstrations became more violent when pro-Mubarak supporters openly clashed with the anti-Mubarak protesters, the U.S. seemed to be moving closer to the "leave now" position to avoid further chaos. Then as the protesting returned to more peaceful ways and newly appointed Vice President Suleiman met with some opposition leaders and showed a seeming willingness to accede to some of the major protester demands, the U.S. policy shifted toward support of an "orderly transition" process, emphasis on the word "process". Process is an indeterminate word in terms of a time frame but it certainly seemed that our policy was backing farther away from any appearance that we were supporting the "leave now" demands of the demonstrators.
Here is where President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton were and still are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. The U.S. was under pressure from many of its friends in the Middle East, including Israel, and outside the region to back away from an openly anti-Mubarak policy. Their position: don't be too hasty in throwing Mubarak, a long time friend and ally, under the bus. This may in part account for our shift toward an "orderly transition" process as the path toward a democratic Egypt.
On the other hand, the pro-democracy demonstrators, now joined by striking workers seeking better pay and working conditions, may have gotten the feeling that the U.S. was going soft on them and their demands and edging back toward its more traditional policy of backing those in power. The danger for the United States here is that the longer the uprising lasts and our support of an "orderly transition" continues, the greater the possibility that the pro-democracy protests may sour on the U.S. as a backer of their demands. The protesters have focused their pro-democracy demands to ousting Mubarak and getting major political, economic, and legal reforms. Contrary to media reports Mubarak did not resigned but said he was turning his powers over to his vice president. With that, the U.S. concern turns to the so-called transition or turn over of power process. The concern is that those in power, whoever they may be, will stall on meeting pro-democracy demands in hopes that the the uprising will end, the protesters will go home and back to work, and they can soften their responses to the protester demands. Looking further ahead, it is likely that regardless of which side comes out on top, the people in power or the protesters, the U.S. will be looked at more skeptically as a "reliable" friend, not only by the protesters but also by the others in the region such as the kings of Jordan and Saudi Arabia. And "friend" in any form may be a best case scenario. And, of course, what will be the role of the military? With that thought, it's time to turn again to House Speaker John Boehner.
The first rule for exercising leadership in Congress is to be able to count the votes. Put another way -- don't put any issues on the floor for a vote unless you know you will win. Boehner and his leadership team failed the vote counting test twice on Tuesday and again on Wednesday..
The House GOP leadership controls the flow of legislation to the floor and on Tuesday it brought to a vote legislation to extend three provisions of the Patriots Act enacted in response to the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. That act expanded the government's surveillance authority to help uncover terrorist activity. The three provisions are due to expire at the end of the month so to hasten their extension Boehner brought the legislation up under a special rule that prohibits offering amendments but requires a two-thirds vote for passage. Unfortunately for Boehner and company, the final vote was seven short of the two-thirds required. President Obama supports extension of the provisions. The Patriots Act vote was actually the second time on Tuesday when the GOP leadership apparently couldn't count votes. Earlier in the day, the Republicans pulled a trade bill off the floor before a vote could be taken, a move which usually means the bill was headed for defeat. Then on Wednesday Boehner again fell short of the two-third vote needed on a bill to force the U.N. to pay back $179 million in supposed overpayments.
The biggest embarrassment for Boehner was on the Patriots Act vote when 26 Republicans deserted him and joined 122 Democrats to reject the bill. Aside from the embarrassment of losing a vote so soon after taking over House leadership, the interesting thing to note is that those deserting him came from the very conservative wing of the party, those opposed to what they see as big government's growing intrusion into individual privacy. Anti-big government is part of the core values of libertarians and tea party supporters and thus sends a message to Boehner that their policy views are not to be ignored when it comes to future votes. The next test of tea party willingness, or not, to support Boehner and the establishment GOP will come next week when another central tea party issue, government spending, starts down the legislative path. Like the crisis in Egypt, stay tuned.
No fun when Boehner makes it so easy. Do you think the Tea Partiers deliberatley misled the leadership on how they would vote in order to make a statement?
ReplyDeleteAnd on Egypt, it now looks like maybe is a no. A couple weeks ago I watched Julian Asange on 60 Minutes and thought he acquitted himself well. He seemed to suggest that the Wikileaks postings had a causal role in the uprising in Tunisia, and, not sure he said it, but Egypt. Any thoughts?
Sidney
ReplyDeleteI'm doubtful myself that the TP misled Boehner, but if they did they are serial deceivers. Boehner got caught three times in two days. Maybe he just has a long learning curve when it comes to counting votes.
Had to do some editing all day to keep up with what the media was saying. So the latest title was "(No)" rather than "(Maybe)". I have my own notion (not elevated enough to be a theory) that the media was manipulated by Mubarack all day to mislead the world so he could come along and show his determination to stay to his fellow authoritarians in the region. And in a convulated way the military played a role in the manipulation. A lot has been said, including this blog, over the past two weeks on the ties between the Egyptian and U.S. military because of the $1.3 billion in miliary assistance every year. Then a few days ago there was a report that the Saudis said they would step in and pick up the tab if the U.S. stopped its aid. If true, that might realign the Egyptian military and its ties. In that sense Mubarack's show of determination to the Saudi king would be in line with the Egyptian military's possible new attachments to the Saudis. But the bottom line on the military's role in what happened today is still pretty murky and may reflect some fight within the military itself on whom to side with. That's a lot of speculation but the idea that the media can be manipulated is an old one so I'm just trying to tie that to this mess.
Not sure I would give Assange as much credit as he gives himself, but he has stirred up dust in a number of places. Thus, I would not discount his claims totally, but it really stretches me to think that anything he has said would lead to such momentous changes as occurred in Tunisia and is underway in Egypt.
Sidney
ReplyDeleteP.S. Excuse the misspellings of Mubarak in my reply. Just noticed it but too late to change.
I heard that the majority of Egyptian people do not buy the Muslim Brotherhood's message and that is is losing power in Egypt. That is an interesting point about a lot of today's drama being media controlled. I buy into that. If you look back at the day's events it does seem pretty contrived. It must've been an emotional roller coaster ride for the protestors thinking early on in the day they are close to succeeding in the first step to oust Mubarek.
ReplyDeleteStaying tuned to next week to see how the spending cut legislation does.
DesertGirl
ReplyDeleteGuess what strikes me most is that the Muslim Brotherhood has faded into the background in all of this. But it is not clear what the MB message is. First, it is a social service agency which operates more than three dozen hospitals as well as providing other services. Second, unlike the ayatollah-based religious structure of Iran, the MB is secular. But being secular doesn't mean that it would not seek to have Islamic law built into the Egyptian constitution. Much about the MB depends on whom you read and listen to these days. You can have it either way, including from the MB itself which has various factions which are not in agreement on some issues.
I'm not one given to conspiracy theories, but I like of like the "notion" (as I used the term with Sidney) that Mubarak and his close lieutenants used the press to lead the world astray so he could show last minute determination to stay as a signal to others in the region who worry about a popular uprising in their countries.
I don't think the MB can be called secular any more than the Christian Right could be. The slogan of the MB is "Islam is the solution." But hopefully they are not extreme and more in line with the Turkish AK ruling party.
ReplyDeleteOne NPR analyst this morning offered the hypothesis that Mubarak is a father figure to the army and that they were giving him one more chance to win the people to his (not resigning, thank you) side with the speech yesterday and that they are looking for a face-saving way for him to bow out. As you suggested before, there must be all kinds of internal and external negotiations going on regarding Egypt's fate.
As I said, the MB is secular in that it is not structured on the ayatollah-based religious hierarchy. My comment then goes on to say that this does not mean it won't seek non-secular goals and have Islamic law as the basis of the legal system, as your citing their slogan indicates. It seems to me that the MB is broadly comparable to the Christian Right in that there is not a religious hierarchical system for the CR, although given the chance they would like to see some brand of fundamentalism as the underlying basis of our moral and legal system.
ReplyDeleteYour comment sounds like it got caught like my posting in the middle of a running story.
Guess there was no face saving way out at the end. As to the father figure image he tried to convey, it was that image that led off his address last night and he presented himself as the "father" to all of the Egyptian people.
Cosmo
ReplyDeleteP.S. Guess it's a matter of how one wants to dissect it. In labeling the MB secular, I separate the structure from its religious goals. If the structure is not based on a religious hierarchy, I think of it as secular with a religious goal. If I read you correctly you look at the religious goals independent of the structure and if the goal is Islamic law, then by definition it is not secular.
Sidney
ReplyDeleteSo much for my "notion" about media manipulation.
What a day for the Egyptian people! I was wondering if there would be a "special edition" blog. :) There is still a lot of hope for a democratic Egypt. The pundits as everyone would expect are making their predictions. I am hearing a lot of positive talk that the military and the people won't let the MB take over and there is hope for a democratic society similar to that of Turkey. Your previous blogs mention Turkey as a possible hope to help stabilize the region. Maybe we could have a Turkey/Egypt solution. I know it is too early to predict or expect anything, but to me it seems like there is some real hope that this may help the region. Neither the military nor the people want the MB to take over from what I have heard and with the hope for some fair elections in September, maybe we will see another democratic society in the region. Was George Bush right?
ReplyDeleteIt was a good thought on media manipulation. I had actually been a little suspicious myself. In today's day and age where there is so much media manipulation it isn't too far a stretch to think something is going on behind the scenes.
With respect to our domestic spending issues. I am not surprised by anything. To me, it always seems politics as usual.
Carole
ReplyDeleteA special edition is tempting, but will hold any thoughts until my next posting Monday. It was a great experience to watch all of this, but as you suggest--let's wait and see. Right now all we have is a military-run country. The test will BEGIN if and when they sit down with various groups to talk about the rules of the game for the next round which would presumably be elections. The MB is the great unknown, but with so much focus on the MB and whether or not it will hijack the process and outcome we need to also be careful about other opposition groups with more radical goals than the MB. At least the MB with all of the social services it provides to the people is a stake holder while some other less known groups are not.
As you know I am a big Turkey booster, but there are too many who seem to think that Turkey's growing involvement in the region is biased in favor of links to Syria and Iran. I take it another way and that is to deal with the tough cases you have to engage them. That's the Obama policy toward Iran and to a lesser extent, Syria. You can't expect to come to agreement on anything unless you talk with them and from my perspective that is what Turkey has been doing, not just cozying up to them.
You put me on the spot with the Bush question. I'm not one given to viewing him and his policies favorably. So let me just say that I view with skepticism his "spreading democracy" rhetoric as primarily that, rhetoric to mask other policy goals. But it could turn out that in a sense, he was at the right policy place at the right time.
As events unfolded, I became less enamored by my notion of media manipulation in this instance, although it remains a basic part of the way I view the media over time.
On the spending issue, will say a bit more on this in the next posting but watching the GOP establishment and its reactions to pressure by dissident Tea Party types is a bit like watching events in Egypt-- it ain't over until it's over.
It may be some years before we get a fairly good picture of what the various players in Egypt did and even then we'll never really know. I don't know enough about the Wikileaks postings relevant to Tunisia and Egypt to say if there was anything revealing about their regimes that might have helped sparked the protests but one thing is certain - the power of the internet and social media to make such protests effective. I have a feeling that Ahmadinejad may understand this better than Mubarak and company and will crack down on the opposition much more brutally and from his point of view effectively than was the case in Egype.
ReplyDeleteSidney
ReplyDeleteDitto for me on the WikiLeaks. Assange is not a modest man so I make the unsupported judgment that Tunisian and Egyptian were based on fundamentals that far outweighed anything that could be disclosed by leaking of diplomatic cables.
Yesterday's crackdown in Tehran is further testimony that Ahmadinejad isn't one to take any chances that street demonstrations could be elevated to the stage of a revolution. He showed that after the last presidential election there in 2009. He also has the advantage that most of what he does is supported by the Grand Ayatollah as well as the Revolutionary Guard which benefits even more than the top military in Egypt with preservation of the status quo.
One certainly has to be impressed with the power of the social media in mobilizing support for a cause. In this country the social media seems to mobilize for even bigger stakes--indignation that Justin Bieber didn't win the top Grammy award.
Oh,very good Charley. The best laugh I've had reading something online in a long time. By the way want to say yours is one of the few - nay only - political blogs I'm familiar with that the blogger actually takes the time to respond to comments. I appreciate that and the fact that I usually come away from the blog with a sense I've learned something.
ReplyDeleteSidney
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for the nice comments. Makes it worthwhile. By the way, be sure to issue a disclaimer that "the preceding is not a paid for endorsement."