Weissman writes: "For all its problems and Morsi's many faults, Egypt was a great experiment in building democracy in a traditional society. Whatever is left of Al Qaeda will be delighted to hear that Washington and Cairo have given Islamist violence such a boost."
Who benefits from Morsi's ouster? (photo: Reuters)
06 July 13
hether one backs the July 3rd overthrow of Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi, or backs away from it in disgust, the stakes are undeniably high, and world leaders only increase the risks by pretending that the forcible removal of the country's first democratically elected president was not a military coup. Morsi's ouster was in every significant sense a coup, and the generals wasted no time in unleashing the signature round-ups, arrests, gang attacks, suspension of the existing constitution, and closing down of sympathetic media outlets.
Why such widespread aversion to using the word coup? The reasons vary, and none offer much promise.
The White House avoids the word to prevent the automatic cut-off of American aid, which includes some $1.3 billion in military assistance to keep the Egyptians more or less in line. But where is that line? In June, the U.S. ambassador in Cairo publicly supported Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood government and spoke out against renewed "street action." Then, on Monday night, Obama urged Morsi both publicly and privately to be responsive to the demands of the protesters seeking his scalp, while U.S. defense secretary Chuck Hagel and Pentagon chief of staff General Martin Dempsey remained in continuing contact with Egyptian military leaders in the days and hours leading up to the coup.
Who said exactly what and to whom? And what role, if any, did the U.S. government-funded Freedom House and National Endowment for Democracy play. Both have been actively working in Egypt. Many questions remain unanswered, except - of course - to those knee-jerk web sites that need no evidence to concoct conspiracies of their choosing. (Did I mention Lyndon LaRouche?) Conspiracies exist, to be sure, but let's find the evidence first, and I have no doubt that we will.
In the meantime, it is hard to deny the former congressman Ron Paul, when he makes the simple observation that "Egypt had a democratically-elected government, but it was overthrown by the US-funded Egyptian military!" Even nuttier, how can the Egyptian military possibly lead the country "back to democracy," as Obama and other Western leaders now demand, when the Muslim Brotherhood, the country's strongest political party, is currently operating at such a decided disadvantage? And what will stop large numbers of the brotherhood and similar "Fools of God" in other countries from giving up on the ballot box and going back to bullets and bombs in pursuit of political Islam?
For all its problems and Morsi's many faults, Egypt was a great experiment in building democracy in a traditional society. Whatever is left of Al Qaeda will be delighted to hear that Washington and Cairo have given Islamist violence such a boost.
Would-be democrats will hear a no less disturbing message. Listen closely to the public statements of the prominent Egyptian civilians who most promoted the coup, especially former diplomat and presidential candidate Amr Moussa and the Nobel prize-winning former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, spokesman for the youth-supported anti-Morsi Tamorad (Rebellion) and a leading candidate to become the new prime minister.
"This is not a coup," Moussa insisted to CNN's Jim Clancy. "This is a revolution." He was talking about the many millions of anti-Morsi demonstrators protesting in the streets and the reputed 22 million signatures on their anti-Morsi petition. He also used argument to defend the arrests of leading members of Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood, including the Supreme Guide Mohamed Badie and his deputy, reportedly on charges of incitement to kill anti-Morsi demonstrators.
ElBaradei, who stood on television alongside the miltary's top man, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, in announcing the coup, also denied that any coup had taken place. Morsi's ouster, he said, was instead a "correction of the uprising of 2011." ElBaradei had failed miserably to run a successful election campaign against Morsi, and so he redefines democracy to give the generals the decisive vote.
Make no mistake. Liberal, democratic, and secular Egyptians could make a good case for a popular revolution, in which the people take power into their own hands while forcing the military to stand aside. But that is not what happened. In Egypt, Moussa, ElBaradie and millions of well-meaning people, many of them idealistic youth, heaped praise upon the military and provided the catalyst for them to take control. No wonder ElBaradei & Co. run away from the coup word.
A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France, where he is researching a new book, "Big Money: How Global Banks, Corporations, and Speculators Rule and How To Break Their Hold."
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
