US attitude towards Mubarak, Islamists and Israel

Category: , , , , , , By freshouttatime

US Admin preparing for post Mubarak Egypt, and the spectre of Islamism for Israel

  1. http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/31/a_realist_policy_for_egypt
    • Walt writes that supporting democratic change is the realist position to take. A domestically stable Egypt; makes for a better US regional ally and serves other US goals for the region- counterterrorism, headway into a two state solution to name a couple.
    • With regards to Israel, Egypt would not venture to change their peace treaty with Israel anytime soon, as it lacks military parity with Israel itself, would likely be cut off from US funding. In the face of food shortage and unemployment, drastic foreign policy adjustments probably rank last on the list of priorities.
  2. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/opinion/02Halevi.html?_r=1
    • This piece sheds light on Israeli concerns of a Muslim Brotherhood regime in the Post Mubarak era. While many argue that the US attitude towards Egypt is of high concern to Israel’s national security, I’d say that Israeli commentators/officials are overreacting.
    • Piece claims that Muslim Brotherhood will seize power through a façade of cooperation; and call for the end of Israel. Isn’t this the kind of mistrust that led to Gaza after the 2006 HAMAS elections?
  3. http://www.juancole.com/2011/02/why-egypt-2011-is-not-iran-1979.html
    • Cole repudiates the monopolizing role MB would play in Egypt. Egypt is not Iran for several reasons, and he breaks down the different classes involved in both revolutions.
    • I’m getting to pieces that directly address concerns of an Islamist take over; these are just appetizers!
  4. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/02/how-the-white-house-approached-egyptial-turmoil/70646/
    • A telling piece on the Obama administration’s handling of the revolution, and disowning of Mubarak. Obama will not directly influence the selection of the new regime, but will ensure that US interests (Israeli security priority 1) are met by it.
    • The relationship of importance is the Military- the ‘caretaker of the state’ who is the major recipient of US aid. Ultimately, no regime cannot afford to take an anti-Israeli stance due to dependence on aid, intl treaties etc, and the Military presumably will make sure it will never get that far anyway.
  5. http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=37443&tx_ttnews[backPid]=7&cHash=72961f54f9
    • A series of scenarios of the post revolution landscape. Keeping with the theme, Islamists pose no threat of militancy, and are highly unlikely to break intl treaties.
    • Dominant theme has been the presence of the military in preventing foreign infiltration, and maintenance of stability. Opposition parties are poorly funded/organized and Egypt is already a deep state making it likely that whatever regime emerges has to be with the blessing of the military.

analyses on today’s Tahrir Square clashes up next