Turkish Forum

Tag: Arab Spring

  • Erdogan Seeks Closer Ties With New Arab Rulers

    Erdogan Seeks Closer Ties With New Arab Rulers

    By MARC CHAMPION And MATT BRADLEY

    CAIRO—In Cairo’s Opera House on Tuesday, the standing ovations, chants and fist pumping from the audience began even before Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stood up to speak.

    Associated Press Prime Minister Erdogan, embracing his Egyptian counterpart Essam Sharaf in Cairo Tuesday, is seen by many Arabs as a heroic figure.
    Associated Press Prime Minister Erdogan, embracing his Egyptian counterpart Essam Sharaf in Cairo Tuesday, is seen by many Arabs as a heroic figure.

    When he got to threatening further retribution against Israel for its refusal to apologize over the killing of Turkish citizens during a scuffle on an aid ship last year, the audience roared.

    Mr. Erdogan was on the first stop of an “Arab Spring” tour that will take him to Tunisia and Libya later this week, as he seeks to extend Turkey’s influence in the region using his own popularity and a tough line on Israel to draw support.

    As vendors distributed posters of Mr. Erdogan and his face looked down from giant billboards in the city center, he seemed to be successful. “People in Egypt see him as the new Gamal Abdel Nasser,” said Mohamad Mosalam, a banker from Société Généralé in Egypt, referring to Egypt’s revered post-colonial president, who faced down Britain, France and Israel over control of the Suez Canal in 1956. “For 40 years [after Nasser], Arab people felt they had no leader.” Now, said Mr. Mosalam, they have Mr. Erdogan.

    Speaking just blocks away from where U.S. President Barack Obama sought to persuade Arabs to trust America again in a speech on the Middle East two years ago, Mr. Erdogan also chided Washington. He called on the U.S. to rethink its plan to oppose Palestinian statehood in the United Nations this month.

    That stance, said Mr. Erdogan, “does not fit the understanding of justice in U.S. foreign policy.” He went on to warn Arabs against adopting ideas from outside the region, without specifying what or whose ideas he was referring to.

    Turkey’s prime minister sought to make common cause between Arabs and Turks. He stressed their common faith and history (during the Ottoman Empire), their desire for democracy and above all, common opposition to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.

    Israel, he said in an address to Arab League foreign ministers earlier Tuesday, “is going to lose in the end.”

    Israeli officials have said they believe Mr. Erdogan’s recent downgrading of diplomatic relations with Israel and sharp rhetoric are designed specifically to boost his stature in the Middle East in the wake of the Arab Spring. Turkish officials say the moves are linked solely to Israel’s refusal to apologize for the deaths of its citizens on the ship.

    Turkey’s outspoken leader called Tuesday for close partnership — including military — between Egypt and Turkey, two of the region’s most populous Muslim countries. He pledged to boost trade to $5 billion from $3 billion today, within five years. And he signed 11 agreements with Egypt’s transitional government, covering areas from energy to the creation of a new joint High Security and Cooperation Council.

    But there were also signs of the potential limitations to Mr. Erdogan’s bid for leadership in the Arab world.

    His visit came at a sensitive time for Egypt’s interim military leaders, who have reached the nadir of their post-revolutionary prestige. In the past week, the military has announced a wider remit for Egypt’s 30-year old emergency law while cracking down on media groups that it considered to be inciting public disorder.

    So far, the military has acted as a conservative counterweight to those Egyptian voices who would like to see a bolder foreign policy. That triggered popular anger, in particular, when the military tried to protect Israel’s embassy rather than expel its diplomats after Israeli forces killed six Egyptian border guards earlier this month.

    “They don’t want to go in clashes with the U.S. and Israel so I don’t think that there will be a good and solid feedback from Erdogan’s visit with Egypt,” said Bashir Abdel Fattah, a Turkey expert at the government-financed Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies. Indeed on Tuesday, Mr. Erdogan called several times for democratic forms not to be held back, without specifying to whom he was referring.

    “I don’t think it could be a beginning of an alliance between Egypt and Turkey in the future, because both countries know that there are limits between cooperation,” said Mr. Fattah.

    Mr. Erdogan also had to tread carefully with regard to Syria, which he didn’t even mention in his address to the Arab League foreign ministers.

    Outside the building, meanwhile, Syrian activists protested against Mr. Erdogan’s stance, which they saw as too accommodating to President Bashar Al-Assad.

    Speaking to ordinary Egyptians at the Opera house, however, Mr. Erdogan attacked the Syrian president by name. “Now the Syrian people do not believe Al Assad. I don’t either,” said Mr. Erdogan. “A leader that murders his people loses his legitimacy.”

    —Ayla Albayrak contributed to this article.

    Write to Marc Champion at marc.champion@wsj.com

    via Erdogan Seeks Closer Ties With New Arab Rulers – WSJ.com.

  • Syrian question sets Turkey and Iran apart

    Syrian question sets Turkey and Iran apart

    Japan TimesBy SHLOMO BEN-AMI

    MADRID — Whether the Arab Spring will usher in credible democracies across the Arab world or not remains uncertain. But while the dust has not yet settled after months of turmoil in Tunis, Cairo and elsewhere, the Arab revolts have already had a massive impact on the strategic structure of the Middle East.

    Until recently, the region was divided into two camps: an incoherent and weakened moderate Arab alignment, and an “axis of resistance,” formed by Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah against American and Israeli designs for the region.

    Driven by a strategy of “zero problems” with its neighbors,” Turkey’s quest for a leading role in Middle East politics brought it closer to Syria and Iran.

    The Arab Spring exposed the fragile foundations upon which the entire axis of resistance was built, and has pushed it to the brink of collapse.

    The first to opt out was Hamas. Fearful of the consequences of the demise of its patrons in Damascus, Hamas tactically withdrew from the axis and let Egypt lead it toward reconciliation with the pro-Western Palestinian Authority on terms that it had refused under former Egyptian Hosni Mubarak.

    Turkey is genuinely interested in a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute in a regional system of peace and security, whereas Iran and Hezbollah are bent on derailing both in order to deny Israel the kind of peace with the Arab world that would end up isolating Iran.

    Notwithstanding its bitter conflict with Israel, Turkey, unlike Iran, is not an unconditional enemy of the Jewish state, and would not discard an accommodation with Benjamin Netanyahu’s government. Indeed, talks are now under way between the parties to restore more normal relations.

    Nor do Iran and Turkey share a common vision with regard to the strategically sensitive Persian Gulf region. Turkey, whose 2008 treaty with the Gulf Cooperation Council made it a strategic partner of the region’s monarchies, was unequivocally assertive during the Bahrain crisis in warning Iran to cease its subversive intrusion into the region’s affairs. The stability and territorial integrity of the Persian Gulf States is a strategic priority for Turkey; that is clearly not the case for Iran.

    Similarly, when it comes to Lebanon, Turkey certainly does not share Iran’s concern about the possible interruption of Hezbollah’s lifeline should the Syrian regime collapse. And Iran and Syria, for their part, have never been too happy with Prime Minister’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s aspirations to act as a broker in Lebanon, which they consider to be their strategic backyard.

    This explains Hezbollah’s rejection of a Turkish-Qatari initiative to act as mediators after the fall of Saad Hariri’s Lebanese government in January.

    Turkey’s commitment to peaceful democratic transitions in the Arab world has alienated it from its Syrian ally, Bashar al-Assad — with whose repressive practices both Iran and Hezbollah are fully complicit — and is now driving Iran and Turkey even further apart.

    Iran is working to ensure that free elections open the way to truly Islamic regimes in the Arab world, while Turkey assumes that its own political brand, a synthesis of Islam and democracy with secular values, should ultimately prevail.

    The rift reflects not only ideological differences, but also disagreement about the objective of regime change. Iran expects the new regimes to rally behind it in radically changing the region’s strategic equation through a policy of confrontation with the U.S. and Israel, while Turkey expects the new regimes to follow constructive policies of peace and security.

    Instability and confusion in the Arab world serve the agenda of a radically nonstatus quo power such as Iran. Instability has the potential to keep oil prices high, benefiting the Iranian economy. Moreover, with the West focused on the formidable challenges posed by the Arab revolts, Iran finds it easier to divert the world’s attention from its nuclear program, and to circumvent the international sanctions regime designed to curtail its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.

    Turkey’s foreign policy, unlike Iran’s, needs a stable environment to prosper. Instability undermines its entire regional vision; it certainly challenges its idealistic strategy of “zero problems.” It also puts at risk Turkey’s robust economic penetration into Arab markets. And with the Kurdish problem as alive as ever, the Turks also know only too well that upheavals in neighboring countries can spill over into Turkey itself.

    It is on the Syrian question that the differences between Turkey and Iran are especially apparent. Turkey has practically resigned itself to the inevitable demise of Syria’s repressive Baath regime.

    For Iran and its Hezbollah clients, the fall of Assad would be nothing short of a calamity — one with far-reaching consequences.

    Devoid of its Syrian alliance and estranged from Turkey, Iran would become an isolated revolutionary power whose fanatical brand of Islam is repellent to most Arab societies.

    Turkey was wrong to try to gain wider influence in the Middle East by working with the region’s revolutionary forces. It is far wiser for Turkey to make common cause with the region’s responsible forces.

    A democratic Egypt would certainly be a more reliable partner. Egypt has already managed to draw Hamas away from Syria into an inter-Palestinian reconciliation.

    Instead of competing for the role of regional power broker, as Mubarak did, Egypt can join forces with Turkey — whose officials the Egyptians wisely invited to the ceremony that sealed the Palestinian reconciliation — to promote an Israeli-Arab peace and a civilized security system in the Middle East.

    Shlomo Ben-Ami is a former Israeli foreign minister who now serves as vice president of the Toledo International Center for Peace. He is the author of “Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy.” © 2011 Project Syndicate

    japantimes.co.jp, Aug. 8, 2011

  • Experts say Turkish model cannot be imported as is

    Experts say Turkish model cannot be imported as is

    Despite much talk about the possibility of reproducing the Turkish state model in Egypt, which would give the military a role in internal politics to safeguard the secularism of the state, experts remain suspicious of the idea.

    Photographed by AFP
    Photographed by AFP

    Hassan Nafaa, a political science professor at Cairo University, said the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) positions itself at an equal distance from those who started the revolution and want to bring about genuine change and reform, and remnants of the former regime who are leading a counter-revolution.

    On the sidelines of a conference entitled “The Impact of Arab Revolutions on the Arab-Israeli Conflict”, held in Istanbul, Turkey, Nafaa told Al-Masry Al-Youm that the success of the Turkish state model for Egypt depends on how far the latter’s religious groups have been influenced by the Turkish experience, which he said has resolved the apparent conflict between Islam and democracy.

    He added that the success of this model in Egypt depends on how much Islamic parties in Egypt see Turkey’s Justice and Development Party as a model, but the Turkish and Iranian models cannot be exported to Egypt or any other country.

    Nafaa said the SCAF is protecting the revolution as well as remaining members of the former regime, and the three forces are interacting on the political scene.

    He added that the SCAF wants to be neutral because it is more concerned about the security of the state and the society than about the conflict between these two powers, but the current conditions in Egypt require the SCAF to take one side – either to protect the revolution or the powers working against it.

    Arm al-Shobaki, a political expert at Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, praised the Turkish model, saying Turkey’s Justice and Development Party has employed religion in a successful way. At a conference held at the Alexandria Library two days ago, he said the party has not used a single religious slogan it its campaigns, yet has achieved significant economic growth for Turkey.

    He added that Turkey has succeeded in formulating a constitution to define the relationship between the army and the political authority and to create a democratic relationship between Islamic and secular parties. It has also succeeded in communicating with the Arab and Islamic worlds.

    Shobaki added that benefiting from the Turkish model does not mean it should be “cloned” , saying this would belittle Egyptians’ revolution.

    Discussing the economic success of Turkey, the dean of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences of Istanbul Aydin, Veysel Ulusoy, said sustainable economic growth rates are required to achieve a reasonable outcome.

    A participating Turkish researcher said the election of the Justice and Development Party for the third time in parliamentary elections can be attributed to its success in introducing radical political, cultural and structural changes.

     

    Translated from the Arabic Edition

    via Experts say Turkish model cannot be imported as is | Al-Masry Al-Youm: Today’s News from Egypt.

  • Turkish policy adviser: Turkey is shaping the ‘Arab Spring’

    Turkish policy adviser: Turkey is shaping the ‘Arab Spring’

    A top aide to Turkey’s prime minister said Thursday that his country’s policy of engaging Islamist groups and rogue regimes in the Arab world had given Turkey unique leverage in shaping the outcome of the “Arab Spring.”

    “We’ve been criticized for engaging many of these groups, whether it’s Hezbollah or Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood – the so-called difficult actors in the Middle East … but now most of these groups with which we’ve developed some sort of engagement … are going to play an important role in their respective countries,” said Ibrahim Kalin, chief foreign policy adviser for Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

    Mr. Kalin spoke Thursday at a Middle East Institute forum in Washington.

    Hamas recently signed a unity deal with the Palestinian Authority, and Hezbollah and its legislative allies succeeded last week in forming a Lebanese government.

    The Muslim Brotherhood, meanwhile, is poised to perform well in Egypt’s upcoming parliamentary elections.

    “Some critics claim that, in fact, this is a test for Turkish foreign policy and that this puts Turkey in a difficult position because Turkey so far has worked with the establishment, with the regimes, with most of the dictators in the Arab world. Now you will have to change your allies in the region,” Mr. Kalin said. “Our response is that, in fact, Turkey will be strengthened, not weakened, by a more democratic and prosperous Arab world.”

    Mr. Kalin also said his country’s ties with rogue regimes had enabled it play a quiet, behind-the-scenes role in encouraging reform.

    “When you engage a country like Iran or like Syria, what you want to do is to get results – not sensational rhetoric, not public battles, but results.”

    While Turkish officials were reluctant to publicly criticize Iran during its 2009 crackdown on anti-government protesters, they have taken an active role in the Syrian crisis, hosting opposition leaders and thousands of refugees who have streamed across the Syria-Turkey border.

    Mr. Erdogan’s Islamist-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP) won an overwhelming victory in the country’s June 12 elections – its third landslide since its 2002 rise to power.

    Mr. Kalin noted that while AKP won only half of the country’s votes, polls showed the 65 percent to 70 percent of the population approved of its foreign policy, which has included a warming with governments across the Middle East and North Africa and a cooling of its longstanding alliance with Israel.

    © Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

    via Turkish policy adviser: Turkey is shaping the ‘Arab Spring’ – Washington Times.

  • Egypt protests: America’s secret backing for rebel leaders behind uprising

    Egypt protests: America’s secret backing for rebel leaders behind uprising

    The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change” for the past three years, The Daily Telegraph has learned.

    By Tim Ross, Matthew Moore and Steven Swinford

    The American Embassy in Cairo helped a young dissident attend a US-sponsored summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police.

    On his return to Cairo in December 2008, the activist told US diplomats that an alliance of opposition groups had drawn up a plan to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and install a democratic government in 2011.

    The secret document in full

    He has already been arrested by Egyptian security in connection with the demonstrations and his identity is being protected by The Daily Telegraph.

    The crisis in Egypt follows the toppling of Tunisian president Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali, who fled the country after widespread protests forced him from office.

    The disclosures, contained in previously secret US diplomatic dispatches released by the WikiLeaks website, show American officials pressed the Egyptian government to release other dissidents who had been detained by the police.

    Mr Mubarak, facing the biggest challenge to his authority in his 31 years in power, ordered the army on to the streets of Cairo yesterday as rioting erupted across Egypt.

    Tens of thousands of anti-government protesters took to the streets in open defiance of a curfew. An explosion rocked the centre of Cairo as thousands defied orders to return to their homes. As the violence escalated, flames could be seen near the headquarters of the governing National Democratic Party.

    Police fired rubber bullets and used tear gas and water cannon in an attempt to disperse the crowds.

    At least five people were killed in Cairo alone yesterday and 870 injured, several with bullet wounds. Mohamed ElBaradei, the pro-reform leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner, was placed under house arrest after returning to Egypt to join the dissidents. Riots also took place in Suez, Alexandria and other major cities across the country.

    William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, urged the Egyptian government to heed the “legitimate demands of protesters”. Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, said she was “deeply concerned about the use of force” to quell the protests.

    In an interview for the American news channel CNN, to be broadcast tomorrow, David Cameron said: “I think what we need is reform in Egypt. I mean, we support reform and progress in the greater strengthening of the democracy and civil rights and the rule of law.”

    The US government has previously been a supporter of Mr Mubarak’s regime. But the leaked documents show the extent to which America was offering support to pro-democracy activists in Egypt while publicly praising Mr Mubarak as an important ally in the Middle East.

    In a secret diplomatic dispatch, sent on December 30 2008, Margaret Scobey, the US Ambassador to Cairo, recorded that opposition groups had allegedly drawn up secret plans for “regime change” to take place before elections, scheduled for September this year.

    The memo, which Ambassador Scobey sent to the US Secretary of State in Washington DC, was marked “confidential” and headed: “April 6 activist on his US visit and regime change in Egypt.”

    It said the activist claimed “several opposition forces” had “agreed to support an unwritten plan for a transition to a parliamentary democracy, involving a weakened presidency and an empowered prime minister and parliament, before the scheduled 2011 presidential elections”. The embassy’s source said the plan was “so sensitive it cannot be written down”.

    Ambassador Scobey questioned whether such an “unrealistic” plot could work, or ever even existed. However, the documents showed that the activist had been approached by US diplomats and received extensive support for his pro-democracy campaign from officials in Washington. The embassy helped the campaigner attend a “summit” for youth activists in New York, which was organised by the US State Department.

    Cairo embassy officials warned Washington that the activist’s identity must be kept secret because he could face “retribution” when he returned to Egypt. He had already allegedly been tortured for three days by Egyptian state security after he was arrested for taking part in a protest some years earlier.

    The protests in Egypt are being driven by the April 6 youth movement, a group on Facebook that has attracted mainly young and educated members opposed to Mr Mubarak. The group has about 70,000 members and uses social networking sites to orchestrate protests and report on their activities.

    The documents released by WikiLeaks reveal US Embassy officials were in regular contact with the activist throughout 2008 and 2009, considering him one of their most reliable sources for information about human rights abuses.

    www.telegraph.co.uk, 28 Jan 2011

    Egypt protests: secret US document discloses support for protesters

    Here is the secret document sent from the US Embassy in Cairo to Washington disclosing the extent of American support for the protesters behind the Egypt uprising.

     

    S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 CAIRO 002572 SIPDIS FOR NEA/ELA, R, S/P AND H NSC FOR PASCUAL AND KUTCHA-HELBLING E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/30/2028 TAGS: PGOV, PHUM, KDEM, EG SUBJECT: APRIL 6 ACTIVIST ON HIS U.S. VISIT AND REGIME CHANGE IN EGYPT REF: A. CAIRO 2462 B. CAIRO 2454 C. CAIRO 2431 Classified By: ECPO A/Mincouns Catherine Hill-Herndon for reason 1.4 (d ).

    1. (C) Summary and comment: On December 23, April 6 activist xxxxxxxxxxxx expressed satisfaction with his participation in the December 3-5 \”Alliance of Youth Movements Summit,\” and with his subsequent meetings with USG officials, on Capitol Hill, and with think tanks. He described how State Security (SSIS) detained him at the Cairo airport upon his return and confiscated his notes for his summit presentation calling for democratic change in Egypt, and his schedule for his Congressional meetings. xxxxxxxxxxxx contended that the GOE will never undertake significant reform, and therefore, Egyptians need to replace the current regime with a parliamentary democracy. He alleged that several opposition parties and movements have accepted an unwritten plan for democratic transition by 2011; we are doubtful of this claim.

    xxxxxxxxxxxx said that although SSIS recently released two April 6 activists, it also arrested three additional group members. We have pressed the MFA for the release of these April 6 activists. April 6’s stated goal of replacing the current regime with a parliamentary democracy prior to the 2011 presidential elections is highly unrealistic, and is not supported by the mainstream opposition. End summary and comment.

    —————————- Satisfaction with the Summit —————————-

    2. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx expressed satisfaction with the December 3-5 \”Alliance of Youth Movements Summit\” in New York, noting that he was able to meet activists from other countries and outline his movement’s goals for democratic change in Egypt. He told us that the other activists at the summit were very supportive, and that some even offered to hold public demonstrations in support of Egyptian democracy in their countries, with xxxxxxxxxxxx as an invited guest. xxxxxxxxxxxx said he discussed with the other activists how April 6 members could more effectively evade harassment and surveillance from SSIS with technical upgrades, such as consistently alternating computer \”simcards.\” However, xxxxxxxxxxxx lamented to us that because most April 6 members do not own computers, this tactic would be impossible to implement. xxxxxxxxxxxx was appreciative of the successful efforts by the Department and the summit organizers to protect his identity at the summit, and told us that his name was never mentioned publicly.

    ——————- A Cold Welcome Home ——————-

    3. (S) xxxxxxxxxxxx told us that SSIS detained and searched him at the Cairo Airport on December 18 upon his return from the U.S. According to xxxxxxxxxxxx, SSIS found and confiscated two documents in his luggage: notes for his presentation at the summit that described April 6’s demands for democratic transition in Egypt, and a schedule of his Capitol Hill meetings. xxxxxxxxxxxx described how the SSIS officer told him that State Security is compiling a file on him, and that the officer’s superiors instructed him to file a report on xxxxxxxxxxxx most recent activities.

    ——————————————— ———-

    Washington Meetings and April 6 Ideas for Regime Change

    ——————————————— ———-

    4. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx described his Washington appointments as positive, saying that on the Hill he met with xxxxxxxxxxxx, a variety of House staff members, including from the offices of xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx), and with two Senate staffers. xxxxxxxxxxxx also noted that he met with several think tank members. xxxxxxxxxxxx said that xxxxxxxxxxxx’s office invited him to speak at a late January Congressional hearing on House Resolution 1303 regarding religious and political freedom in Egypt. xxxxxxxxxxxx told us he is interested in attending, but conceded he is unsure whether he will have the funds to make the trip. He indicated to us that he has not been focusing on his work as a \”fixer\” for journalists, due to his preoccupation with his U.S. trip. 5. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx described how he tried to convince his Washington interlocutors that the USG should pressure the GOE to implement significant reforms by threatening to reveal CAIRO 00002572 002 OF 002 information about GOE officials’ alleged \”illegal\” off-shore bank accounts. He hoped that the U.S. and the international community would freeze these bank accounts, like the accounts of Zimbabwean President Mugabe’s confidantes. xxxxxxxxxxxx said he wants to convince the USG that Mubarak is worse than Mugabe and that the GOE will never accept democratic reform. xxxxxxxxxxxx asserted that Mubarak derives his legitimacy from U.S. support, and therefore charged the U.S. with \”being responsible\” for Mubarak’s \”crimes.\”

    He accused NGOs working on political and economic reform of living in a \”fantasy world,\” and not recognizing that Mubarak — \”the head of the snake\” — must step aside to enable democracy to take root.

    6. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx claimed that several opposition forces — including the Wafd, Nasserite, Karama and Tagammu parties, and the Muslim Brotherhood, Kifaya, and Revolutionary Socialist movements — have agreed to support an unwritten plan for a transition to a parliamentary democracy, involving a weakened presidency and an empowered prime minister and parliament, before the scheduled 2011 presidential elections (ref C). According to xxxxxxxxxxxx, the opposition is interested in receiving support from the army and the police for a transitional government prior to the 2011 elections.

    xxxxxxxxxxxx asserted that this plan is so sensitive it cannot be written down. (Comment: We have no information to corroborate that these parties and movements have agreed to the unrealistic plan xxxxxxxxxxxx has outlined. Per ref C, xxxxxxxxxxxx previously told us that this plan was publicly available on the internet. End comment.)

    7. (C) xxxxxxxxxxxx said that the GOE has recently been cracking down on the April 6 movement by arresting its members. xxxxxxxxxxxx noted that although SSIS had released xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx \”in the past few days,\” it had arrested three other members. (Note: On December 14, we pressed the MFA for the release of xxxxxxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxxxxxx, and on December 28 we asked the MFA for the GOE to release the additional three activists. End note.) xxxxxxxxxxxx conceded that April 6 has no feasible plans for future activities.

    The group would like to call for another strike on April 6, 2009, but realizes this would be \”impossible\” due to SSIS interference, xxxxxxxxxxxx said. He lamented that the GOE has driven the group’s leadership underground, and that one of its leaders, xxxxxxxxxxxx, has been in hiding for the past week.

    8. (C) Comment: xxxxxxxxxxxx offered no roadmap of concrete steps toward April 6’s highly unrealistic goal of replacing the current regime with a parliamentary democracy prior to the 2011 presidential elections. Most opposition parties and independent NGOs work toward achieving tangible, incremental reform within the current political context, even if they may be pessimistic about their chances of success. xxxxxxxxxxxx wholesale rejection of such an approach places him outside this mainstream of opposition politicians and activists.

    SCOBEY02008-12-307386PGOV,PHUM,KDEM,EGAPRIL 6 ACTIVIST ON HIS U.S. VISIT AND REGIME CHANGE IN EGYPT

    www.telegraph.co.uk, 28 Jan 2011

     

     


  • A Middle East Without America?

    A Middle East Without America?

    By Pat Buchanan

    The fever sweeping the Middle East is now coursing through Libya, Yemen, Iran and Bahrain, where the U.S. Fifth Fleet is based.

    In all four nations, state violence is being used to crush the rebels, and regime survival hangs on whether security forces and the army stand behind the government or stand aside.A new Middle East is dawning. What will it look like?

    Perhaps the nation to study is Turkey, which has already gone through a democratic and dramatic transformation.

    In 2000, Turkey was a reliable U.S. ally, a friend to Israel, an aspiring candidate for membership in the EU. Since then, Turkey has set a different course, welcomed by her people, that has measurably enhanced her prestige.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s regime is far more Islamic than any Turkish government since the caliphate. He and his Justice and Development Party have effected constitutional reforms to curb the power of the judiciary and military, guardians of the secular state established by Kemal Ataturk in 1923. Scores of generals have been indicted for treason.

    Turkey refused President George W. Bush permission to use its territory to invade Iraq. Denied a fast track to membership in the EU, Turkey now looks to the south and east. Relations with Syria have been repaired. Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been welcomed in Istanbul.

    To the rage of Hillary Clinton, the Turks and Brazil cut a deal with Iran to transfer half the low-enriched uranium at Natanz out of the country. This was seen as undercutting U.S. policy. When the U.N. imposed the latest sanctions on Iran, Turkey voted no.

    “The Turks are out of their lane,” said a U.S. diplomat.

    Indeed they are. And as Turkey moves out of America’s orbit, she is moving back into a Muslim world much of which she ruled for centuries. A sure sign is the bristling hostility to Israel, with which Turkey has had close political and military ties.

    At Davos in 2009, in a debate with Shimon Peres about the Gaza war, Erdogan shouted at Israel’s president, “You know well how to kill,” stormed out and flew home to a hero’s welcome.Eight of the nine dissidents shot by Israeli commandos in the Gaza Freedom Flotilla trying to run the blockade were Turks. Erdogan’s backing of the flotilla and condemnation of Israel for a “bloody massacre” made him and Turkey more admired in Gaza than are Iran and Ahmadinejad.

    After that first week of demonstrations in Cairo, when Hosni Mubarak announced he would not run again for president, America dithered, but Erdogan declared that Mubarak should resign immediately.“The (Egyptian) people expect a very different decision from Mubarak,” Erdogan said. “The current administration does not inspire trust so far as the democratic change wanted by the population is concerned.”Erdogan abruptly canceled his February visit to Egypt.

    What, then, are the crucial elements of the new Turkish policy?

    First, a new deference and respect for Islam. Second, make Turkey the champion of the causes of the Arab and Muslim masses, foremost among which is the cause of the Palestinian people. Third, defy the United States and denounce Israel.What the Turks are about has been called “neo-Ottomanism,” a 21st century policy to reclaim the position they held for centuries.

    As the British elbowed aside the Ottoman Turks and the Americans shouldered aside the British after Suez, now it is America that appears to be the receding power in the Middle East and Turkey the rising power.Indeed, the American hour seems to be rapidly approaching its end.

    In weeks, President Ben Ali, our man in Tunis, was overthrown. Mubarak, our man in Egypt for 30 years, was overthrown. Hezbollah became the real power in the Lebanese government. The king of Jordan dismissed his prime minister and cabinet. For the first time, voices are speaking against the royal family, especially the king’s wife.

    The Palestinian Authority has been discredited by Wikileaks documents revealing the concessions it was prepared to make for a tiny rump state on the West Bank. Benjamin Netanyahu forced President Obama to back down completely from his demands that Israel halt new construction in East Jerusalem and all expansion of settlements on the West Bank. The Middle East peace process is dead.

    Our ally, the king of Bahrain, is now under siege. President Saleh of Yemen, our ally against al-Qaida, has been forced to pledge he will not run again in 2013, nor will his son. Pakistan is aflame with anti-Americanism.

    By year’s end, all U.S. troops are to be out of Iraq, where the influence of Iran is rising and the man behind the throne is the anti-American Muqtada al-Sadr.

    The U.S. press is transfixed by all this, but a question arises: What vital interest of a United States staring at bankruptcy would be imperiled if we got out of the way, stopped fighting these countries’ wars and paying these countries’ bills and let these people determine their own future for good or ill?

    (Patrick Joseph “Pat” Buchanan is an American conservative political commentator, author, syndicated columnist, politician andbroadcaster. Buchanan was a senior adviser to American Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Ronald Reagan, and was an original host on CNN‘s Crossfire. He sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1992 and 1996. He ran on the Reform Party ticket in the 2000 presidential election).