Arabs Revolt: Change for the same?

Umberto Mazzei

04/03/2011

Opinión

^-A ⁺A

The news of the rebellions in Arab countries have a Hollywoodian touch. The story told by the Big Press is almost the same. Young people communicate over the Internet, join protest in a square the streets, fight with the police, the tyrant flees and it is assumed that tyranny collapses. The villain is a character with decades on power and few years or months of life left. The escape of the villain, according to mainstream’s media verdict, opens the path to democracy. The story is called "jasmine revolution", an Arab version of the coloured revolutions in Eastern Europe. The only revolt in which the villain does not seem to know the script is the one in Libya, which is also the only case that rises talk in United States and England about "humanitarian” invasion.

The shadow of the CIA

The press pretends that Arab revolts came as a surprise to the government in Washington, which is now doing its best to make them as bloodless as possible. We all know how much concerned is always the U.S. government over the blood of the innocent. Arab revolts, according to the alternative press - not the other - seem to not have been such a surprise. It is being said that both, Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarak, are sick and that it was well known in Washington. Ben Ali was interned in a Saudi hospital shortly after his arrival, which seems to confirm those rumours.

Another evidence of some linkage of the riots with Washington is that the CIA director, Leon Panetta, acknowledged in testimony before Congress that the CIA was to identify possible "triggers" for uprisings in countries like Egypt[1]. The same note informs us that President Obama ordered in August 2010 to investigate the possibilities of uprisings in the Arab world and especially in Egypt. The result was a 18-page report.

It is also known that the State Department, Freedom House and National Endowment for Democracy – NED- are inviting, since 2008[2], groups of young members of the Egyptian opposition, to impregnate them with "American values" and train them to create networks using social media tools like twitter and facebook , which Big Press says have served to articulate the riots.

Something was anticipated in France. Just before the riots in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia there were visits by members of the French Cabinet. Prime Minister Francois Fillon went to spend Christmas with his wife ... in Egypt. The Special Adviser at the Élysée, Henri Guaino, did the same... in Libya. The noisier case was that of Sarkozy’s Foreign Minister, Michelle Alliot-Marie. The veteran of three cabinets travelled to Tunisia in late December with his companion Patrick Ollier, Minister of Relations with Parliament. She went there to buy on behalf of her parents – 94 she and 92 him- shares in Aziz Miled companies, a Tunisian magnate in partnership with Ben Ali's brother in law. The news were published in February by Le Canard Enchaîné and shocked her out of the cabinet. Her companion is still there.

What changed in Egypt?

"The Army continues to command, General Mubarak retires" is the truth that headlines should have said. Instead, they pretended a political change, such as “Mubarak resigns and the army takes over". But come on. The army is in control since the coup of July 1952! Since the coup of the "free officers" against King Faruk!

King Farouk was deposed and General Muhammad Naguib, formal leader of the uprising, became the First Egyptian President. He was followed by the ideologist and real leader, Commander Gamal Abdel Nasser. Since then, both, presidents and governments of Egypt, are chosen and directed by the Egyptian armed forces. When General Mubarak retires and the military take the reins, there is not a change, but continuity.

Soldiers of Fortune

In 1979, the peace agreement with Israel left the Egyptian military with little military tasks and a lot of money. United States pays an annual tribute of 1,300 million, so the military get busy with anything other than Israel. In 30 years the tribute helped to develop a mercantile empire for the Egyptian armed forces.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle[3] that empire encompasses various business activities ranging from selling fire extinguishers and medical equipment to computers, televisions, sewing machines, refrigerators, pots and pans, cooking gas, mineral water and olive oil. According to a leaked cable, in 2008 the U.S. Ambassador to Egypt said that " We see the military's role in the economy as a force that generally stifles free market reform by increasing direct government involvement in the markets." The Ambassador added that these companies are very often run by retired high military officers.

Strictly military activities involve a total of 2,440 million and are 3.4% of Egyptian GDP. However, many sources[4] estimate that the military control about one-third of the Egyptian economy; it is difficult to assert because their companies are tax exempt and usually do not reveal revenues, but are presumed to be stratospheric. For certain, there are 14 enterprises under the Ministry of Military Production (www.momp.gov.eg / Ar / Facts.aspx) whose web pages offer civilian products[5].

There are other companies outside the ministry who are active in unexpected areas, if we consider their martial origin. A well known one is El Nasr Company for Services and Maintenance, with 7,750 employees in 365 locations that offer 18 types of services, including child care. It has revenues for 40 million Egyptian Pounds (€ 4.9 million), according to its website (www.queenserviceegypt.com). As the Egyptian military prefer self reliance on food, they own farms of all kinds and, of course, their own bakeries.

This multiplicity and size of their businesses suggests that the Egyptian military will find it difficult to submit to a civil authority arising from any election. Presumably, they prefer to leave things as they are.

What change in Tunisia?
In Tunisia, there are no changes looming. Ben Ali left on 14 January 2011 and until February 27 his prime minister, Mohamed Gahnnouci, continued to rule. Ghannouci recently resigned, but the most important posts of the "provisional government" are still in the hands of former Ben Ali ministers. When the government makes changes, like replacing the old Governor of the Tunisian Central Bank, is to appoint Mustafa Kamel Nabli, a former Head of the Middle East Department at the World Bank. What an Omen!

It does not seems to be a change worth the 78 dead - according to the official count - killed by the government during the demonstrations. What is going on in Tunisia certainly con not be called a revolution, not even called a change of party in government. The control instruments of the last 50 years are still there: the Tunisian police, the justice system and the RCD party.

With a belated gesture, the RCD expelled the fugitive Ben Ali and some of their most notorious partners, to mark distances. A kind of alibi for party members who still occupy the key ministries of the "provisional government." The parliament also continues with the same majority made up of members of the RCD. The middle class seems alarmed at the prospect of radical changes. The opposition is fractured by years of repression and infiltration; the Ennahda Islamic group - whose leader Rashid Ghannouchi returned from 22 years of exile - supports the provisional government. Already there is talk of postponing the July elections.

Bahrain and Yemen

Little space is given in visual or written media to riots in Bahrain and Yemen, which seem encouraged by examples seen on TV from Tunisia and Egypt. In both cases, the main effect of protests will be that their governments become more aware of their dependence on the U.S. to stay in power.

Bahrain is the headquarters of the U.S. fleet V. It is an absolute monarchy, with one million subjects, ruled by a Sunni Muslim oligarchy while most people are Shiite Muslims. It seems unlikely that any major change will happen there.

Yemen suffers another (32 years) old dictatorship supported by the United States. It is a country of great strategic importance because its position in the Red Sea and its border with Saudi Arabia. Hence the crackdown on the demonstrations may be bloody, as the ongoing civil war in the north, but no one will bring Abdullah Saleh’s case to the Security Council.

Libya
Since the “gattopardean” revolts began in Arab countries, the mobilization of the media, the rhetoric of change and the talk of potential for contagion, made me suspect that the ultimate goal of the show was to demote Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

The procedure to remove Kadafi recalls the one used to break-up Yugoslavia, overturn Slobodan Milosevic and amputate Kosovo. The Yugoslav war was started by separatist groups organized, trained and financed by the United States. There was a media campaign against Serbia and talk of air strikes, never confirmed, against the civilian population. NATO ordered a no-fly zone in the Serbian sky, as in Iraq. An exclusion only for Serb planes, because NATO, with 600 aircraft, made 3000 "humanitarian" attacks - between 24 March and 10 June, 1999- dropping hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives, in an exercise of superfluous killing of civilians and destruction of civilian infrastructure.

Libya is a major oil and gas provider and is been governed for 42 years by Colonel Qaddafi, a colourful and unpredictable man, which governs without any official title. Although domesticated ten years ago, he is more independent than Ben Ali or Mubarak. Europeans need Libyan oil and would like to replace Kadafi with a younger and compliant employee. Washington would prefer a puppet from the oil cartel –the Hamid Karzai sort- to better control the flow of energy to Europe. That is why there is some disagreement on Libya.

The plan is to create a civil war that can serve as a pretext for intervention and occupation. A clear proof is the announcement that Kadafi will be tried at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Milosevic style. It is meant to make sure that he fights until victory or death. European diplomacy schools teach the well-known Roman maxim "To the enemy on the run, golden bridges"[6] and Washington is likely to know it too. This announcement encourages the opposite, to die killing.

Gaddafi is a romantic personality: he lives in a Bedouin tent, has female bodyguards[7], exhibits a socialist discourse and is notorious for scolding his colleague dictators at the Arab League meetings. For someone like him, it is consistent to die weapons in hand to avoid a shameful end. The false statement by former British Chancellor, William Hague, about a Gaddafi flight to Venezuela, was meant to stir up the revolt in Libya, but gives a glimpse on the fact that Gaddafi does not have a long list of countries willing to receive him.

The United States and the European Union know well that Gaddafi has dictated for 42 years, while standing on a network of tribal and personal loyalties, successful social improvements and economic growth, but plagued by nepotism, corruption, theatrical declamation and foreign policy opportunism. Only the last four features are consistent with the uses of oligarchic democracies.

Those democracies did good business with Qaddafi, such as the sale of weapons. Those very weapons – as they say now at the Security Council – that Kadafi may use to suppress the revolt. There is talk about air strikes on the civilian population, reported by Al Jazeera, but not confirmed by images. Diplomatic sources in Libya, say that the news of Al-Jazeera are different in Arabic and in English. The Arabic version makes no mention of aerial attacks against civilians, perhaps because Libyans speak Arabic. Those who speak English have a fleet in Bahrain, very close to Qatar, where Al-Jazeera has its headquarters.

The Libyans should reflect on the experience of humanitarian liberation and democracy promotion efforts carried by the United States and its partners. The suffering, death and destruction in Iraq and Afghanistan makes old enemies to be reconciled with the memory of Saddam Hussein and the Taliban.

A Final Thought

The world may be convinced that there is a democratic change in Egypt when it ceases its complicity in the slow genocide in Gaza, it opens definitively the Rafah border and its foreign policy reflects the deep rooted Egyptian people fraternal solidarity with Palestinian people.

- Umberto Mazzei has a PhD in political science from the University of Florence. He has taught international economics at universities in Colombia, Venezuela and Guatemala. He is Director of the Institute of International Economic Relations in Geneva.

[1] New York Times. February 16, 2011: Secret Report Ordered by Obama Identified Potential Uprisings by Mark Lander

[2] Asian Tribune, 11/02/2011. Manufacturing Dissent: U.S. covertly fermented uprising in Egypt to protect its interest by Daya Gamash (Asiantrbune.com)

[3] San Francisco Chronicle, February 13 ; “Egypt’s military, an economic giant, now in charge” by Andrew Ross

[4] Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 23 February, 2011 : Egypt: How a Lack of Political Reform Undermined Economic Reform by Michele Dunne, Mara Revkin

[5]Bloomberg, 15 February, 2011. Egypt Generals Running Child Care Means Transition Profit Motive

ByCam Simpson and Mariam Fam

[6] The original phrase is Hosti non solum dandam esse viam ad fugiendum, sed etiam muniendam, by Scipion the African, victorious on Anibal at Zana, between Tunisia and Tripoli; Frontino, Strategemata, liber IV, De variis consiliis

[7] Silvio Berlusconi is the only leader who still prises him

https://www.alainet.org/en/articulo/148076