Get Red Pepper's email newsletter. Enter your email address to receive our latest articles, updates and news.

×

Mubarak defiant

Phyllis Bennis on the situation in Egypt as Mubarak vows to remain in power.

February 10, 2011
7 min read


Phyllis Bennis is Red Pepper’s United Nations correspondent, and a fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies and the Transnational Institute in Amsterdam. Her books include Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Primer.


  share     tweet  

After deliberately raising the hopes of millions of Egyptians and millions more around the world, U.S.-backed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak defied the rising demand of the hundreds of thousands, the millions of protesters who have taken to Egypt’s streets, to announce he will remain in office.  Claiming he would not bow to “foreign pressure,” Mubarak, he said he had “laid down a vision….toexit the current crisis, and to realize the demands voiced by the youth and citizens….without violating the Constitution.”

With those words, he took up the mantle of protecting Egypt’s Constitution, an approach championed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from last weekend. Clinton had urged that Egypt’s political transition go slow because, she said, if Mubarak stepped down the Constitution required elections within 60 days – to early for free and fair elections.  What she ignored was the popular demand of the Egyptian opposition to scrap the current constitution, widely understood to be designed to keep the ruling party in power. Mubarak did describe a range of organizational and political processes he said would lead to amending the constitution, even listing specific articles that should be changed, but the constitutional committee he announced a few days ago is made up of Mubarak loyalists and is broadly distrusted.

Mubarak claimed he is “totally committed to fulfilling all the promises” he made earlier, but those promises, including a pledge he would not run again in September elections, are based on the assumption that he remains in power at least until then. He did refer to delegating some authority to his newly-appointed Vice-President Omar Suleiman, long known for his links with the CIA in coordinating Egypt’s interrogation-and-torture role in Washington’s extraordinary rendition program, but did not give up the power of the presidency.

The celebratory crowds in Tahrir Square – which had grown to monumental size over the last six or eight hours as people gathered in anticipation of a very different speech – as well as those in Alexandria and elsewhere across Egypt, reacted with fury.  There is little question that the rumors, which reached fever-pitch by the time Mubarak addressed the nation around 11:00 p.m. Egypt time, also stoked the anger when the hated president made clear, despite claiming his belief that the protesters’ demands were legitimate, that he would not leave Egyptian soil until he was “buried under it.”

The question now is what happens next. There is little doubt the protesters of Tahrir Square, those outside the Parliament building, the Canal workers in Suez, and the wide range of Egyptians who have joined the protests in the last few days, will continue their opposition. It is not clear what role the military will play.  Earlier reports indicated that the top military command was meeting without Mubarak – a sign, it was thought, that the military was recognizing Mubarak was no longer in command. Their communiqué spoke of supporting “the legitimate demands of the people,” as they have said before, and was one of the factors that sent tens of thousands of more people to Tahrir Square and its counterpart venues in Alexandria and elsewhere.  But that was all before.  The rumors proved false – the claims from military commanders that “everything you want will be realized,” claims from leaders of Mubarak’s party that he would hand over power to the vice-president, word from the prime minister that Mubarak might step down, all proved false.

In the U.S., CIA director Leon Panetta in a public hearing this morning said publicly that it was possible that Mubarak might step down – an admission unthinkable until today, and an indication of how far out of the loop White House and other administration officials are.  It is certainly possible that there had been an earlier agreement among the powerful players for Mubarak to indeed resign – and that he reneged at the last minute. But so far there is no way to know.

Up until Mubarak’s speech, today the military in Egypt were widely welcomed as partners of the popular opposition.  Statements from the military brass to protesters led to chants of the partnership between the people and the military, echoing across Tahrir Square. But the military brass has also made clear that it will not force or even urge Mubarak to resign – that it would violate their military mandate.  What we don’t know is where they will stand now – will they maintain their commitment to not fire against the people, if Mubarak orders them to put an end to the protests by any means necessary?

We also don’t know what the relationship is this moment between the Pentagon and the Egyptian military. While it seems clear the political echelon of the Obama administration is scrambling to figure out what is happening in Egypt, which of the players are up and which are down at any moment, and what the U.S. response should be, the military has a much longer, more consistent relationship with their Egyptian counterparts. Mubarak’s newly-anointed Vice-President Suleiman is the linchpin of that relationship, and it is likely that his longstanding Pentagon supporters, those who actually arranged to funnel the money, arrange the training of his officers, buy & transport the U.S.-made teargas, the B-16 bombers, the tanks, etc, so they may know the military’s intention more clearly.

Tomorrow, Friday, will be crucial.  Fridays have seen some of the biggest protests throughout this revolution, especially after Friday prayers when people headed to Tahrir Square and other protest venues from the mosques.  But today – with the numbers of protesters swelled by workers’ strikes, mobilizations of tens of thousands of lawyers and doctors, and hundreds of thousands of Egyptians across class, religious, gender, and geographic divides all pouring out into the streets, we are already seeing what the people will do tomorrow.

The key will be the response of the military.  And of course, their sponsors in the U.S. So far President Obama has not spoken after Mubarak’s speech. Before the speech, Obama said briefly that we are watching history in Egypt.  What will he and his administration – including his Pentagon – do now?  This is where the role of the U.S. remains key. Mubarak may claim he will not resign under outside pressure, but the reality is there has been little pressure so far – there have been requests.  The requests have been denied.

Now what?  Will we see police and/or soldiers once again shooting U.S.-made teargas canisters at the hundreds of thousands of women, children, men, families, filling Tahrir?  Expectations had been sky-high. Wael Ghonim, the Google exec whose emotional interview after his release by Mubarak loyalists a few days ago, tweeted “Mission accomplished. Thanks to all the brave young Egyptians.”  Those hopes have been dashed, their mission is not accomplished.  They will have to make the hard judgments and develop the complicated strategies for the struggle that lies ahead.

The decision for us is whether we will continue to allow our government to stand by, continuing to pay $1.5 billion of our tax money, to enable this dictatorship to continue. We need to make real President Obama’s earlier call, ironically also in Cairo, for an entirely new way of engaging with the Arab world.  That commitment will be evident here. Either we continue to enable dictatorship, or we begin the hard task of redefining all of U.S. policy across the region, from one based on U.S.-defined interests in oil, Israel and stability regardless of human rights and sovereignty, to one instead based on internationalism, equality, real democracy, dignity and human rights.

The decision how to continue their revolution rests with the Egyptian people. The decision for where our government stands rests with us.

Phyllis Bennis is a fellow of the Transnational Institute and Institute of Policy Studies.

Red Pepper is an independent, non-profit magazine that puts left politics and culture at the heart of its stories. We think publications should embrace the values of a movement that is unafraid to take a stand, radical yet not dogmatic, and focus on amplifying the voices of the people and activists that make up our movement. If you think so too, please support Red Pepper in continuing our work by becoming a subscriber today.
Why not try our new pay as you feel subscription? You decide how much to pay.

Phyllis Bennis is Red Pepper’s United Nations correspondent, and a fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies and the Transnational Institute in Amsterdam. Her books include Understanding the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Primer.


Labour’s NEC has started to empower party members – but we still have a mountain to climb
The crunch executive meeting ahead of Labour conference agreed some welcome changes, writes Michael Calderbank, but there is still much further to go

Working class theatre: Save Our Steel takes the stage
A new play inspired by Port Talbot’s ‘Save Our Steel’ campaign asks questions about the working class leaders of today. Adam Johannes talks to co-director Rhiannon White about the project, the people and the politics behind it

The dawn of commons politics
As supporters of the new 'commons politics' win office in a variety of European cities, Stacco Troncoso and Ann Marie Utratel chart where this movement came from – and where it may be going

A very social economist
Hilary Wainwright says the ideas of Robin Murray, who died in June, offer a practical alternative to neoliberalism

Art the Arms Fair: making art not war
Amy Corcoran on organising artistic resistance to the weapons dealers’ London showcase

Beware the automated landlord
Tenants of the automated landlord are effectively paying two rents: one in money, the other in information for data harvesting, writes Desiree Fields

Black Journalism Fund – Open Editorial Meeting
3-5pm Saturday 23rd September at The World Transformed in Brighton

Immigration detention: How the government is breaking its own rules
Detention is being used to punish ex-prisoners all over again, writes Annahita Moradi

A better way to regenerate a community
Gilbert Jassey describes a pioneering project that is bringing migrants and local people together to repopulate a village in rural Spain

Fast food workers stand up for themselves and #McStrike – we’re loving it!
McDonald's workers are striking for the first time ever in Britain, reports Michael Calderbank

Two years of broken promises: how the UK has failed refugees
Stefan Schmid investigates the ways Syrian refugees have been treated since the media spotlight faded

West Papua’s silent genocide
The brutal occupation of West Papua is under-reported - but UK and US corporations are profiting from the violence, write Eliza Egret and Tom Anderson

Activate, the new ‘Tory Momentum’, is 100% astroturf
The Conservatives’ effort at a grassroots youth movement is embarrassingly inept, writes Samantha Stevens

Peer-to-peer production and the partner state
Michel Bauwens and Vasilis Kostakis argue that we need to move to a commons-centric society – with a state fit for the digital age

Imagining a future free of oppression
Writer, artist and organiser Ama Josephine Budge says holding on to our imagination of tomorrow helps create a different understanding today

The ‘alt-right’ is an unstable coalition – with one thing holding it together
Mike Isaacson argues that efforts to define the alt-right are in danger of missing its central component: eugenics

Fighting for Peace: the battles that inspired generations of anti-war campaigners
Now the threat of nuclear war looms nearer again, we share the experience of eighty-year-old activist Ernest Rodker, whose work is displayed at The Imperial War Museum. With Jane Shallice and Jenny Nelson he discussed a recent history of the anti-war movement.

Put public purpose at the heart of government
Victoria Chick stresses the need to restore the public good to economic decision-making

Don’t let the world’s biggest arms fair turn 20
Eliza Egret talks to activists involved in almost two decades of protest against London’s DSEI arms show

The new municipalism is part of a proud radical history
Molly Conisbee reflects on the history of citizens taking collective control of local services

With the rise of Corbyn, is there still a place for the Green Party?
Former Green principal speaker Derek Wall says the party may struggle in the battle for votes, but can still be important in the battle of ideas

Fearless Cities: the new urban movements
A wave of new municipalist movements has been experimenting with how to take – and transform – power in cities large and small. Bertie Russell and Oscar Reyes report on the growing success of radical urban politics around the world

A musical fightback against school arts cuts
Elliot Clay on why his new musical turns the spotlight on the damage austerity has done to arts education, through the story of one school band's battle

Neoliberalism: the break-up tour
Sarah Woods and Andrew Simms ask why, given the trail of destruction it has left, we are still dancing to the neoliberal tune

Cat Smith MP: ‘Jeremy Corbyn has authenticity. You can’t fake that’
Cat Smith, shadow minister for voter engagement and youth affairs and one of the original parliamentary backers of Corbyn’s leadership, speaks to Ashish Ghadiali

To stop the BBC interviewing climate deniers, we need to make climate change less boring
To stop cranks like Lord Lawson getting airtime, we need to provoke more interesting debates around climate change than whether it's real or not, writes Leo Barasi

Tory Glastonbury? Money can’t buy you cultural relevance
Adam Peggs on why the left has more fun

Essay: After neoliberalism, what next?
There are economically-viable, socially-desirable alternatives to the failed neoliberal economic model, writes Jayati Ghosh

With the new nuclear ban treaty, it’s time to scrap Trident – and spend the money on our NHS
As a doctor, I want to see money spent on healthcare not warfare, writes David McCoy - Britain should join the growing international movement for disarmament

Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India
Inglorious Empire: What the British Did to India, by Shashi Tharoor, reviewed by Ian Sinclair