26
02/11
US rift opens over handling of Egypt crisis
As the Obama administration has scrambled to respond to the unfolding drama in Egypt, political leaders and activists across the spectrum in Washington have split over how the US should handle the crisis.
On the right, Egypt has provoked sharp clashes, largely over whether by default the US should support democracy movements. Those who say it should are ranged against pragmatic advocates of US power more willing to back autocratic allies.
The debate on Egypt is also feeding into the early manoeuvring over the 2012 presidential poll, with the dozen or so potential Republican candidates struggling to find a position that appeals to a fractured base.
Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, two of the most prominent figures of the George W. Bush era, have offered scant support for a change of government over the certainties of Hosni Mubarak’s regime.
“Extremists, like the Muslim Brotherhood … are not there for democracy, they are not there for free political systems or free economic systems, and to the extent they have the opportunity to take over they will, and that is a dangerous thing,” Mr Rumsfeld said.
The most extreme warnings have been delivered by Glenn Beck, on Fox News, suggesting that the Egyptian upheaval could lead to the establishment of a Muslim caliphate stretching from Morocco to the Philippines.
William Kristol, a prominent conservative, called Mr Beck hysterical and said he was marginalising himself just as extreme right-wingers had done in the 1960s. Failure to support the protesters, he wrote in the Weekly Standard, was a “sign of short-sightedness uncharacteristic of conservatives and of excuse-making for thuggery unworthy of the American conservative tradition”.
John Bolton, who also served in the Bush administration, is dismissive of such views. “Political principles and moral principles come into conflict with each other in the real world,” he said.
Mr Bolton criticised the administration’s handling of the crisis and the shifts in its public position, but the Republican leadership in Congress has been loath to take on the president over the issue.
The conservative split reflects in part the fallout over the Iraq war, which left many with little taste for military campaigns abroad.
Another complication is Israel, which usually unites conservatives. Israel has long prided itself on being the Middle East’s only democracy but finds itself leery about democratic change on its borders.
Struggling to adjust to events in Cairo, the Obama administration has now come out against any rapid change of power and move to elections.
Hillary Clinton, secretary of state, has suggested Egypt would not be able to hold free and fair elections within 60 days, as mandated by the country’s constitution in the event of Mr Mubarak’s resignation.
Left unspoken, at least in public, is another US rationale for delay: the hope that a pause of several months will allow other opposition groups to develop and counter the advantage of the well-organised Muslim Brotherhood.
As a result, the US is now dependent on Omar Suleiman, the new vice-president who it hopes will organise the transition to free elections, even as it finds itself at loggerheads with him.
Robert Gibbs, the White House spokesman, condemned as “particularly unhelpful” comments by Mr Suleiman that Egypt was not yet ready for democracy and predicted continuing protests until Cairo negotiated with more opposition groups.
Democratic activists have quietly supported the administration’s efforts to guide Egypt towards polls.