President George W. Bush likes to associate his administration's goals
with the will of the Almighty. Witness the stirring coda of the 2005
State of the Union address: "The road of Providence is uneven
and unpredictable yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom."
As in many previous speeches, Bush lingered on the way stations of
this divinely lit pathway in the "broader Middle East,"
the region stretching from Morocco to Afghanistan.
Everyone expected the president to trumpet the turnout in the January
30 Iraqi elections for a transitional national assembly, if only to
claim vindication of his unpopular regime-changing war. His thinly
veiled warnings to autocratic leaders in Syria and Iran, both classified
as "against us" in the war on terrorism, sounded themes
of long standing. But Bush also made explicit pledges to "encourage
a higher standard of freedom" in two close Middle Eastern allies
of the United States, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Will he defer to Providence
and demand expeditious reform in these two autocracies, when his predecessors
in the White House have assiduously turned the other cheek?
Careful listeners heard the answer in the speech itself. Bush predicted
that "the victory of freedom in Iraq" would "inspire
democratic reformers from Damascus to Tehran" -- the capitals
of Syria and Iran. In those states that are "against us,"
he expects that democratic change will come from the long-suffering
populations, perhaps with a helpful nudge from Washington. Saudi Arabia,
on the other hand, "can demonstrate its leadership in the region
by expanding the role of its people in determining their future. And
the great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace
in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle
East." In these allied undemocratic states, Bush trusts the regimes
to lead their benighted subjects on the road to redemption, just as
previous presidents have always done, and always in vain.
Exhibit A is the actual behavior of the Saudi and Egyptian regimes.
A few examples:
Saudi courts recently sentenced 15 people to flogging because they
had demonstrated in favor of an elected government to replace the
absolute rule of the monarchy.
In 2004, the royal family's police arrested 13 other citizens who
had merely circulated a petition calling for a constitutional monarchy
with a parliament.
In Egypt, just days before Bush addressed Congress, security forces
detained three activists who were distributing leaflets at a book
fair calling upon Husni Mubarak to relinquish his 24-year grip on
the presidency. Mubarak is running later this year in yet another
sham referendum where Egyptians can vote yes or no on his fifth term,
but will not be able to choose someone else. A prominent opposition
politician has been jailed, apparently just for backtracking on his
promise to vote yes.
Bush told Iranians chafing under oppressive clerical rule that "as
you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you." He
could not spare an encouraging word for pro-democracy activists in
Saudi Arabia and Egypt, though they are also paying a high price for
their stand. Nor did he shine a light into the dingy corners of Saudi
and Egyptian prisons, where torture is commonplace.
The reason for his silence is clear. He is content to watch these
regimes stumble on the cobblestones of the "uneven and unpredictable"
road to freedom, as long as they remain congenial to U.S. strategic
goals in the region. Their prisons, meanwhile, are convenient pit
stops for the CIA's "ghost detainees" in the war on terrorism.
If American interrogators cannot build a case against these prisoners,
maybe their less legally restrained Saudi Arabian and Egyptian friends
can.
It is easy, of course, to decry the gap between rhetoric and reality
in Bush's self-appointed mission to democratize the broader Middle
East. His administration is hardly unique in this respect. But the
ink-stained fingers waved by congressional Republicans at Bush's every
mention of the Iraqi elections pointed up in a dramatic way continued
U.S. hypocrisy as Middle Eastern allies roll back the very freedoms
the president says are spreading. As the Egyptians protesting Mubarak's
refusal to step down say, "Enough!"
--
Chris Toensing is editor of "Middle East Report," published
by the Middle East Research and Information Project.
MERIP
OP-EDS
A Country at a Crossroads The Austin-American Statesman (Austin, Texas) November 9, 2007
Kamran Asdar Ali
"A
very frank discussion"— so President Bush described
his Nov. 7 telephone
conversation with Pervez Musharraf, four days after the Pakistani
general
imposed a state of emergency and dissolved the high court expected
to rule
his continued presidency unconstitutional. And frank the discussion
probably
was: In the face of spirited protest in Pakistan, and a querulous
press in
Washington, back-channel pressure succeeded in persuading Musharraf
to
promise parliamentary elections. Yet the generous U.S. aid earmarked
for
Pakistan — on top of nearly $10 billion since 2001 — is
quite evidently not
at risk.
What may be at risk is Musharraf's tenure as head
of the military government. Full
story>>
The
war debate in Washington is bogged down. Partisan rancor is one
reason why, and bipartisan desire for US hegemony in the oil-rich
Persian Gulf is
another. But many Americans are vexed by a nobler concern: that
a
“precipitous” US departure from Iraq would leave intensified
civil war,
ethnic-sectarian cleansing and massive refugee flows in its wake.
This
concern is legitimate. Unfortunately, the sad fact is that Iraq’s
civil war
and humanitarian emergency have grown steadily worse as the US
military
deployment there wears on. Full
Story>>
Should
the United States, seeking to recalibrate the balance between
security and liberty in the "war on terror," emulate
Israel in its treatment of Palestinian detainees? That is the position
that Guantanamo detainee lawyers Avi Stadler and John Chandler
of Atlanta, and some others, have advocated. That people in U.S.
custody could be held incommunicado for years without charges,
and could be prosecuted or indefinitely detained on the basis of
confessions extracted with torture is worse than a national disgrace.
It is an assault on the foundations of the rule of law. Full
Story>>
There
is an oft-told Palestinian allegory about a family who complained
their house was small and cramped. In response, the father brought
the farm
animals inside -- the goat, the sheep and the chickens all crowded
into the
house. Then, one by one, he moved the animals back outside. By
the time the
last chicken left, the family felt such relief they never complained
of the
lack of elbow room again. Full
Story>>
