CAIRO, (May 20, 2010) IPS/GIN – Egypt’s decision to extend its
oppressive Emergency Law for two more years drew a tepid response
from Washington, prompting criticism that U.S. administrations -
including that of President Barack Obama – only push for political
reform in Egypt when it suits their geostrategic interest.
“Obama has completely gone back on his promise to support democracy
in the Arab world,” Hafez Abu Saeda, secretary-general of the
Cairo-based Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, told IPS. “He
has obviously reached the conclusion that regional stability -
i.e., keeping dictatorial regimes in power – is more in the U.S.
interest than democracy.”
On May 11, Egypt’s parliament, which is dominated by the ruling
National Democratic Party of President Hosni Mubarak, approved a
two-year extension of the longstanding and unpopular Emergency Law.
The 30-year-old law, declared following the 1981 assassination of
then president Anwar Sadat, gives the state wide-ranging powers of
arrest and detention without charge.
The government has traditionally defended the law by appealing to
the need for “stability” and safeguarding “national security.”
Opposition figures and rights advocates, however, say the law has
been used primarily to stifle political dissent.
On the day the law was extended, U.S. secretary of state Hillary
Clinton hastened to express her disappointment, calling on Mubarak
to fulfil a 2005 electoral promise to replace the law with
anti-terrorism legislation.
“This extension is regrettable, given the pledge made by the
government to the Egyptian people in 2005,” Clinton stated. “A
broad range of Egyptian voices have called for the elimination of
the state of emergency.”
But despite Clinton’s ostensible regret, many local rights
activists and opposition spokespeople continue to question the
sincerity of Washington’s stated support for Egyptian political
reform.
“The West, namely the U.S. and European Union, is hardly a true
champion for freedom and democracy,” Ibrahim Eissa, prominent
political analyst and editor-in-chief of independent daily
‘Al-Dustour’, wrote in an Apr. 28 editorial. “It only wants
obedient Arab governments that will serve its interests.”
“As long as Mubarak remains a friend of western policy objectives
and plays good neighbor to Israel, the West will give its stamp of
approval to the regime and its blatantly rigged elections,” Eissa
added.
Abu Saeda agreed, noting that, in terms of democracy promotion and
human rights, the Obama administration compared unfavorably to the
previous administration of George W. Bush – despite the latter’s
overwhelming unpopularity in the Middle East.
“During Bush’s second term, the U.S. brought considerable pressure
to bear on Arab regimes for democratic reform, which led to
significant political movement in Egypt,” he said. “Obama promised
to maintain that pressure, but appears to have gone back on his
word.”
Abu Saeda went on to note that, shortly after assuming the
presidency, Obama reduced U.S. financial assistance earmarked for
democracy promotion in the Arab world by more than 200 million US
dollars. “Still, this isn’t as important as the U.S. moral support
previously given to Egyptian political reform that fired the
political activism seen in 2004 and 2005,” he said.
“In fact, since Obama became president, many Arab regimes have
stepped up their violations of democracy and citizens’ rights, in
the form of arbitrary arrests, military tribunals, emergency laws,
etc.,” Abu Saeda added. “All of which the administration in
Washington has either met with silence or with blasÇ statements
intended merely for domestic consumption.”
Hamdi Hassan, MP for the Muslim Brotherhood – Egypt’s largest
opposition movement – and official spokesman for the group’s
parliamentary bloc, says the Obama administration “doesn’t care
that the Egyptian regime is dictatorial, only that it conforms to
U.S. policy objectives.”
“After briefly supporting democratic reform in the region following
9/11, the U.S. realized that democracy in the Arab world was not
in its interest,” Hassan told IPS. “This is because the Arab
publics continue to overwhelmingly reject the Zionist entity – the
security of which trumps all other U.S. concerns.”
“As it stands, Obama couldn’t ask for a better regime than
Mubarak’s, which continues to sell out the Palestinian cause and
has even become a de facto enemy of resistance groups,” he added.
“For this reason, the U.S. will continue providing Egypt with
unprecedented political and economic support – no matter how
anti-democratic the regime is.”
According to Eissa, this self-interest – often in the guise of
“democratization” – is hardly confined to the West’s dealings with
Egypt.
“The U.S. and EU failed to condemn Sudan’s rigged elections last
month because [Sudanese President Omar] al-Bashir’s victory will
likely contribute to the secession of southern Sudan from the north
- a longstanding western objective,” he wrote. “Yet the West
roundly condemned [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad’s
electoral victory last year, heavily supporting opposition claims
that elections were rigged.”
“Nor did the West complain about Afghanistan’s rigged elections
last year, since [Afghan President Hamid] Karzai serves the
interests of the U.S. and its allies,” Eissa added. “The West also
supports [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud] Abbas – who
maintains the post illegitimately since his presidential term
expired in January – for the same reason.”
Hassan points out that Washington’s pretended support for Arab
democracy was most palpably belied by its reaction to the electoral
victories of Palestinian resistance movement Hamas in 2006
Palestinian legislative elections.
“When the Palestinian people chose Hamas, first Bush, then Obama,
refused to speak to the group – even though the elections had been
atypically transparent and democratic,” said Hassan. “Why? Because
Hamas refuses to yield to the Zionist occupation.”
Abu Saeda agrees that western double standards vis-Ö-vis democracy
often extend to the issue of “how Israel is treated.”
“Even though Hamas was elected democratically under the supervision
of [former U.S. president Jimmy] Carter, the U.S. and EU both
rejected the election results and continue to refuse to deal with
it,” he said.
“And look at the Goldstone Report [detailing war crimes committed
during Israel's 2008/09 'Cast Lead' assault on the Gaza Strip],”
added Abu Saeda. “Had those crimes been committed by an Arab
regime, the international community would have had its president
arrested and tried before an international court.”
Comments