Contemplating Egypt at the Herzliya Conference
The organizers of this week’s Eleventh Annual Herzliya Conference on Israel’s national security and Middle East affairs — like intelligence agencies and political analysts around the world — did not foresee the tumult that broke out in January in Tunisia, quickly spread to Egypt, and last night received momentous if ambiguous expression in Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s announcement that he would transfer power to Vice President Omar Suleiman. But the conference framework — a daily mix of small, focused roundtables, plenary session panel discussions, and keynote addresses that left ample opportunity for good old-fashioned schmoozing — proved flexible. It easily accommodated conference attendees’ keen and anxious interest in the convulsions shaking Egypt.
Israeli security experts — and more than a few ordinary citizens — are by and large pessimistic. They see in the uprisings in Tunisia, regime change in Egypt, and stirrings of unrest in Jordan and elsewhere in the Middle East not only the hunger for freedom and equality but also the rise of anti-Western forces, the unleashing of religious extremism, and a reminder of the disadvantages of democracy where its foundations have not been securely laid. And they fear that the consistently inconsistent messages sent by the Obama administration reflect further evidence of the decline of American influence and power.
America has indeed wavered. At first, the Obama administration expressed support for Mubarak. On January 27, two days after the first demonstrations in Cairo, Vice President Biden insisted in an exclusive TV interview on PBS’s NewsHour that Egypt’s president was an American ally, he should not step down, and he should not be referred to as a dictator. Over the last two weeks, the Obama administration has erratically revised its assessment. In an emerging alliance with some neoconservative supporters of President Bush’s freedom agenda, the administration has swung its support to the opposition, demanded that Mubarak leave office promptly, and optimistically called for substantial democratic reforms.
Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s track record in the Middle East does not inspire confidence. To be sure, the consensus at the Herzliya Conference was that a new round of American-led sanctions, now nine months old, have slowed down Iranian development of nuclear weapons. But members of the Israeli military intelligence establishment stressed that at this late stage sanctions could at best delay, not prevent, their acquisition. And the stage is late in part because before imposing new sanctions the Obama administration squandered nearly 15 months on fruitless engagement with Tehran.
Obama administration engagement with Syria, moreover, has yielded results as barren as those produced by engagement with Syrian patron Iran. And the Obama administration has no discernible plan for dealing with the collapse of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, the rise of Islam in Turkey, and last month’s brazen power-grab by Hezbollah in Lebanon. These ominous events reinforce the perception in the region that the administration is in over its head.
At the same time, the cascade of setbacks suffered by American policy along with the formidable challenge presented by rapidly changing circumstances in Egypt provide an opportunity for the administration to reconsider basic elements of America’s Middle East policy. They also underscore the urgency of such a reconsideration.
That reconsideration should begin with the progressive interpretation of Middle East politics to which President Obama seems to subscribe. In his first two years in office, two mistaken beliefs characteristic of the progressive view have been on conspicuous display.
The first is that the primary source of instability in the Middle East is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The belief was encapsulated in remarkable fashion by General James Jones, the recently departed Obama national security adviser, who delivered a keynote address at the Herzliya Conference. Speaking to reporters after his address, he declared:
I’m of the belief that had God appeared in front of President Obama in 2009 and said if he could do one thing on the face of the planet, and one thing only, to make the world a better place and give people more hope and opportunity for the future, I would venture that it would have something to do with finding the two-state solution to the Middle East.
You state:
“Israeli security experts — and more than a few ordinary citizens — are by and large pessimistic.”
Well, that maybe, but certainly not Barack Hussein O’Bama, aka Barry Soetoro.
The chances of Egypt going to war with Israel is almost non-existant. The Egyptian army are US allies. However, Egypt will have the opportunity of punishing Israel by closing of gas-exports. This means that a war in Lebanon will be much more costly. It means that Israel must adapt its policies to a new reality. And it certainly means a palestinian state within the next few years.
This is reality, not a science fiction movie in Glen Becks nightmare paralel universe.
When you look at the numbers of those that support the Moslem Brutha Hoods, its not hard to see why the israelis are pessimistic. After all, didnt the Palestinians, given an opportunity at free elections, elected HAMAS? The same will likely happen to Egypt. Dont forget, this country had Gamel Nassar for a quarter of a century before Anwar Sadat changed the course of the country in the late 70s-and got MURDERED by the moslem brotha hoods for it. There is no such animal as a moderate moslem.
The article is substantially correct, but for one thing.
From the article:
“That policy will place an emphasis not on elections, which easily produce illiberal results, but on improving education, expanding rights, enlarging opportunity, and enhancing the rule of law. With a view to Egypt and beyond, reasonable pessimists and reasonable optimists at the Herzliya Conference agreed on one crucial point: if you want democracy in the long run, you must focus in the short and intermediate term on the moral and cultural preconditions of freedom.”
De-Islamization is the primary moral and cultural precondition of freedom in the Third World, much as de-Nazification was the primary moral and cultural precondition of freedom in Europe over half a century ago.
As long as a substantial part of the voting population adheres to Islam, then by definition they believe that liberty, as we know it, is wrong. Sooner or later, they will use “democracy” as a tool to vote in a totalitarian system under shari’a law.
The question now is “was it worth the cost to give up the Sinai for peace?” The specter of a onehundredthirty mile long front line with Egypt is now looming with an enemy as intractable as Hamas or Hezbollah. If and when the Moslem Brotherhood takes Egypt over, it must be considered an act of war. If the Brotherhood is allowed to remilitarize the Sinai, it will put the most modern equiped army (next to Israel’s) right on their border. Egypt has hundreds of Abrams battle tanks, a good supply of older M60s (which are also capable tanks) and a good supply of APCs. Its Airforce has 300 F16s plus various other aircraft which makes it on par with Israel’s. Not since 1967, has the prospect of such a superior force been on Israel’s border. Half of Egypts people are under age thirty, they can’t remember the defeats of 67 or 73. They have been fed a steady diet of hate by the Egyptian media and the Brotherhood. They want war with Israel. Its not a pretty picture.
Obama to the Democrats in Congress – “The difference this time? You’ve got me!”
G-D to the Jews; “It’ll be the same as last time. You’ve got me”
Israel should immobilize Syria immediately then neutralize Lebanon, Gaza and the west bank and prepare for a radicalized Egypt?
this is exactly what Israel should do. I don’t understand the question-mark at the end of your sentence.
Everyone clapped and cheered when we invaded Iraq…demanding Democracy and ” Regime Change”. The same people are running like frightened rabbits today, terrified what they have brought upon themselves.
There was a Reason President H. Bush did not invade Iraq and stopped at the border in 1992, it is dangerous to trigger national fervor and movements if you don’t know where it will lead. The Invasion of Iraq in 2003 had nothing to do with 9/11, the war on terror, or any other political reason.
The Iraq invasion is the first domino, the last domino is Saudi Arabia and collapse of the US dollar, as Saudi reserves are what back USA Petro Dollar System. Estimate about 4-5 years for the House of Saud to Fall, and with it the US Dollar.
The worlds economic powers already see writing on the wall, and why the German Bourse is buying the NYSE…America is being sold Piecemeal to avoid complete collapse of the American economy. America could not manage our own finances, so it will be managed for us.
It takes years-decades-centuries for geopolitical movements to play out, we are just now going to feel effects what USA and Britain Have been doing in the Middle east for the last century.
It was a grand ride.
We are amazed at the fact Eqypt/government fell so quickly..
IT was like setting a tissue on fire…poof!
I’m waiting for the “twinkling of an eye” when they all disappear..what a feaking mess over there. AND OBama is doing it to us…well, he’s not the first , just the most blatant
Not to put a too fine point on it, Israeli experts relied too much on Ben Eliezer, the so called expert on all things Egyptian.
Blinded by his hopeful delusions as to what was really happening in Egypt, chiefly thinking by doing so he could prop up Mubarak(the least bad alternative of MANY bad actors, especially the Muslim Brothers)he saw no Islamic unrest, nor heard any of their underpinnings.
Moreover, it is inconceivable that Israeli experts did NOT see the leftist boots on the ground laying the groundwork.Obama, with six degrees of separation from the protests, sent in his cadre of community organizers to uproot the regime. Those who believe this to be hyperbole have not been paying attention.
Moreover, whatever happens in Egypt will resonate in Europe, trickling down to the revolution that the left is pining/hoping/agitating for in the US.
What use is an Egyptian army without spare parts and a method to replace destroyed vehicles and jets?
As it is presently constituted, the Egyptian army is no threat to Israel, none. They would have to rebuild their entire military from the ground up and at what cost to the economy? And who will sell them these tanks and planes and guarantee a steady supply to replace losses in the midst of a war like the Soviets did in ’73?
Who is going to forgive debt as was done when Mubarak helped the West with Iraq and what will the International Monetary Fund do to help a radicalized Egypt? Who is going to tell us that foreign investments will continue to stream in or tourists?
Do you really think the international community will stand by and let a MusBros. gov’t hijack the Suez Canal? Egypt can’t even close the Straights of Tiran without going to war. How is Egypt going to rebuild an army: by selling gas to Israel and cotton? How about selling gas to Jordan which itself need outside subsidies to survive? How is Egypt going to successfully back up its decades long threat to wage war on any polity south of them that diverts flow from the Nile? The Nile is Egypt’s Achilles Heel and Egypt is well aware of Israeli friendships in the south of the Sudan.
Intent separated out from the means to carry out that intent we call wishful thinking and we don’t even know that such wishful thinking to actually do anything against Israel, or assert the political “will of Allah” or pan-Arab nationalism beyond rhetoric even exists in Egypt.
Egypt is effectively shackled when it comes to war as the only people who have and would be able to continue to enable their military are the very people we in America are saying Egypt might now turn against – us. Without “us”, there is either no weapons or no money as one cannot generate outside money by selling products from agricultural land when Egypt is already a net importer of food and one cannot sell sand or rent out the Pyramids to Arizona.
The greatest threat to the West from Islam in my view is immigration. It ensures that the people who appreciate economic and intellectual freedoms, which are those with some money but no power, leave police states rather than rebuild them and that those with nothing, no education, who somehow get to the West either will not or cannot assimilate as they simply cannot compete in the work force.
The greatest threat to Islam is Facebook not only in terms of its danger to dictators but because it exposes muslims to a greater world that thinks more of having a good life, loving, going to the beach, excelling at work, having obtuse hobbies and a zillion other things, than blowing anyone up.
Even as we speak Islam is being transformed by its teeming youth from a backward looking to a forward looking zeitgeist as the West has been for centuries now and this is dependent on opportunity to express one’s life as a person who is economically and intellectually free.
No one knows to what extent this heady taste of freedom will be expressed through religion but history shows that religion is not conducive to progress or success; one or the other will have to be ditched.
Turn off immigration and leave on Facebook and Islam is at once isolated and subverted from within. U.S. foreign policy should be squarely aimed at our own immigration bureaucracy that gives a constant fresh supply of zealots who create organizations within the U.S. with entirely shady purposes; just turn off the tap.
This is not 1900 and the new immigrants are not like the old and so thinking about this must change rather than continuing a blithe faith in a peaceful Islam that is nowhere in evidence in reality. Emigrating into the U.S. should not be looked at as a right but a privilege and those who arrive and start agitating for change, hiding behind our own Constitution, should be deported.
I have read many times that Egypt has the biggest and most powerful military in the Arab Middle East; all weapons and planes supplied by the USA. The present US administration will be delighted to provide all parts and whatever is needed.
To attack Israel?
Egypt makes its own Abrams tanks through license granted. It can simply resupply itself.
ALL HAIL THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC ON THE NILE
On the 32nd anniversary of the Iranian Revolution, one of the most deadly and terrifying in history, Hosni Mubarak went the way of Iran’s tragic Shah as Egypt begins it’s transformation into the Islamic Republic on the Nile. The only walls crumbling are those that divide Mosque and State as a new and more horrible tyranny takes shape arising from a people who hate America, the West and Israel’s Jews and want Sharia law to guide their fate. The Gazaization of Egypt is now underway as the Brotherhood of Evil works its way into power joining with Hamas, Hezbollah and fascist Iran in an alliance of unholy terror.
“Israeli security experts — and more than a few ordinary citizens — are by and large pessimistic. They see in the uprisings in Tunisia, regime change in Egypt, and stirrings of unrest in Jordan and elsewhere in the Middle East not only the hunger for freedom and equality but also the rise of anti-Western forces, the unleashing of religious extremism, and a reminder of the disadvantages of democracy where its foundations have not been securely laid. And they fear that the consistently inconsistent messages sent by the Obama administration reflect further evidence of the decline of American influence and power.”
I totally, totally, agree with that assessment. We have just traded a dictator in Egypt for a military coup. And that’s a good thing? United States influence has fallen A LOT over the past few years. But it is just stunning how quickly Obama threw Mubarak under the bus. I’m sure a lot of other leaders in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, and a few other places are wondering about the “loyalty” of our American president to their regimes. Sure, Obama supports “the people,” but he never quite tells you who or what is going to replace these dictators or monarchs. It could certainly be worse than what we had, as in the case of Iran. Sure, the army is better than having an Islamist takeover in Egypt, but who says we’re not going to end up with an army general in power who is an ardent nationalist, like Nasser, and who hates Israel and the west? Given Egypt’s political and social past, I’m not too optimistic about what’s coming down the road in that country.
It is frightening that Israeli leaders always appear to take the short-term view when it comes to Israel’s survival. The peace agreement Israel made with Egypt was with one leader, Sadat. Israeli leaders did not have the common sense to know things could change drastically with a change in Egypt’s government??? How insane and scary!
Know your enemy! In Islam, peace agreements are made and kept only until such time Islamics become strong enough to attack and conquer a hated infidel nation. A peace agreement is merely a CEASE FIRE! Mohammad was the role model.
Israel gave away the strategic Sinai, the oil wells Israel developed; and beautiful Sharm el-Sheikh – all for a worthless piece of paper – a so-called peace agreement.
Israel NEVER surrender to global jihad. No Muslim terror state in Israel!
“Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s track record in the Middle East does not inspire confidence”
This is the heart of the matter.
It took 6 grueling years in Iraq to implement a form of republic government, with the mightiest army ever assembled to marshall the Iraqis to a decent spot. And that ain’t over yet, by a long shot.
So somebody needs to explain to me how Egypt, the birthplace of radical Islam, with no experience with democracy, with a 14 century anti-democratic tradition, with about 75 million starving people pre-disoposed to authoritarian theocratic government, is going to come out of this with a stable democratic republic. If their army retains the authoritarian regime for another couple of decades, gradually putting in place the cornerstones of representative government, maybe; not likely, but maybe. Without that, thinking that the outcome within a couple of years will be anything but a theocracy is fanciful.
There is only one good lesson in this: trading land for peace guarantees nothing! Israel must not return one more square foot of land and diminish its strategic positions.
Herzeliya Conf is a left-wing extended talk-show. No one takes it seriously. Gen Jones is an anti-Semite. Nu?
What is overlooked is the reality that Eygpt ASSEMBLES M1 Abrams tanks domestically. Does anyone realistically think Eygpt has the industrial capacity to manufacture the gas turbine engines or the complex fire control systems?
Then there is reality. In the past the Eygptians proved incapable of maintaining simple Soviet weapon systems under the pressure of war. Soviet technology by their own declaration…”designed by genius to be operated by idiots”.
Another key thing overlooked is the pivital demilitarization of the Sinai. Begin and Sadat anticipated this. This demilitarized Sinai is defense in depth. Any advacing Eygptian formations face a long overland march, exposed to air reconisance and air attack. An Eygptian mobilization has little chance of reaching the Israeli frontier.
Iran is working to built nuclear weapons and meanwhile it’s oil production is declinning because they lack the expertise to develop new reserves and lack the refining capacity to supply their own gasoline.
In the words of Mao…..paper tigers…..