Elephant in the room: The loss of Mubarak = a loss for American hegemony in the Middle East n/t

[Turborama]

(edited to change "to" to "for")

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. I wish I could recommend this more than once

[Turborama]

17. As far as I'm concerned, you're recommendation far outweighs

any and all the unrecs this OP has received.

Thank you. :hi:

[whirlygigspin]

2. I call 'bullshit'

the 'loss' of Mubarrak or more importantly the democratization of Egypt would be good for the US of A; but maybe not so good for the war machine and it's oh so complient 'supporters' (read profiteers)

[Turborama]

3. Hegemony...

"but maybe not so good for the war machine and it's oh so complient 'supporters' (read profiteers)" and "Big Oil".

Maybe you need to retract the "bullshit" call, seeing as you just contradicted yourself.

[inna]

4. fuck American hegemony, period

[eridani]

11. That brings us to the old "whatchu mean, America kemosabe" question

Sure it would be great for us poor saps who just live here. Why can't we be "America"? what is usually ment is the interests of the corporate elite who call themselves "America." Getting rid of Mubarak wouldn't be so good for their interests.

[stranger81]

5. Absolutely. The last thing the US wants in Egypt is a democracy,

since any democracy in Egypt would substantially shift Egyptian policy towards Israel.

[gateley]

10. That IS something to consider. Regardless of one's opinion of Israel, if another

Muslim country "takes aim", so to speak - the world will pay.

Tough situation.

[Hannah Bell]

6. depends very much on the backstory.

[mmonk]

7. I think ElBaradei would deal with the US,

just not as a militarized puppet.

[Kalyke]

8. Enshallah!

[proud patriot]

9. I guess we can save the 1.3 billion in tax dollars we send them

annually to support their military.

[Turborama]

13. That is a big chunk of change

There needs to be a complete readjustment on the conditions of the development aid, too.

U.S. Aid to Egypt: The Current Situation and Future Prospects
Ahmad Al-Sayed El-Naggar
WEB COMMENTARY, JUNE 2009

=snip=

As for U.S. security and military aid to Egypt, which is about $1.3 billion annually, it does not aim to strengthen Egyptian military power against any external threat, as this would be contrary to the declared U.S. objective of ensuring Israeli security and maintaining Israeli military supremacy over its Arab neighbors, including Egypt. Instead, this aid is devoted mainly to strengthening the regime’s domestic security and its ability to confront popular movements. This hardly enhances USAID’s popularity among the Egyptian people or educated elites. The unflinching American support for Israel, and Washington’s failure to reach a comprehensive political settlement even on its own conditions of ensuring Israel’s security within the 1967 borders, make Egyptians and other neighboring Arabs skeptical of political settlements that lead nowhere. It also leads them to question the value of the limited U.S. aid tied to the peace treaty with Israel, which is used to improve America’s image in the media and cover up the U.S. bias toward Israel at the expense of Arab rights.

Finally, aid given to Egypt provides the United States with political, strategic, and sometimes economic benefits that far exceed the value of what Egypt has received. The conditions tied to U.S. aid ensure that much of the money returns to the United States, whether in the form of the imported American products, work contracts that go to American companies at less competitive prices than Egypt could have obtained had the bidding been open to international companies, or the salaries of USAID experts. Most important of all, this aid consolidated a gross imbalance in trade relations between Egypt and the U.S. During the 1983–2007 period, Egypt’s total accumulated trade deficit with the United States was $45.1 billion, according to the IMF Trade Statistics Trends Yearbook. This sum is far greater than the total size of American economic aid to Egypt to date. The Egyptian trade deficit with the United States is closely related to this assistance, making Egypt one of the few countries with which the United States has a trade surplus, counter to its overall trend of an $820.6 billion foreign trade deficit in 2008.

Ahmad El-Naggar is editor-in-chief of the Economic Strategy Trends Report published by the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.

Full article: http://carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=23282

(If anyone's got a more up to date review, I'd be really interested in reading it)

[sabrina 1]

16. Keeping 'lefties' under control!

Instead, this aid is devoted mainly to strengthening the regime’s domestic security and its ability to confront popular movements.

We're still fighting the cold war and the commies. And the world is moving on.

I can't think of any democracy that the U.S. has supported in Latin America, in Africa, in the ME. We always support dictatorships. And yes, we fund them so they can protect all of us :eyes: from any scary 'lefties' who might get the idea that their countries are sovereign nations and not satelites of the U.S. ready and willing to do their bidding, to make their countries safe for Big Business while impoverishing and if necessary, slaughtering their own people.

But times are changing and no one is buying the 'America supports democracy and people's rights' rhetoric anymore. The truth is we don't and everybody knows it, especially those who have suffered and are still suffering under the iron thumb of U.S. allies like Mubarak.

[gateley]

12. Good. Hope the "alliances" we have topple like dominos. I'm tired of us

trying to control the world.

[Catherina]

18. Me too. +1 n/t

[azul]

14. Is that the lost room?

Where the US hides its false democracy, where it kidnaps and tortures and murders, where the law is not evenly applied?

[Odin2005]

15. 2 words: Suez Canal.

[Catherina]

19. +1 n/t