Taming America
Published in Al-Akhbar al-Khaleej
(U.A.E.) on 3 January 2012
by Abdul Zahra al-Rakabi (link to original)
(U.A.E.) on 3 January 2012
by Abdul Zahra al-Rakabi (link to original)
Translated from
by Nickolas Smith.
Edited by Gillian Palmer.
Observers and analysts of the Arab Spring are fearful of the U.S. position on these events, which at first glance seemed neutral because they affected two allied regimes in Tunisia and Egypt. Before handing Washington a fait accompli and turning away, however, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s statements about dealing and cooperating with the Islamists before the election are making them search for any American role hidden amid these events.
It seems that such a role is as evident as the head of a thread, particularly in Egypt and especially after the embassy in Cairo became one of the key players.
The fact is that America's role in the movement was not as gray as Hillary Clinton claimed when she said, "In some cases we are working in the gray areas of diplomacy, which may be interpreted by some as irrelevant."* Such a role, with the help of certain triggers, is working to determine the map or picture of the future of Egypt. This comes a decade after an analogous situation in Pakistan, and it explains why the Americans are betting on the Islamists. This bet is split into two parts: The first of these is to adapt and coexist with the Islamists, according to Clinton's remarks, in the areas of collaboration and cooperation. The other is to tame the Islamists to understand and accommodate American interests. This explains the visit by former presidential candidate and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry. Kerry visited the Muslim Brotherhood on his recent visit to Egypt, positioning himself as an American supporter of this group. This emphasizes once again that Washington is ready to deal with Egypt under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamists in general.
One result of these facts and dressage is that the Salafis are, naturally, promoting their position with the Zionist state. Salafi Nour Party leader [Yousri] Hammad said in a television** interview with "Israeli" Army Radio that Israel must respect the treaties signed with Egypt. He stressed that diplomatic relations with "Israel" depend mainly on the interests of Egypt and the Arab world. Along these lines, Hammad said that the party will respect the peace agreement signed with "Israel" in 1979, adding that [Salafis] are not opposed to the convention and that Egypt is committed to treaties signed by previous governments.
This Salafi position comes as a response to tame the U.S. It is also comes as a message to the Americans that if the Islamists gain power, they will continue to approach their relations with the Zionist state as the previous regime did. Perhaps this attitude is also prior approval of the American Foreign Assistance Act, which requires the secretary of state to testify before the appropriations committees in Congress to confirm that the Egyptian government will fulfill its commitments to the peace treaty between Egypt and "Israel."
U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson is working within this context to establish a starting point for Egypt's future in accordance with the experience in Pakistan. After the ambassador succeeded in the first phase of taming the Islamists, the Salafis naturally filled the position. Patterson did not come to this assigned task arbitrarily; she had been the American ambassador in Pakistan for several years. At the point that witnessed the events of Sept. 11 and then the invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan was at the time under the domination of religious forces and currents. Tension and confusion reigned; in light of this situation, having an army was important. This factor helped Patterson to tame these forces.
The other fulcrum of the American move is making the Islamists receptive, fully tame and understanding of American interests. This map is to be Egypt’s future, as it was with Pakistan — especially if they walk in the way that the American plan decrees, and if the forces of the uprising that actually sparked the revolution of Jan. 25 do not turn the table on this plan and its owners and insist that this is the correct path.
*Editor’s Note: This quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
**Editor's Note: The author may have been referring to Hammad’s telephone, rather than television, interview with Israeli Army Radio.
It seems that such a role is as evident as the head of a thread, particularly in Egypt and especially after the embassy in Cairo became one of the key players.
The fact is that America's role in the movement was not as gray as Hillary Clinton claimed when she said, "In some cases we are working in the gray areas of diplomacy, which may be interpreted by some as irrelevant."* Such a role, with the help of certain triggers, is working to determine the map or picture of the future of Egypt. This comes a decade after an analogous situation in Pakistan, and it explains why the Americans are betting on the Islamists. This bet is split into two parts: The first of these is to adapt and coexist with the Islamists, according to Clinton's remarks, in the areas of collaboration and cooperation. The other is to tame the Islamists to understand and accommodate American interests. This explains the visit by former presidential candidate and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry. Kerry visited the Muslim Brotherhood on his recent visit to Egypt, positioning himself as an American supporter of this group. This emphasizes once again that Washington is ready to deal with Egypt under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamists in general.
One result of these facts and dressage is that the Salafis are, naturally, promoting their position with the Zionist state. Salafi Nour Party leader [Yousri] Hammad said in a television** interview with "Israeli" Army Radio that Israel must respect the treaties signed with Egypt. He stressed that diplomatic relations with "Israel" depend mainly on the interests of Egypt and the Arab world. Along these lines, Hammad said that the party will respect the peace agreement signed with "Israel" in 1979, adding that [Salafis] are not opposed to the convention and that Egypt is committed to treaties signed by previous governments.
This Salafi position comes as a response to tame the U.S. It is also comes as a message to the Americans that if the Islamists gain power, they will continue to approach their relations with the Zionist state as the previous regime did. Perhaps this attitude is also prior approval of the American Foreign Assistance Act, which requires the secretary of state to testify before the appropriations committees in Congress to confirm that the Egyptian government will fulfill its commitments to the peace treaty between Egypt and "Israel."
U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson is working within this context to establish a starting point for Egypt's future in accordance with the experience in Pakistan. After the ambassador succeeded in the first phase of taming the Islamists, the Salafis naturally filled the position. Patterson did not come to this assigned task arbitrarily; she had been the American ambassador in Pakistan for several years. At the point that witnessed the events of Sept. 11 and then the invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan was at the time under the domination of religious forces and currents. Tension and confusion reigned; in light of this situation, having an army was important. This factor helped Patterson to tame these forces.
The other fulcrum of the American move is making the Islamists receptive, fully tame and understanding of American interests. This map is to be Egypt’s future, as it was with Pakistan — especially if they walk in the way that the American plan decrees, and if the forces of the uprising that actually sparked the revolution of Jan. 25 do not turn the table on this plan and its owners and insist that this is the correct path.
*Editor’s Note: This quotation, accurately translated, could not be verified.
**Editor's Note: The author may have been referring to Hammad’s telephone, rather than television, interview with Israeli Army Radio.