Egypt in Chaos Too, but Who Is America With?
Up until a few months ago, anyone who could decrypt the strategic interests of the United States would be able to analyze and understand big international events. It was not a foolproof method, but certainly solid and reasonable. The problem, in light of what has happened in Syria, Libya and most importantly in Turkey — and now in Egypt — is that American strategic priorities are no longer understandable. In Turkey, the U.S. has encouraged the protest and therefore the destabilization of Erdogan, an ally considered solid. The recent story in Egypt is emblematic: The U.S. has de facto encouraged the ousting of another faithful former ally in Mubarak and allowed the triumph of the Muslim Brotherhood, which happened in Tunisia.
The new model, as explained in this blog, seemed to be as follows: Yesterday’s “baddies,” fundamentalist Sunni Muslims ideologically close to the fanaticism of Osama bin Laden, become the “goodies” of today, with whom a new balance in the Middle East could be constructed. Following this logic, an alliance with Erdogan, who is Islamicizing Turkey, made sense.
But is America still with Erdogan now? That’s a mystery. And above all, in Cairo, is it with President Morsi or with the army which, as is well-known, has close ties with Washington and effectively allowed the triumph of the so-called “Arab Spring.” The army doesn’t get on with the Muslim Brotherhood and after having remained quiet for a year, now has the loudest voice; it is not known whether Washington is in agreement or not. More generally, what is Obama’s plan? What is his ambition? His priorities? Are fundamentalist Muslims now the “goodies”?
Sometimes there is the impression that no one is in command or that the driving force in Washington is incredibly distracted. Unless foreign policy is not so adulterated that the chaos is intended and therefore desired. And seeing what is happening in Syria, now in the grip of a civil war; in Libya, now in disarray; and in Tunisia, which is at the risk of exploding like Egypt, doubt is at least legitimate.
The new model, as explained in this blog, seemed to be as follows: Yesterday’s “baddies,” fundamentalist Sunni Muslims ideologically close to the fanaticism of Osama bin Laden, become the “goodies” of today, with whom a new balance in the Middle East could be constructed. Following this logic, an alliance with Erdogan, who is Islamicizing Turkey, made sense.
But is America still with Erdogan now? That’s a mystery. And above all, in Cairo, is it with President Morsi or with the army which, as is well-known, has close ties with Washington and effectively allowed the triumph of the so-called “Arab Spring.” The army doesn’t get on with the Muslim Brotherhood and after having remained quiet for a year, now has the loudest voice; it is not known whether Washington is in agreement or not. More generally, what is Obama’s plan? What is his ambition? His priorities? Are fundamentalist Muslims now the “goodies”?
Sometimes there is the impression that no one is in command or that the driving force in Washington is incredibly distracted. Unless foreign policy is not so adulterated that the chaos is intended and therefore desired. And seeing what is happening in Syria, now in the grip of a civil war; in Libya, now in disarray; and in Tunisia, which is at the risk of exploding like Egypt, doubt is at least legitimate.
Previous article![]( "They Want To Kill the Watchman and Take the Grapes. However …")
