Obama Expresses ‘Worry’ for the Military Coup, but Doesn’t Condemn It
The armed forces offer assurances to the Pentagon that they will remain just long enough to ensure the transition.
Barack Obama stated this Wednesday, “We are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian armed forces to remove President Morsi and suspend the Egyptian constitution.” However, he doesn’t explicitly condemn the coup d’état, although he calls for a review — not discontinuation — of aid given to Egypt by the United States, which is essential for the country’s survival.
The American president asked the military to “move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process.” He equally stressed the need to “avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsi and his supporters.”
In a public statement made last night, Obama confirmed that the wish of his government is for a full democracy to exist in Egypt with regard to human rights and to a variety of beliefs and ideologies: “The United States does not support particular individuals or political parties, but we are committed to the democratic process and respect for the rule of law.”
The vagueness of the president’s words, which expressed unease over what is obviously the forced interruption of the democratic process but at the same time recognize the legitimacy of the military to lead the transition, is a reflection of the difficult position in which the crisis has left the U.S. administration: happy to be rid of an uncomfortable partner like Morsi but without alternatives or influence on the future.
The return of the armed forces to the forefront of Egyptian politics is not necessarily bad news for the United States. The Egyptian military is closely linked to its American colleagues, from whom it receives money, training and a constant exchange of information. Because of the closeness between both institutions, it is hard to believe that the Egyptian military has acted without having first received approval from the U.S. Department of Defense.
In fact, this Wednesday official sources quoted by the Associated Press (AP) reported that the Egyptian military offered assurances to Pentagon officials that they are not interested in running their country for a long time and that they will remain at the front only when necessary in order to organize the transition to a new democratically elected president.
According to sources, in the last hours, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey have been in contact with the Egyptian military leaders who have apparently kept them abreast of their movements and intentions.
At the same time, the removal of Mohamed Morsi means a true relief for the American government, which had never come to understand or come to terms with a leader of Islamic militancy training whose intentions and plans, particularly in foreign policy, were not exactly in Washington’s taste.
However, the disruption of the democratic process in Cairo is also a certain setback for Obama, to the extent that he hasn't been capable of supporting it or of finding an ideal ally for the United States on his way. Without ever having come to establish a relationship of trust with Morsi, the White House doesn't have a clear choice between the opposition now.
As Obama said, the United States tries not to speak openly in favor of either side fighting for power in Egypt — one of its main allies in the Middle East — and tries to handle the situation in a way that it remains above the pressure margin of the parties involved, which is currently getting bad.
The deterioration of the Egyptian crisis has taken the American administration by surprise — like it did two years ago with the popular uprising that ended Hosni Mubarak — confirming its loss of influence in a country that it once controlled comfortably. All that Washington can do now is try not to make the situation overflow even more, avoid a bloodbath and achieve true stabilization, however precarious it may be.
One way to achieve this would be trying to act as arbitrator in a crisis, which really doesn't seem like a role others can fill. Keeping ties with the military, maybe the U.S. still has some room to come to an agreement, which right now seems difficult.
The stabilization of Egypt, the country with the largest army and population in the Arab world, is not only important for the U.S. itself but also because of the huge influence Egypt has in the Middle East. Therefore, it is the solution to other crises of the region, like the civil war in Syria or the resumption of communication between Palestinians and Israelis.
Barack Obama stated this Wednesday, “We are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian armed forces to remove President Morsi and suspend the Egyptian constitution.” However, he doesn’t explicitly condemn the coup d’état, although he calls for a review — not discontinuation — of aid given to Egypt by the United States, which is essential for the country’s survival.
The American president asked the military to “move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process.” He equally stressed the need to “avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsi and his supporters.”
In a public statement made last night, Obama confirmed that the wish of his government is for a full democracy to exist in Egypt with regard to human rights and to a variety of beliefs and ideologies: “The United States does not support particular individuals or political parties, but we are committed to the democratic process and respect for the rule of law.”
The vagueness of the president’s words, which expressed unease over what is obviously the forced interruption of the democratic process but at the same time recognize the legitimacy of the military to lead the transition, is a reflection of the difficult position in which the crisis has left the U.S. administration: happy to be rid of an uncomfortable partner like Morsi but without alternatives or influence on the future.
The return of the armed forces to the forefront of Egyptian politics is not necessarily bad news for the United States. The Egyptian military is closely linked to its American colleagues, from whom it receives money, training and a constant exchange of information. Because of the closeness between both institutions, it is hard to believe that the Egyptian military has acted without having first received approval from the U.S. Department of Defense.
In fact, this Wednesday official sources quoted by the Associated Press (AP) reported that the Egyptian military offered assurances to Pentagon officials that they are not interested in running their country for a long time and that they will remain at the front only when necessary in order to organize the transition to a new democratically elected president.
According to sources, in the last hours, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey have been in contact with the Egyptian military leaders who have apparently kept them abreast of their movements and intentions.
At the same time, the removal of Mohamed Morsi means a true relief for the American government, which had never come to understand or come to terms with a leader of Islamic militancy training whose intentions and plans, particularly in foreign policy, were not exactly in Washington’s taste.
However, the disruption of the democratic process in Cairo is also a certain setback for Obama, to the extent that he hasn't been capable of supporting it or of finding an ideal ally for the United States on his way. Without ever having come to establish a relationship of trust with Morsi, the White House doesn't have a clear choice between the opposition now.
As Obama said, the United States tries not to speak openly in favor of either side fighting for power in Egypt — one of its main allies in the Middle East — and tries to handle the situation in a way that it remains above the pressure margin of the parties involved, which is currently getting bad.
The deterioration of the Egyptian crisis has taken the American administration by surprise — like it did two years ago with the popular uprising that ended Hosni Mubarak — confirming its loss of influence in a country that it once controlled comfortably. All that Washington can do now is try not to make the situation overflow even more, avoid a bloodbath and achieve true stabilization, however precarious it may be.
One way to achieve this would be trying to act as arbitrator in a crisis, which really doesn't seem like a role others can fill. Keeping ties with the military, maybe the U.S. still has some room to come to an agreement, which right now seems difficult.
The stabilization of Egypt, the country with the largest army and population in the Arab world, is not only important for the U.S. itself but also because of the huge influence Egypt has in the Middle East. Therefore, it is the solution to other crises of the region, like the civil war in Syria or the resumption of communication between Palestinians and Israelis.