To 'Reform,' Egypt Needs to Break Ties with the US
Published in Global Network
(China) on 16 August 2013
by Yang Ziyan (link to original)
When covering violence by Egypt's military, the Western media has clearly contradicted itself. According to one commentator, democracy in Egypt has failed; according to another, democracy is the path to a solution.
A question I have not understood for a long time is: What is democracy? One ridiculing observation: Shouldn't democracy all be the same? If so, then why do American democracy, Italian democracy and German democracy vary so much? Since there are different styles of Western democracy, what kind of democracy should Egypt implement?
U.S. Republican Senators McCain and Graham co-authored an article about Egypt, depicting a democratic road to a better future. If implementing new reforms, then they should be in the style of U.S. democracy. The U.S. is a “longtime [friend] of Egypt and its armed forces … and [has] consistently spoken up for the democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people.”
The U.S. has continuously thought that, through military aid, it holds control over the Egyptian military with a “thin thread.” During several weeks of diplomatic mediations, Obama was busy trying to create balance, urging the military to avoid violence and reinstate the democratic government, while simultaneously trying not to impair the future of the U.S. with the Egyptian military by preserving 30 years of important security cooperation.
As it stands, regarding the attack by the Egyptian police on the Muslim Brotherhood last Saturday, a high-ranking Egyptian military officer appeared indifferent to accusations by the U.S., increasing the difficulty of efforts by the Obama administration to achieve balance and democracy.
After the overthrow of Mubarak, in the areas of religious rule and military politics, the Egyptian people wanted to have the ability to have choices. However, the current situation is at a stalemate; the religious party does not recognize the military, and the military does not recognize the religious party. The crucial point in Egypt's "reformations" lies in severing its ties with the U.S.
Overthrowing Morsi was obviously a “coup d’état.” The U.S. denies this because this means that $1.5 billion of military aid has lost legitimate grounds for being spent. It also puts the U.S. into the disgraceful role of a meddler. How many times has the U.S. had a say in the affairs of other countries? When there was unrest in Pakistan, Thailand, Libya and other countries, the U.S. had a hand in the outcome by pulling strings behind the scenes.
The poor experience of democracy in Iraq implemented by the U.S. has revealed the value of democracy. This arrogant American concept cannot seriously respect the demands of the Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish people. The United States’ solution in Egypt does not take into account its military, secularists and Islamic ideals; it's just in the United States’ interest.
The Egyptian people, who have endured serious losses, have high hopes for the future. When getting the economy back on track, because of the importance of human rights and legal systems, the first thing to do is to address security issues. In the transition to a new government, a constitution must be drafted that can be believed in. A new election method needs to be planned which implements free and fair elections for the parliament and president.
However, to get out of turmoil and “reform” Egypt, the most important thing is for Egypt to find its own path. The practice of American democracy has obviously utterly failed. Now it is in the hands of the people to choose, but they shouldn't make the same kind of mistake of having too much dependence on the military and democracy.
A question I have not understood for a long time is: What is democracy? One ridiculing observation: Shouldn't democracy all be the same? If so, then why do American democracy, Italian democracy and German democracy vary so much? Since there are different styles of Western democracy, what kind of democracy should Egypt implement?
U.S. Republican Senators McCain and Graham co-authored an article about Egypt, depicting a democratic road to a better future. If implementing new reforms, then they should be in the style of U.S. democracy. The U.S. is a “longtime [friend] of Egypt and its armed forces … and [has] consistently spoken up for the democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people.”
The U.S. has continuously thought that, through military aid, it holds control over the Egyptian military with a “thin thread.” During several weeks of diplomatic mediations, Obama was busy trying to create balance, urging the military to avoid violence and reinstate the democratic government, while simultaneously trying not to impair the future of the U.S. with the Egyptian military by preserving 30 years of important security cooperation.
As it stands, regarding the attack by the Egyptian police on the Muslim Brotherhood last Saturday, a high-ranking Egyptian military officer appeared indifferent to accusations by the U.S., increasing the difficulty of efforts by the Obama administration to achieve balance and democracy.
After the overthrow of Mubarak, in the areas of religious rule and military politics, the Egyptian people wanted to have the ability to have choices. However, the current situation is at a stalemate; the religious party does not recognize the military, and the military does not recognize the religious party. The crucial point in Egypt's "reformations" lies in severing its ties with the U.S.
Overthrowing Morsi was obviously a “coup d’état.” The U.S. denies this because this means that $1.5 billion of military aid has lost legitimate grounds for being spent. It also puts the U.S. into the disgraceful role of a meddler. How many times has the U.S. had a say in the affairs of other countries? When there was unrest in Pakistan, Thailand, Libya and other countries, the U.S. had a hand in the outcome by pulling strings behind the scenes.
The poor experience of democracy in Iraq implemented by the U.S. has revealed the value of democracy. This arrogant American concept cannot seriously respect the demands of the Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish people. The United States’ solution in Egypt does not take into account its military, secularists and Islamic ideals; it's just in the United States’ interest.
The Egyptian people, who have endured serious losses, have high hopes for the future. When getting the economy back on track, because of the importance of human rights and legal systems, the first thing to do is to address security issues. In the transition to a new government, a constitution must be drafted that can be believed in. A new election method needs to be planned which implements free and fair elections for the parliament and president.
However, to get out of turmoil and “reform” Egypt, the most important thing is for Egypt to find its own path. The practice of American democracy has obviously utterly failed. Now it is in the hands of the people to choose, but they shouldn't make the same kind of mistake of having too much dependence on the military and democracy.
Next article![]( "Incongruous Mix")
