Just as we were always told that killers such as Mao and Stalin were really “agrarian reformers” -= we are being fed the myth of a moderate, pragmatic Muslim Brotherhood. Somewhere in journalist hell, Walter Duranty is smiling.
by Caroline Glick
You have to hand it to the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. They know how to play power politics. They know how to acquire power. And they know how to use power.
Last Friday, the day before voters by most accounts elected the Brotherhood’s candidate Mohamed Morsy to serve as Egypt’s next president, The Wall Street Journal published a riveting account by Charles Levinson and Matt Bradley of how the Brotherhood outmaneuvered the secular revolutionaries to take control of the country’s political space.
The Brotherhood kept a very low profile in the mass demonstrations in Tahrir Square in January and February 2011 that led to the overthrow of then-president Hosni Mubarak. The Brotherhood’s absence from Tahrir Square at that time is what enabled Westerners to fall in love with the Egyptian revolution.
Those demonstrations led to the impression, widespread in the US, that Mubarak’s successors would be secular Facebook democrats. The role that Google’s young Egyptian executive Wael Gonim played in organizing the demonstrations was reported expansively.
His participation in the anti-regime protests – as well as his brief incarceration – was seen as proof that the next Egyptian regime would be indistinguishable from Generation X and Y Americans and Europeans.
In their report, Levinson and Bradley showed how the Brotherhood used the secularists to overthrow the regime, and to provide them with a fig leaf of moderation through March 2011, when the public voted on the sequencing of Egypt’s post-Mubarak transformation from a military dictatorship into a populist regime. The overwhelming majority of the public voted to first hold parliamentary elections and to empower the newly elected parliament to select members of the constitutional assembly that would write Egypt’s new constitution.
As Egypt’s largest social force, the Brotherhood knew it would win the majority of the seats in the new parliament. The March 2011 vote ensured its control over writing the new Egyptian constitution.
In July 2011, the Brotherhood decided to celebrate its domination of the new Egypt with a mass rally at Tahrir Square. Levinson and Bradley explained how in the lead-up to that event Egypt’s secular revolutionaries were completely outmaneuvered.
According to their account, the Brotherhood decided to call the demonstration “Shari’a Friday.” Failing to understand that the game was over, the secularists tried to regain what they thought was the unity of the anti-regime ranks from earlier in the year.
“Islamists and revolutionary leaders spent three days negotiating principles they could all support at the coming Friday demonstration in Cairo’s Tahrir Square. They reached an agreement and the revolution seemed back on track.”
One secularist leader, Rabab el-Mahdi, referred to the agreement as “The perfect moment. A huge achievement.” But then came the double cross.
“Hours before the demonstration, hard-line Salafi Islamists began adorning the square with black-andwhite flags of jihad and banners calling for the implementation of Islamic law. Ms. Mahdi made frantic calls to Brotherhood leaders, who told her there was little they could do.” Checkmate.
THE DIFFERENCE between the Brotherhood and the secularists is a fundamental one. The Brotherhood has always had a vision of the Egypt it wants to create. It has always used all the tools at its disposal to advance the goal of creating an Islamic state in Egypt.
For their part, the secularists have no ideological unity and so share no common vision of a future Egypt. They just oppose the repression of the military.
Opposing repression is not a political program. It is a political act. It can destroy. It cannot rule.
So when the question arose of how to transform the protests that caused the US to abandon Mubarak and sealed the fate of his regime into a new regime, the secularists had no answer. All they could do was keep protesting military repression.
The Brotherhood has been the most popular force in Egypt for decades. Its leaders recognized that to take over the country, all they needed was the power to participate in the elections and the authority to ensure that the election results mattered – that is, control over writing the constitution. And so, once the secularists fomented Mubarak’s overthrow, their goal was to ensure their ability to participate in the elections and to ensure that the parliament would control the constitution-writing process.
To achieve these goals, they were equally willing to collaborate with the secularists against the military and with the military against the secularists. To achieve their goals they were willing – as they did before Shari’a Friday last July – to negotiate in bad faith.
While instructive, the Journal’s article fell short because the reporters failed to recognize that the Brotherhood outmaneuvered the military junta in the same way that it outmaneuvered the secularists. The article starts with the premise that the military’s decision to stage an effective coup d’etat last week spelled an end to the Egyptian revolution and the country’s reversion to the military dictatorship that has ruled the state since the 1950s.
Levinson and Bradley claim, “Following the rulings by the high court this week [which canceled the results of the parliamentary elections and ensured continued military control over the country regardless of the results of the presidential elections], the Brotherhood’s strategy of cooperation with the military seems failed.”
But actually, that is not the case. By permitting the Brotherhood to participate in the elections for parliament and the presidency, the military signed the death warrant of its regime. The Brotherhood will rule Egypt. The only thing left to be determined is whether its takeover will happen quickly or slowly.
To understand why this is the case, it is important to notice what happened in Turkey. When the Islamist AKP party won the 2002 elections, the Turkish military was constitutionally authorized to control the country. As the guardians of Turkey’s secular state, Turkey’s military was constitutionally empowered to overthrow democratically elected governments.
Ten years later, Turkey is a populist, authoritarian, Islamic state. Half the general officer corps is in prison, held without charge or on trumped up charges. Turkey’s judiciary and civil service are controlled by Islamists. The AKP is filling the military’s officer corps with its loyalists.
When you know what you want, you use all the tools at your disposal to achieve your goals. When you don’t know what you want, no matter what tools you hold, you will fail to achieve your goals.
The Egyptian military today is far weaker than the Turkish military was in 2002. And it has already been outmaneuvered by the Brotherhood. The only way for it to secure its hold on power is through brute force. And the generals have already shown they are unwilling to use sufficient force to repress the Brotherhood.
[...]
THE INEVITABILITY of the Islamic takeover of Egypt means that the peace between Israel and Egypt is meaningless. Confrontation is coming. The only questions that remain are how long it will take and what form it will come in. If it happens slowly, it will be characterized by a gradual escalation of cross-border attacks from Sinai by Hamas and other jihadist groups. Hamas’s sudden eagerness to take responsibility for the mortar attacks against southern Israel as well as Monday morning’s murderous cross-border attack are signs of things to come.
[...]
However the Egyptian election results pan out, the die has been cast. We must prepare for what is coming.
Read the rest: The Brotherhood’s useful idiots
Tags: Caroline Glick
The bad guys always seem to excel at PR.
Speranza, Why are you bringing Mao and Stalin into this? Morsi is obviously not the ideal president, but he is not going to commit genocide. He’s renounced the Muslim Brotherhood, pledged to represent the entire Egyptian populace, and has promised to uphold the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement. That’s a pretty good start. Don’t you think?
@ MacDuff:
The Democrats sure do. The effects of their policies are almost the exact opposite of their stated goals, yet people still vote for them. It is unreal.
Mark Steyn weighs in.
@ theoutsider:
Tell that to the Coptic Christians in Egypt. Maybe not genocide. Just a little ethnic cleansing. It’s OK. They’re only Christians.
Iron Fist wrote:
The whole loyalty to the Democratic Party is bizarre.
@ theoutsider:
Obama made quite a few promises, too. They are looking for Western aid, and like the palis, they will have an evil wing they just cannot control without more cash and weapons..
Really, are we going to fall for that kind of shit again??.
I see no reason to trust their word.
Not a thin dime to Egypt until they show whose side they are on..
Speranza wrote:
It’s similar to “Battered Wife Syndrome”.
@ Iron Fist:
He wasn’t in charge then. The country was in anarchy. I’m not saying he’s going to be a great leader, but give him a chance. He’s saying the right things.
saying the right things
Did the Muslim Brotherhood ever withdraw the declaration of war against the US?? I do not recall seeing that story.
@ theoutsider:
@outsider:
How can you say this? It appears you are not paying attention. This entire “Arab Spring” is a hoax, and we all know it. For anyone to think this was going to end differently has not been paying attention. MB says they will not put up a presidential candidate, then they do, now they say they will be “democratic”………….please. Look at your history. Soviet Union assured that all the Eastern European countries they occupied would have “fair” elections. How did that turn out? This nonsense of “democratic” principles is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. Does the term taquia sound familiar. Just wait for it………..it’s coming.
@ smokefire:
Good to see you! Hope all is well.
@ theoutsider:
Can you name a single Islamist government that has proven to have been an improvement? Really, just examine the history of the last 35 years.
theoutsider wrote:
Really ?
Egypt’s Morsi to rethink Israel peace pact, build Iran ties
@ theoutsider:
What about the attacks on the Coptic Christians? Have you not read the Muslim Brotherhood Charter?
@ Guggi:
Are they going to build Iran ties after their pissing match in Syria?
@ quiet man:
I have to give credit to Allen West and Michele Bachmann. they both have broken with the GOP on the this and are speaking out on the Muslim Brotherhood.
@ theoutsider:
Oh and btw: even the WaPo says the so called “Arab Spring” is a mess and Obama has to take his hare of it:
Obama’s Arab Spring mess
This is all a 1979 Iran/Carter redux.
@ Guggi:
It’s not just Obama,. The Republican Party supports the Arab Spring as well. This is a bi-partisan failure in Washington.
Words that Israeli and US leaders should take to heart.
Unfortunately there are many in the US leadership that are all too happy to sacrifice Israel for momentary ephemeral favor from the moes. Many in Israel I think are either willfully blind, or must be playing the game as best they can given the world’s desire to assist muslims perpetrating the genocide of Jews so central in their evil faith.
My suggestion for Israel to remember the golden rule for dealing with a fanatical genocidal enemy, do unto others before they do unto you.
theoutsider wrote:
No, I don’t think it’s a “good start” and I’d like some link on his renouncing the Muslim Brotherhood.
A piece from Reuter’s, the headline of which reads “Egypt’s Islamist president gets to work”
“A good start”? The Middle East needs more secularism, they’re all full up on Islamism.
@ MacDuff:
This is the only silver lining. They are apt to go at each other like in Syria.
smokefire wrote:
It’s a disaster for the West and bad news for Israel. Anyone with a snippet of reason and rationality can see that.
@ MacDuff:
The Palestinians are thrilled. That means it is bad news for America. Remember, those evil fuckes danced in the streets on 9-11. I’ll never forgive that.
Copts will be fleeing as fast as they can get visas.
@ Rodan:Morsi @ Rodan:
Morsi renounced the Muslim Brotherhood. That is a good start. I’m not endorsing the guy. All I’m saying is, let’s see where goes. Right now, he seems more like Sadat than Khomeni. We should all be rooting for that. If he is a theocrat, Fuck him. I’m hopeful though.
@ Iron Fist:
The only good thing to come out of this is that Muzz are very apt to go at each other. I hope the Syrian war continues for a long time to come.
@ Rodan:
Not always. The uprising of 1982 in Hama/Syria was fully supported by Iran although the Hama MB was Sunni. Al-e Ahmed and Ali Shariati -- both Shia from Iran -- were their favorite writers.
Rodan wrote:
I agree, the best outcome would be for all the countries involved is the A-rabble Spring(TM
) to fully involve themselves in killing each other.
theoutsider wrote:
You live in another universe ?
@ Guggi:
That’s true. Hell there were tines Hizballah and al-Qaeda worked together like in Bosnia or the Khobar Towers attack in 96.
Right now they are duking it out in Syria and I hope that conflicts continues.
One underlying issue that can’t be overlooked regarding middle east politics -- tribalism. Here in the US we say “all politics are local”. In the ME, all politics are tribal at their core. Tribal affiliation was, and is a major component in Iraq, Libya and Syria. One of my favorite movies, Lawrence of Arabia, illustrated this perfectly. The hatred between the tribes was greater than their desire to come together and work for the greater good.
Somebody here thinks it’s my duty to take the big green garbage wagon up the hill…
theoutsider wrote:
He seems more like Hitler than either Sadat or Khomeini.
@ Guggi:lET’S@ Guggi:@ Guggi:
Let’s see, the guy hasn’t taken office yet. I’m an optimist.
@ huckfunn:
That’s why I love whats going on in Syria. Let them kill each other. The more they fight each other, the better it is for us.
theoutsider wrote:
It’s friggin’ hilarious that you’re making these arguments under a post called The Muslim Brotherhood’s useful idiots. Really, thanks for the chuckle!
@ Rodan:
Hitler, Really??? Evidence????
@ theoutsider:
Here you go.
There are way more stories of attacks on the Coptic Christians. But I bet you are OK with that.
You’re really naive about the Middle East. Look at Iraq, they get Democracy Chaldean Christians were cleansed. The Free Syrian Army is ethnically cleansing Christians in Syria.
That’s OK, its all for Democracy!
Rodan wrote:
Over there, there are only 2 ways things get done. My foot is on your neck or your foot is on my neck. Nothing in between. I remember the film footage of the Iraqi soldiers coming out of the desert to surrender during Desert Storm. They would grovel at the feet of our troops; trying to kiss their hand, etc… If the roles were reversed they would be abusing their captives without mercy.
@ Rodan:
I still don’t get the Hitler reference in regards to Morsi and Egypt. BTW, I was against the Iraq war from the beginning. Your guy Romney’s probable Secretary of State is Joe Lieberman. How do you feel about that?
@ theoutsider:
Child abusement (physically, psychologically and sexually)in Egypt is one of the highest in the world and women are beaten to death for not voting for Morsi. Nice, but I agrre; it’s more like Sadat who also was well known for beating his wife and his children frequently.
theoutsider wrote:
I don’t like Romney, I’m only voting for him against Obama because of domestic issues.. After the election I have made it clear, I will oppose Romney’s Pro-Muslim Brotherhood foreign policy.
As for Joe Libermann, fuck him too. He’s another Muslim Brotherhood lackey.
Your boy Obama and Romney are no different in this regard,.
You are arguing with the wrong Conservatives if you think I will defend Romney’s interventionist foreign policy.
@ huckfunn:
That’s why teh Serbs took no prisoners in Bosnia. The same with the Kateb (Lebanese Christian Phalangists) in the Lebanese civil war. They are vicious brute people who only respect death.
@ theoutsider:
I don’t believe that Mohammad Morsi renounced the Muslim
Brotherhood, at least I can’t find it.
That would be rather counter intuitive for the candidate
of the Muslim Brother hood renouncing the Muslim Brotherhood.
I believe that he renounced “violence” because he wants
American aid.
If you can find somewhere that Morsi renounces the MB, I
will stand corrected.
@ theoutsider:
That is the first I’ve heard that. Where do you get that from? Personally, I am hoping for Bolton for Sec. State. That seems more likely, as Bolton is part of Romney ‘s foreign policy team.
no good can come from the MB…they are long range thinkers and damned patient about it….they are a terrorist group with lipstick and anybody that trusts them is shortening their own rope….BO’s personal congratulatory phone call was an unbelievable gesture…prepare to start funding the MB with your own hard earned dollars….another example of the feds being wildly out of touch
heysoos wrote:
Couldn’t agree more and all the “revolutionaries” who have voted for Morsi will deeply regret it but then it will be to late.
@ Rodan</b@ Rodan:
So we agree. The Iraq and Libya wars w@ Iron Fist:
@ Iron Fist:
Lieberman is first on the list. He is an even more Wilsonian creep than that Bolton scumbag.
@ heysoos:
Yup. Only 2 People have spoken out about the Muslim Brotherhood. Allen West and Michele Bachmann. I know you don’t like Bachamnn, but she is right about the Muslim Brotherhood. The other politicians, crickets.
SCOTUS UPHOLDS PART OF AZ IMMIGRATION LAW.
@ huckfunn:
Can you do a thread and just publish it on the main part of the blog. I will move this post into special report.
@ Rodan:
I’m still evaluating the ruling. Now Fox is saying that most of the law was struck down.
@ Rodan:
They’re saying there will be no Obamacare ruling today.
@ theoutsider:
The Iraq war in retrospect was a mistake. Saddam was a scumabg, but he was a secular ruler. We established a Sharia state and an Iranian vassal state. Plus we turned a blind eye to the ethnic cleansing of Christians. I used to support it, but seeing how we did it, I would oppose it today.
Now if we did it differently, in other words go in smash the place and leave , then I could support that. But not the way we did it.
Libya was a mistake as well. We installed a Muslim Brotherhood regime.
I want nothing to do with the Mideast. Other than arm and support Israel, I want nothing to do with those people.
@ huckfunn:
Ok so just headline it.
theoutsider wrote:
Because it is my ******* thread and I can bring anyone in whom I want to. Unlike LGF, we are free here. The Muslim Brotherhood is murderous, they spawned Hamas.
The Court will not rule on ObamaCare today.
This is getting tedious.
The struck down parts & upheld parts of the Arizona
immigration law.
theoutsider wrote:
You are delusional.
@ huckfunn:
Oops, I should have read up yonder before posting.
@ Speranza:
The Muslim Brotherhood also pawned al-Qaeda and the Turkish AKP (Erdogan). They openly state their agenda is genocide.
@ Rodan:
I agree with everything you said. Thanks Rodan.
Rodan wrote:
Sorry, but no. Saddam had already implemented most parts of sharia law and physical punishments. And Christians payed the price for being in the pocket of Saddam although they hadn’t much a choice (like the Palestinians).
New SCOTUS thread upstairs.
RIX wrote:
No problemo. It’s moving pretty fast. New thread.
Jay Sukalow is on with Beck right now.
Section 2B odf the Arizona law is upheld. That is the provision to inquire about immigration ststus & hold for ICE.
The other sectins were knocked down as already covered by
federal law.
This really is a loss for Obama.
@ Guggi:
What was the alternative for the Christians? They had no choice since the alternative to Saddam was what we see now.
Iraq as it was implemented was a mistake and it only helped Iran.
@ theoutsider:
You just have to read up on the Muslim Brotherhood. They are evil.
RIX wrote:
A loss for Obama is a win-win for the American people.
New SCOTUS thread upstairs.
@ Guggi:
No Fucking way. Iraq was totally secular. Saddam was a tyrant, but he was a secular tyrant.
@ Rodan:
@ Rodan:
They may be. I just wish the best for Egypt.
theoutsider wrote:
Saddam, therefore, increasingly portrayed himself as a devout Muslim, in an effort to co-opt the conservative religious segments of society. Some elements of Sharia law were re-introduced, and the ritual phrase “Allahu Akbar” (“God is great”), in Saddam’s handwriting, was added to the national flag. Saddam also commissioned the production of a “Blood Qur’an”, written using 27 litres of his own blood, to thank God for saving him from various dangers and conspiracies
@ theoutsider: As other have said the end game is up in Egypt and has not been played out. Especially with a strong military.
The democratic revolutionaries in Tahir Square were naive. They have no staying power. What emerged is the military construct of Egypt and the MB social construct. Those are the only two powers. Morsi reads like Egypts version of obama to me. I don’t think Egypt has a strong enough secular educational system to hold up a non partisan government. It’s going to be either one or the other. Morsi saying that today he will by Egyptian first, MB second, does not mean in the next election cycle the message becomes reversed. If he can hold power like that, maybe. But who does he go to for help with power? The military?
@ theoutsider: Bathist.