President Mubarak thirty years in power and in the service of neo
Egypt to the brink of bloodshed
by Thierry Meyssan *
The mainstream media are passionate Egyptian demonstrations and predict the arrival of Western democracy throughout the Middle East. Thierry Meyssan denies that interpretation, points to the existence of forces opposing the move and pointed out that the result goes in the opposite direction of the U.S. order in the region.
Yesterday, for example, about two million people marched through the streets of Cairo, the capital, to demand the immediate departure of the president, his newly appointed vice-president, General Suleiman and all those representing old state order in the service of Western colonialism.
------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------
February 3, 2011
From Beirut (Lebanon)
Tools
Send
Print Versions of this article: français
Inglés Italian Português
Countries
Egypt a week ago that the Western media are echoing the protests and repression in place in major Egyptian cities. These means establishing a parallel between these events and that led to the fall of Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, Tunisia, and speak with an air of rebellion that runs the Arab world. Also according to the media, this movement can be extended to Libya and Syria and should benefit the Democrats laity, not the Islamists, they say, because the Bush administration overestimated the influence of the religious and the "regime of the ayatollahs" that reigns in Iran is frowned upon. This was to fulfill the wish expressed by U.S. President Barack Obama at the University of Cairo: democracy reign in the Middle East.
This analysis is false in all its aspects.
First, the demonstrations in Egypt began months ago. The Western media ignored them because they felt they would come to nothing. The Tunisians were not infected with the Egyptians but their eyes were opened to the West about what is sucediente in the region.
Second, the Tunisians have rebelled against a government and administration corrupt gradually began to plunder the whole society, thus depriving of hope to a growing number of social categories. Egyptian rebellion is not directed against this form of exploitation but against a government and administration are so busy that serve foreign interests that they have no energy to meet the basic needs of its population.
Many riots have occurred in Egypt in recent years, either against collaboration with Zionism or manmade. These two issues are intimately linked. The protesters refer simultaneously to the Camp David Accords, the blockade on Gaza the rights of Egypt on the Nile waters, the division of Sudan, the housing crisis, unemployment, injustice and poverty.
addition, Tunisia was a dictatorship run by police, while Egypt is administered by a military regime. I say "managed", not "governed", because in both cases these are states that are a postcolonial wards, private foreign and defense policy independent. As a result, in Tunisia, the army managed to come between the people and police of the dictator, while in Egypt the issue will be resolved to blow between the military assault rifle.
Third , if what is happening in Tunisia and Egypt is a stimulus for the oppressed, the reality is that these people are not what they imagine the Western media. For journalists in the media, the "bad guys" are the governments that oppose, or seem to resist-Western policy. However, for the people, the tyrants are those who exploit and humiliate. That's why I do not think we will see similar riots in Damascus.
The government of Bashar el-Assad is the pride of the Syrians. It has sided with the resistance and has managed to preserve its national interests without ever yielding to pressure. The most important thing is that it has failed to protect their country of destination that Washington reserved: chaos, as in Iraq, or religious despotism, as in Saudi Arabia. Although certain aspects of his administration are widely criticized, is developing a bourgeois and democratic decision-making processes that accompany it. By contrast, states such as Jordan and Yemen are unstable with respect to the Arab world, and the contagion may spread also to black Africa, for example, Senegal.
Fourth, the Western media are belatedly discovering that the Islamic threat is nothing more than a scarecrow. They should also admit that those who were activated Clinton United States and France Mitterrand, during the 1990s in Algeria, and inflated the Bush administration after the attacks of 11 September, while European governments neocons Blair, Merkel and Sarkozy were engaged in feeding.
They should also recognize that nothing in common with Saudi Wahhabism and the Islamic Revolution of Ayatollah Khomeini. Rate trends both "Islamists" is simply not only absurd, but amounts to prohibited self-understanding of what is happening.
The Saud family has financed, in cooperation with the U.S., Muslim sectarian groups who preach a return to the image they have of society VII century, the era of the prophet Muhammad. But its impact in the Arab world is similar to the Amish, their horse-drawn carts in the United States.
The Khomeini revolution did not have as its objective the establishment of a perfect religious society, but the overthrow of the system of world domination. States that political action is to man a means of sacrifice and improve himself and is therefore possible to find in Islam the energy needed for change.
peoples of the Middle East does not aim to replace the police or military dictatorships that oppress religious dictatorships. There is no Islamic threat. Simultaneously, the revolutionary ideal Islamic, which resulted in the birth of Hezbollah within the Lebanese Shiite community, is now influencing Hamas in the Palestinian Sunni community. It may also be able to play a role in the movements that are already underway and is already doing in Egypt.
Fifth, although not to the liking of some observers, and although we are seeing a return of the social question that can not be reduced to a simple movement of class struggle. Of course, the ruling classes are afraid of popular revolutions, but things are much more complicated. So there is nothing surprising that King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has telephoned President Obama to ask him to stop the mess in Egypt and to protect established governments in the region, especially yours. But the same King Abdullah just promote regime change in Lebanon through democratic means. Left the Lebanese-Saudi billionaire Saad Hariri and helped the March 8 coalition, including Hezbollah, to put in place as prime minister to another Lebanese-Saudi billionaire Najib Mikati. Members who had chosen to Hariri representing 45% of the Lebanese electorate, while Mikati has just been elected by parliamentarians who represent 70% of the electorate.
Hariri responded to the interests of Paris and Washington, while Mikati announces a policy of supporting national resistance. The question of the struggle against the Zionist project is now extraordinarily crucial in relation to class interests. Moreover, rather than the distribution of wealth, demonstrators protesting against the capitalist system imposed by the Zionist pseudo-liberalism.
Sixth, and returning to the case of Egypt, the Western media rushed to help up to Mohamed El Baradei, naming him as the leader of the opposition. This is laughable. Mr El Baradei is a personality who enjoys a nice reputation in Europe for some time have resisted pressure from the [Bush] administration, without opposing it completely. Therefore represents a good conscience who claims to have Europe to Iraq after opposing the war, ended up supporting the occupation. However, objectively, ElBaradei is the man with the warm cloth which gave him the Nobel Peace Prize for not giving it to Hans Blix. It is, above all, a personality without influence in their own country. There is political because the Muslim Brotherhood made him their spokesman to the Western media.
U.S. has made opposition more representative, as Ayman Nur, who probably will soon Washington out of the hat, although their positions in favor of the disqualified pseudo-liberalism to economic the social crisis that is crossing the country.
as it may, in fact there are only two mass organizations established in the population, which has long opposed the current policy: the Muslim Brotherhood on the one hand and the Coptic Christian church on the other (although SB Chenudda III sees a difference between the Zionist policy of Mubarak, which he opposes, and Arafat, which he fits.) A Western media that detail escapes them because they have made the public believe it was the Muslims who persecuted the Copts, when in reality the dictatorship of Mubarak who does it.
useless not to digress at this point. Hosni Mubarak has named Vice President Omar Suleiman, a gesture that seeks to clearly make it harder to possible physical elimination by the United States.
Mubarak became president because he had been appointed vice president and the United States ousted President el-Sadat Annuar through the group of Ayman al-Zawahiri. So Mubarak always refused to appoint a vice president for fear of being killed in turn. By designating the general Suleiman, Mubarak now chooses one of his accomplices, whom he himself with his hands stained with the blood of el-Sadat. From now on, to seize power, not enough to kill the president but also will have to run your vice. But Omar Suleiman is the chief architect of collaboration with Israel and that Washington and London are going to protect you as the apple of his eye.
addition, Suleiman may be supported by the Israeli army against the White House. And brought Israeli snipers and equipment are ready to bring down the most active elements (leaders or leaders) for street demonstrations.
General-President Hosni Mubarak and Omar Suleiman general vice-president appeared on television with his generals, advisers to demonstrate that the military retain power. Seventh, the situation reveals the contradictions U.S. administration. In his speech at the University of Cairo, Barack Obama reached out to Muslims and called for democracy. But now he'll do anything to prevent democratic elections in Egypt. He can tolerate a legitimate government in Tunisia, but not in Egypt. Elections would benefit the Muslim Brotherhood and the Copts. Of them would a government that would open the border with Gaza and liberate the million people locked up there.
Palestinians, with support from its neighbors, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt, they will destroy the Zionist yoke.
should be noted here that during the past two years, Israeli strategists have discussed the possibility of orchestrating a move. Considering that Egypt is a social time bomb, that revolution is inevitable there, have studied the possibility of promoting a military coup in favor of an ambitious and incompetent official.
latter then undertake a war against Israel and would fail in it. Tel Aviv regain its former prestige and military and also recover the Mount Sinai and its natural resources. It is known that Washington firmly opposes such a scenario, too difficult to control.
In short, the Anglo-Saxon Empire remains stuck to the principles that he set in 1945, is in favor of democracies that make "the decision correct '(that of subservience) and is opposed to the people who make "bad" (the independence).
Therefore, if you think necessary, Washington and London have no qualms about supporting a bloodbath in Egypt, provided that the military won out over others is committed to maintaining the international status quo.
Video:
Egyptian police Mubarak regime behaves
criminal
share this
Thierry Meyssan
French political analyst. Founder and president of the Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace conference. Last work published in English: The Big Lie II. Manipulation and misinformation in the media (Monte Avila Editores, 2008).
The articles of this author
Send a message
0 comments:
Post a Comment