Text Fwd: International Day of Solidarity Action - KCTU protest in front of Egyptial Embassy

Korean Confederation of Trade Unions
Newsletter
February 8, 2011
International Day of Solidarity Action

“Egyptian People’s Struggle is right!”
“KCTU fully supports the protest of workers and people of Egypt!”

The Egyptian peoples struggle against the 30 year of pro-U.S. dictatorship has been continuing for more than 15 days. On February 8, KCTU joined the "International Day of Solidarity Action" to the Egyptian people's struggle and held a protest action in front of the embassy of Egypt with various social movement organisations. Participants including an Egyptian resident confirmed their solidarity and support to the struggle. KCTU also express its solidarity to the newly established Egyptian Federation for Independent Unions.

“The struggle of Egyptian people reminded me the June Struggle for Democracy in 1987. The people who have suffered from the dictatorship for 30 years is now crying for freedom, rights to work and democracy. KCTU is standing by workers and people in Egypt. We will use every endeavour to support the courageous struggle,” said Jeong Ui-heon, the first vice president of KCTU. Kalhid Ali, an Egyptian participant reported “More than 300 people has died or disappeared since January 25, however Egyptian people are continuing their struggle,” calling for solidarity.

After a series of speeches, Jeong Ui-heon, KCTU first vice president tried to enter the embassy building to present the protest letter to Mr Mohamed Abdelrehim Elzorkany, the Ambassador of the Arab Republic of Egypt in South Korea. However, the Korean Police blocked his entrance and the Egyptian embassy also rejected to receive the letter. In this situation, vice president Jeong tore up the letter and threw it over the wall of the building, to express his protest against the Mubarak government.

This action will be followed by the 2nd Rally for "Mubarak's Stepping-down and a Free Egypt" on February 11, 3 p.m, in front of the Egyptian embassy.

[Press Statement]

Egyptian People’s Struggle is right!
KCTU fully supports the protest of workers and people of Egypt!

The Egyptian peoples struggle against the 30 year of pro-U.S. dictatorship has been continuing for more than 15 days. On February 8, the day which has been decided as a “Day of Solidarity Action” for Egyptian People by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), its affiliates in 151 countries start their solidarity action including presenting protest letter to the Egyptian embassies. KCTU welcomes the ITUC’s decision and will use every endeavour.

The claims of Egyptian people are right. Their demand for minimum wage and right to work is the same as the demand of the KCTU and Korean workers, and Korean people, who have experienced a series of military dictatorships of Park Jung-hee, Chun Du-hwan, and Noh Tae-woo, fully sympathize their demand for an abolition of the Emergency Laws. The international society already turned its back to the rule of an iron fist of Mubarak and is urging his resignation and transition to the democracy. The United States, which has stood by the anti-democracy of Egyptian governments for the sake of its hegemony, is at a loss which way to go.

KCTU, which has its root in the Gwang-ju People’s Uprising in 1980 and the June Struggle for Democracy and the following Great Struggle of Workers in 1987, is paying special attention to the Egyptian Federation for Independent Unions, which has newly established against the government’s national centre. The Federation has let the general strike and struggled strongly with other organizations including the April 6 Youth Movement and launched in the middle of the ongoing struggle. The federation determined to fight to the end despite the ruling class’s suppression. Their demand for right to work, minimum wage, free education and unemployment compensation, which meet the people’s basic demand of livelihood, is absolutely supported by the people.

Egypt is attracting the world’s attention. We firmly believe that the workers and people in Egypt will win the victory despite of the merciless oppression and sabotage of the Mubarak and the manipulation of the United State. KCTU starts its solidarity and support to the Egyptian people’s struggle with joining the international day of action of ITUC and will continue it until the people win a final victory.

“Transition Now, Respect the Will of the People!”

February 8, 2011
Korean Confederation of Trade Unions

Text Fwd: “Game Over” for Mubarak, “Game On” for Egypt’s Workers

DMZ Hawai'i
“Game Over” for Mubarak, “Game On” for Egypt’s Workers
February 14, 2011 by kyle

Katy Rose, a good friend and activist who played a key role in the Superferry resistance on Kaua’i and who now works for a union in Californa, sent this insightful article about the revolutionary transformation that is taking place within Egyptian society, much of it driven by the awakened power of the working class: Mubarak’s Folly: The Rising of Egypt’s Workers. Here are a few excerpts:

Rarely do our rulers look more absurd than when faced with a popular upheaval. As fear and apathy are broken, ordinary people – housewives, students, sanitation workers, the unemployed –remake themselves. Having been objects of history, they become its agents. Marching in their millions, reclaiming public space, attending meetings and debating their society’s future, they discover in themselves capacities for organization and action they had never imagined.

…
After all, revolutions are not just about changing institutions. Most profoundly, they are about the dramatic remaking of the downtrodden. Revolutions are schools of profound self-education. They destroy submission and resignation, and they release long-repressed creative energies – intelligence, solidarity, invention, self-activity. In so doing, they reweave the fabric of everyday life. The horizons of possibility expand. The unthinkable – that ordinary people might control their lives – becomes both thinkable and practical.

…

Participants repeatedly describe how their fear has lifted. “When we stopped being afraid we knew we would win,” Ahmad Mahmoud told a reporter. “What we have achieved,” proclaimed another, “is the revolution in our minds.” The significance of such a revolution in attitudes is inestimable. But such shifts do not happen at the level of consciousness alone; they are inextricably connected to a revolution in the relations of everyday life – by way of the birth of popular power. And these new forms of people’s power and radical democracy from below have emerged as steps necessary to preserve the Revolution and keep it moving it forward.

…
What the coming weeks will bring is still uncertain. But Mubarak’s folly has triggered an upsurge of workers’ struggle whose effects will endure. “The most precious, because lasting, thing in this ebb and flow of the [revolutionary] wave is . . . the intellectual, cultural growth of the working class,” wrote Rosa Luxemburg.

In Tahrir Square and elsewhere thousands of signs depict Mubarak accompanied by the words “Game Over.” For the workers of Egypt it is now, “Game On.”

Text Fwd: Washington: How Best to Shape the Middle East Playing Field?

Global Research
Washington: How Best to Shape the Middle East Playing Field?
Any new government in Egypt will be anti-Israel...
by Eric Walberg
Feb. 10, 2011

Quiet tourist backwater Tunisia under its only rulers since independence -- Habib Bourghiba (1956-1987) and then Zein Al-Abidine bin Ali (1987-2011) -- was a much appreciated ally of the United States. However, as bin Ali fled to Saudi Arabia last month, US leaders suddenly were hailing those who defied his US-trained police with their US-made tear gas and guns, including the 100 they killed.
Two weeks later, after almost identical developments in Egypt, the US found itself poised to repeat itself, praising the now millions of protesters, including at least 300 who so far have died, though stopping short of pushing Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak (1981-2011) to follow his colleague’s steps into exile, fearing the collapse of its Middle East order.

Now mainstream US pundits strategise about how best to shape the new political playing field to continue to meet US needs. In the New York Times Mark Landler worries about “potentially dangerous directions” for the US. He quotes United States President Barack Obama’s new special envoy to Tunisia Jeffrey Feltman on the need to “support pro-democracy forces”, though Daniel Shapiro cautions against “a cookie-cutter ideal of how to approach it”. And Aaron Miller tells Landler they must find the right balance between “identifying the US too closely with these changes” (read: continuing to support the government) and at the same time “not finding ways to nurture them enough” (read: controlling the pro-democracy activists).

Martin Indyk, adviser to Obama’s Middle East envoy George Mitchell and former ambassador to Israel, weighed in definitively on Egypt in a CNN interview 30 January when he called Mubarak “a dead man walking”, saying “We have to get on the right side of history.” In other words, if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em.

Even without a “cookie-cutter” it is clear in Cairo that the Landlers and Indyks advising Washington on its policies towards Arab countries are following a well-defined recipe not concerned with Arab democracy, but Israel’s best interests, even as the policy zigs one way and zags another.

That bin Ali’s staunch support for the US war against Islam (excuse me, “terrorism”) just might be an important reason why Tunisians risked life and limb to overthrow him hardly seems to enter the US radar screen. Bin Ali’s willingness to persecute his own people while serving US Middle East interests also goes a long way towards explaining his lack of qualms about stealing their wealth and ignoring their basic needs.

Ditto Egypt. Shapiro’s insistence that no cookie-cutter is adequate to the complexities of the Middle East is belied by both the uniformity of US Arab allies’ domestic and foreign policies and the quick succession of almost identical protests. The last 30 years have witnessed a cookie-cutter scenario of a US-supported secular government which persecuted Islamists and opened the nation to the depredations of neoliberalism and tourism through a US-educated and armed elite which amassed vast fortunes. It is hardly surprising that the dispossessed finally exploded in fury.

There are differences -- Egypt has a large peasantry, by definition conservative. But it also has memories of socialism -- land reform and the relative equality of the days of Gamal Abdel-Nasser. In addition, Egypt has a long history of political plurality. Spurred on by mass movements Kefaya (Enough), ElBaradei’s National Association for Change, and the April 6 Youth Movement, the venerable Wafd (Delegation) Party, the Muslim Brotherhood and several more recent secular parties such as Al-Ghad (Tomorrow) and Tagammu (Alliance) will hit the political ground running when the dust finally clears after Egypt’s popular uprising.

By all rights Egypt is the most important player in the Middle East, but since president Anwar Sadat signed the Camp David accord in 1979, Egypt has been intimately tied to the US as the only Arab country, along with Jordan, to sign a peace treaty and recognise Israel, and thus was sidelined. The revolution of January 2011 has suddenly thrust Egypt back into the Middle East’s “great game”, much as the ascendancy of Nasser in 1952 in reaction to British domination made it a key player in that era’s great game.

As it has done throughout the post-WWII period, Washington is hedging its political bets. Until the last moment in both Tunisia and Egypt, it strongly supported the government despite an increasing pattern of repression and corruption in both countries, while also backing and financing the regimes' detractors, primarily through the activities of Freedom House and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), recognising that the end must come at some point.

According to a Wikileaks 6 December 2007 cable posted by Norway’s Aftenposten, USAID budgeted $66.5 million dollars in 2008 and $75 million in 2009 to Egyptian programmes promoting “democracy and good governance”. “President Mubarak is deeply sceptical of the US role in democracy promotion,” reads another cable from the US embassy in Cairo dated 9 October 2007. “Nonetheless, (US government) programmes are helping to establish democratic institutions and strengthen individual voices for change in Egypt.”

Virtually an adjunct of the CIA, the NED funnels funds to all the region’s countries. In 2009 it gave grants to more than a dozen opposition groups, including Al-Jahedh Forum for Free Thought, the American Center for International Labor Solidarity, the Arab Foundation for Supporting Civil Society, the Arab Society for Human Rights, the Egyptian Union of Liberal Youth, the Project on Middle East Democracy and the Youth Forum. The complete list is at ned.org/where-we-work/middle-east-and-northern-africa/Egypt.

Under the auspices of Freedom House’s New Generation programme Egyptian visiting fellows from civil society groups came to the US for training in 2008, including meetings with US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and White House National Security adviser Stephen Hadley. In May 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met a delegation of Egyptian dissidents, just prior to Obama’s visit to Egypt. Sixteen activists met with Clinton and Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman as part of a two-month fellowship.

However, even as the governing National Democratic Party’s rule falters, the US has prevaricated, scrambling to regain control of the political process, clearly concerned that its chosen democratic protégés were perhaps not that reliable (or in control), that the pro-democracy movement could well end up in a new government reversing Egypt’s pro-Western policy.


READ MORE

Text Fwd: US Defence Contractors and Egypt

* Text fwd from Agneta Norberg on Feb. 14, 2011

Southern Studies
U.S. defense contractors with the most at stake in Egypt

Egypt -- where a popular uprising that began last week seeks the end to President Hosni Mubarak's 30-year rule -- is the second-largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid after Israel.

The Egyptian government receives about $2 billion a year from the United States, with most of that assistance going to its military. Last year the U.S. sent about $1.3 billion to Egypt's military compared to about $250 million in economic aid, and the Obama administration requested similar amounts for the 2011 fiscal year, as Britain's Telegraph reports.

The U.S. has long made the case that its unconditional funding for Egypt strengthens relations between the countries and provides benefits for the U.S. such as expedited processing for U.S. Navy warships sailing through the Suez Canal.

Indeed, one of the diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks noted that "President Mubarak and military leaders view our military assistance program as the cornerstone of our mil-mil relationship and consider the USD 1.3 billion annual FMS as 'untouchable compensation' for making and maintaining peace with Israel."

Last week White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the Obama administration would be reviewing its assistance to the Egyptian government based on events over the coming days.

Obviously any change in U.S. aid policy would have important ramifications for Egypt. But it could also have implications for the U.S. companies that contract with the Defense Department to provide good and services to the Egyptian military -- and for their workforces and communities.

Facing South reviewed the Department of Defense contract database over the past two years to see what deals are already in place, and discovered many contracts with connections to the South. The following are the 10 biggest contracts involving aid to Egypt in that period.

1. Lockheed Martin -- Fort Worth, Texas and Orlando, Fla. Last March, the aerospace giant won a $213 million Air Force contract to provide Egypt with 20 F-16 fighter jets (pictured above). The following month, its Lockheed Martin Missiles subsidiary in Orlando, Fla. got a $46 million Army contract to provide night vision sensor systems for Apache helicopters.

2. DRS C3 and Aviation -- Horsham, Pa. In December 2010, this subsidiary of the Italian company Finmeccanica received a $46.1 million Army contract to provide vehicles, hardware and services for Egypt's border surveillance program. That same month DRS landed another $19.6 million Army contract to provide surveillance hardware and services for the Egyptian government.

3. L-3 Communication Ocean Systems -- Sylmar, Calif. and Garland, Texas. The company's Sylmar operations completed a $24.7 million deal with the Navy last August to provide a sonar system for the Egyptian Navy. And in April 2009, L-3's EOS Division in Garland, Texas got a $6.6 million Army contract to provide Egypt with military imaging equipment.

4. Deloitte Consulting -- Arlington, Va. The professional services firm won a $28.1 million Navy contract in December 2009 to provide planning and other support for Egyptian aircraft programs.

5. Boeing -- Mesa, Ariz. and St. Louis. Last May, the aerospace firm landed a $22.5 million Army contract to provide Egypt with 10 Apache helicopters. The month before that, the company's St. Louis operations won a $5.8 million Navy contract to provide logistics support for other governments, with $262,530 of that designated for assistance to Egypt.

6. Raytheon -- Tucson, Ariz. and Andover, Mass. The weapons and electronics firm received a $26 million Navy contract in June 2009 to provide 178 Stinger missiles to both Egypt and Turkey. This past December, it finalized a $5.6 million Army contract to provide Hawk missile system technical assistance to the Egyptian government.

7. AgustaWestland -- Reston, Va. In November 2009, the Navy made definite a previously awarded $17.3 million contract for the company -- a subsidiary of Italy's Finmeccanica -- to provide helicopter maintenance for the Egyptian government.

8. US Motor Works -- Cerritos, Calif. and Grand Prairie, Texas. The company got a $14.5 million Army contract in June 2009 to provide engines, components and spare parts for vehicles acquired for the Egyptian Armament Authority, with most of that work to be done in Texas.

9. Goodrich Corp. --- Chelmsford, Mass. In October 2010, Goodrich landed a $10.8 million Air Force deal to procure and deploy reconnaissance systems for use on the F-16 fighter jets purchased by the Egyptian Air Force.

10. Columbia Group -- Washington, D.C. In June 2009, the defense contractor completed a $10.6 million contract with the Navy to provide remotely operated vehicle systems as well as technical support and training to the Egyptian Navy, with most of the work to be performed out of the company's Panama City, Fla. operations.

Many other companies with recent deals related to Egypt have operations in the South as well. They include Michelin Aircraft Tire of Greenville, S.C.; Wyle Laboratories, Camber Corp. and Summa Technology, all of Huntsville, Ala.; WRSystems Ltd. of Fairfax, Va.; TASC of Chantilly, Va.; and Clayton International of Peachtree City, Ga.

For a full listing of Defense Department contracts awarded over the past two years for work related to Egypt, click here.(Photo of F-16 fighter jet by Master Sgt. Andy Dunaway for the U.S. Defense Department via Wikimedia Commons.)

Video Fwd: People & Power – Egypt: Seeds of change

DMZ Hawai'i
People & Power – Egypt: Seeds of change
February 13, 2011 by kyle

Al Jazeera produced this excellent documentary about the April 6 Movement, the youth organization behind the revolution in Egypt. The small group of disciplined and sophisticated leaders were the spark. Getting training from the Serbian nonviolent youth movement, they applied classic nonviolence organizing principles with new technological tools. The rest is history.

Text Fwd: Egypt's army clashes with protesters

* Image source: same as the link

Army officers escort a protester away from Liberation Square in Cairo, Egypt
An Egyptian girl waves a national flag in celebration.

An early morning overview of Cairo's Liberation Square, the epicenter of the popular revolution that drove Hosni Mubarak from power on February 11, is seen on February 13, 2011.


CLG News
Press TV
Egypt's army clashes with protesters
Sun Feb 13, 2011 7:47AM

Egypt's army has clashed with protesters that refuse to leave Cairo's Liberation Square two days after the US-backed dictator Hosni Mubarak was ousted from power.

Soldiers on Sunday scuffled with thousands of protesters camping out in the Square, the focal point of massive rallies that brought down Mubarak on Friday, a Press TV correspondent reported.

Shouting slogans, protesters fought street battles with soldiers forcing them to back away, the report added.

The protesters, remaining in Cairo's central Liberation Square on Saturday night, warned of holding further rallies if the military fails to fulfill its promise of a peaceful transition of power to a democratic civilian system.

Eighteen days of revolution across Egypt forced the embattled Mubarak to leave office on Friday, handing over power to a military council.

The military promised "a peaceful transition of power" to an elected civilian government on Saturday in order to build "a free democratic state."

However, the new military leadership did not set a timetable to fulfill the pledge.

Thousands of protesters vowed to remain on the major landmark until their demands are met.

Activists have demanded the release of political prisoners, the lifting of a 30-year-old state of emergency and the disbandment of military courts. They say demonstrations will continue until the army accepts the reforms.

According to the United Nations, the Egyptian revolution left more than 300 people dead and thousands more injured.

Reports say the Egyptian military has secretly detained hundreds and possibly thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators since protests erupted on January 25 demanding Mubarak's ouster.

RZS/MB

Related Stories:
Hezbollah hails Egypt Revolution

Text Fwd: S. Korea hails resignation of Mubarak as win for democracy

* The victory of people in Egypt even makes the South Korean conservatives acknowledge it.

Yonhap News
S. Korea hails resignation of Mubarak as win for democracy

SEOUL, Feb. 12 (Yonhap) -- South Korea on Saturday hailed the toppling of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak as a victory for the Egyptian people toward democracy.

Mubarak's three-decade reign ended earlier Saturday, Korean time, after the besieged ruler decided to comply with protesters' requests for him to step down. A junta of military commanders will now assume power in a culmination of the 18-day uprising in the most populous Arab nation.

South Korea's ruling Grand National Party (GNP) said the resignation was "a win for Egyptian democracy."

"We hope everyone in Egypt can reach a peaceful and rational conclusion to complete the democratization process," said Bae Eun-hee, the GNP spokeswoman, in a statement.

Cha Young, spokeswoman for the main opposition Democratic Party (DP), also expressed hope for further development of democracy in Egypt "amid stability and peace."

"We'd like to pay our condolences to those who lost their lives during the fight," Cha said. "We'd also like to pay our respect to their grand victory."

Other minor parties also chimed in, saying they hoped the victory by the people would lead to the founding of a democratic government in Egypt.

The foreign ministry in Seoul issued a statement also calling for peace and stability in Egypt.

"We expect the situation in Egypt will lead to fair and free elections, as per the people's desire," said Cho Byung-jae, the ministry spokesman. "We respect President Mubarak's decision to step down. Our government will work closely with the Egyptian government and people to take our friendly cooperative relations with Egypt to another level."

A foreign ministry official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said it was "fortunate" that the power transfer in Egypt was taking place peacefully.

"We had been most concerned about a violent, bloody uprising that would have shut down the Suez Canal," the official said. "The oil price then would have skyrocketed and trade would have been affected. But we expect the situation to settle down following Mubarak's resignation."

The official said Egypt should now look to the future beyond Mubarak's resignation.

"What Egypt does in the aftermath is more important than the resignation itself," the official added. "The situation must be handled so that impartial and free elections can take place."

jeeho@yna.co.kr

Text Fwd: Closer to, but not yet. The U.S. military aids must stop or it will be more of the same … just like in the Philippines...

* Text fwd from Corazon Valdez Fabros on Feb. 12, 2011

THE EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION: THE TRIUMPH OF HUMAN DIGNITY
by Chandra Muzaffar.

The people of Egypt have won a great victory. They have defeated a dictator. They have ousted Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak fell at the feet of people power. The Egyptian people showed tremendous courage in their struggle against the dictatorship. They persevered against great odds. Their sacrifice was monumental. According to UN sources, in the course of their 18 day protest against a President who had misruled for most of 30 years, some 300 hundred people died at the hands of hoodlums and thugs serving the Mubarak regime.

While thugs targeted the people, it is remarkable that those who fought for justice, freedom and dignity were largely non-violent. Simply put, it was a peaceful revolution--- a revolution that had as its epicentre, Medan Tahrir, Liberation Square. The revolutionaries, as commentators have observed, were civil and courteous. At the forefront of this revolution were young people, in their twenties and thirties. It was their idealism which was the fuel of this revolution. They utilised the new media to the hilt to mobilise and galvanise the masses. The Egyptian Revolution was, in a sense, inspired by the Tunisian Revolution of 14th January 2011. Tunisians--- again many of them young men and women--- showed Egyptians and Arabs throughout West Asia and North
Africa (WANA) that when human beings overcome fear, a hope, a distant goal, is suddenly transformed into reality.

Because Egypt is the heart of the Arab world, its Revolution, the Revolution of 11th February, will have a tremendous impact upon ordinary men and women in the region. It will give them strength and confidence. It will empower them. The Egyptian Revolution will become the beacon that inspires the masses to stand up against corrupt, greedy rulers who betray the trust of the people. It will become the banner around which will rally all those who cherish their dignity and independence and refuse to submit to foreign dictation and dominance that has been the curse of WANA. In this regard, the Egyptian Revolution will undoubtedly provide fresh impetus to the noble Palestinian struggle for self-determination..

By a strange coincidence, the Egyptian Revolution happened on the same day as Iran’s Islamic Revolution. It was on the 11th of February 1979 that the Islamic revolutionaries in Iran proclaimed victory after the military declared its neutrality and the revolutionaries took over public buildings and the Iranian State Radio and Television. 11th February is celebrated as a national holiday in Iran.

The powers-that-be in Tel Aviv, Washington, London, Paris and other Western capitals would not like to be reminded of this historical coincidence. It is a coincidence that will also send a shiver down the spine of many a monarch and president in the Arab world. More than this coincidence, both Revolutions succeeded in harnessing the energies of millions of people in their respective countries. The Egyptian and Iranian Revolutions --- some would argue—are the two most broad-based revolutions in human history.

At a great historical moment like this (I am writing this article a couple of hours after Vice-President Omar Sulaiman’s announcement over Egyptian Television that Mubarak is stepping down) we should recall the other illustrious revolutions in history--- the French Revolution of 1789; the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, and the Chinese Revolution of 1949. There have also been people’s movements in recent decades that have succeeded in overthrowing dictatorial regimes that had lost credibility with the people. The people power movement in the
Philippines in 1986 and the mass movement against the Indonesian President Suharto in 1998 would be two examples from Southeast Asia while the series of uprisings in Eastern Europe in 1989 would also testify to the power embodied in the people.

Revolutions and popular uprisings, however idealistic and altruistic its leaders and participants may be in the initial stages, do not always deliver on the freedom and justice they promise. There are many revolutions that have betrayed the people.. We do not know how the Egyptian Revolution will unfold in the coming days and months.

But for the time being, the people of Egypt, and indeed the people of the world, have every right and reason to celebrate. We have just witnessed the liberation of the soul of a nation. We have just embraced the triumph of human dignity.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST)
and Professor of Global Studies at Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Malaysia.
12 February 2011

Text Fwd: Why Egypt’s progressives win

Women have been at the heart of organising protests in Tahrir Square [Getty]

DMZ Hawai'i
Why Egypt’s progressives win
February 10, 2011 by kyle

In this op ed piece, “Why Egypt’s progressives win”, Paul Amar an Associate Professor of Global & International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara, provides a nuanced analysis of the various forces that created and is shaping the revolution underway in Egypt. He describes the evolution of the Muslim Brotherhood and emerging contradictions within its ranks. The youth and women wings of the Brotherhood have broken away from the “new old guard” to align with leftists and liberals. The Egyptian military also plays a pivotal role due to its own class interests that are not in alignment with the Mubarak regime. But he gives the most credit to the worker’s movement and the anti-police brutality movement for building the base of the present revolution:

It is crucial to remember that this uprising did not begin with the Muslim Brotherhood or with nationalist businessmen. This revolt began gradually at the convergence of two parallel forces: the movement for workers’ rights in the newly revived factory towns and micro-sweatshops of Egypt – especially during the past two years – and the movement against police brutality and torture that mobilised every community in the country for the past three years. Both movements feature the leadership and mass participation of women of all ages and youth of both genders. There are structural reasons for this.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

The New York Times ran an interesting article about the young, technologically savvy professionals that have played a crucial role as intellectuals, organizers and mobilizers of the movement. The article discusses some of the modern mobilization tactics being deployed by the activists to outwit the violent and repressive police state. Also remarkable is the political and ideological diversity of the actors:

They were born roughly around the time that President Hosni Mubarak first came to power, most earned degrees from their country’s top universities and all have spent their adult lives bridling at the restrictions of the Egyptian police state — some undergoing repeated arrests and torture for the cause.

They are the young professionals, mostly doctors and lawyers, who touched off and then guided the revolt shaking Egypt, members of the Facebook generation who have remained mostly faceless — very deliberately so, given the threat of arrest or abduction by the secret police.

Now, however, as the Egyptian government has sought to splinter their movement by claiming that officials were negotiating with some of its leaders, they have stepped forward publicly for the first time to describe their hidden role.

There were only about 15 of them, including Wael Ghonim, a Google executive who was detained for 12 days but emerged this week as the movement’s most potent spokesman.

Yet they brought a sophistication and professionalism to their cause — exploiting the anonymity of the Internet to elude the secret police, planting false rumors to fool police spies, staging “field tests” in Cairo slums before laying out their battle plans, then planning a weekly protest schedule to save their firepower — that helps explain the surprising resilience of the uprising they began.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Text Fwd: Andrew Gavin Marshall: America's Strategic Repression of the 'Arab Awakening'

Global Research
America’s Strategic Repression of the ‘Arab Awakening’
North Africa and the Global Political Awakening, Part 2
By Andrew Gavin Marshall
February 9, 2011

Overview

In Part 1 of this series, I analyzed the changing nature of the Arab world, in experiencing an uprising as a result of the ‘Global Political Awakening.’ Ultimately, I assessed that these could potentially be the birth pangs of a global revolution; however, the situation is more complicated than it appears on the surface.

While the uprisings spreading across the Arab world have surprised many observers, the same could not be said for the American foreign policy and strategic establishment. A popular backlash against American-supported dictatorships and repressive regimes has been anticipated for a number of years, with arch-hawk geopolitical strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski articulating a broad conception of a ‘Global Political Awakening’ taking place, in which the masses of the world (predominantly the educated, exploited and impoverished youth of the ‘Third World’) have become acutely aware of their subjugation, inequality, exploitation and oppression. This ‘Awakening’ is largely driven by the revolution in information, technology and communication, including radio, television, but most especially the Internet and social media. Brzezinski had accurately identified this ‘Awakening’ as the greatest threat to elite interests regionally, but also internationally, with America sitting on top of the global hierarchy.

This spurred on the development of an American strategy in the Arab world, modeled on similar strategies pursued in recent decades in other parts of the world, in promoting “democratization,” by developing close contacts with ‘civil society’ organizations, opposition leaders, media sources, and student organizations. The aim is not to promote an organic Arab democracy ‘of the people, and for the people,’ but rather to promote an evolutionary “democratization” in which the old despots of American strategic support are removed in favour of a neoliberal democratic system, in which the outward visible institutions of democracy are present (multi-party elections, private media, parliaments, constitutions, active civil society, etc); yet, the power-holders within that domestic political system remain subservient to U.S. economic and strategic interests, continuing to follow the dictates of the IMF and World Bank, supporting America’s military hegemony in the region, and “opening up” the Arab economies to be “integrated” into the world economy. Thus, “democratization” becomes an incredibly valuable strategy for maintaining hegemony; a modern re-hash of “Let them eat cake!” Give the people the ‘image’ of democracy and establish and maintain a co-dependent relationship with the new elite. Thus, democracy for the people becomes an exercise in futility, where people’s ‘participation’ becomes about voting between rival factions of elites, who all ultimately follow the orders of Washington.

This strategy also has its benefit for the maintenance of American power in the region. While dictators have their uses in geopolitical strategy, they can often become too independent of the imperial power and seek to determine the course of their country separate from U.S. interests, and are subsequently much more challenging to remove from power (i.e., Saddam Hussein). With a “democratized” system, changing ruling parties and leaders becomes much easier, by simply calling elections and supporting opposition parties. Bringing down a dictator is always a more precarious situation than “changing the guard” in a liberal democratic system.

However, again, the situation in the Arab world is still more complicated than this brief overview, and American strategic concerns must take other potentialities into consideration. While American strategists were well aware of the growing threat to stability in the region, and the rising discontent among the majority of the population, the strategists tended to identify the aim as “democratization” through evolution, not revolution. In this sense, the uprisings across the Arab world pose a major strategic challenge for America. While ties have been made with civil society and other organizations, they haven’t all necessarily had the ability to be firmly entrenched, organized and mobilized. In short, it would appear that America was perhaps unprepared for uprisings to take place this soon. The sheer scale and rapid growth of the protests and uprisings makes the situation all the more complicated, since they are not dealing with one nation alone, but rather an entire region (arguably one of, if not the most strategically important region in the world), and yet they must assess and engage the situation on a country-by-country basis.

One danger arises in a repeat in the Arab world of the trends advanced in Latin America over the past decade: namely, the growth of populist democracy. The protests have brought together a wide array of society – civil society, students, the poor, Islamists, opposition leaders, etc. – and so America, with ties to many of these sectors (overtly and covertly), must now make many choices in regards of who to support.

Another incredibly important factor to take into consideration is military intervention. America has firmly established ties with the militaries in this region, and it appears evident that America is influencing military actions in Tunisia. Often, the reflex position of imperial power is to support the military, facilitate a coup, or employ repression. Again, this strategy would be determined on a country-by-country basis. With a popular uprising, military oppression will have the likely effect of exacerbating popular discontent and resistance, so strategic use of military influence is required.

This also leaves us with the potential for the ‘Yemen option’: war and destabilization. While presenting its own potential for negative repercussions (namely, in instigating a much larger and more radical uprising), engaging in overt or covert warfare, destabilizing countries or regions, is not taboo in American strategic circles. In fact, this is the strategy that has been deployed in Yemen since the emergence of the Southern Movement in 2007, a liberation movement seeking secession from the U.S.-supported dictatorship. Shortly after the emergence of the Southern Movement, al-Qaeda appeared in Yemen, prompting U.S. military intervention. The Yemeni military, armed, trained and funded by the United States, has been using its military might to attempt to crush the Southern Movement as well as a rebel movement in the North.

In short, the ‘Arab Awakening’ presents possibly the greatest strategic challenge to American hegemony in decades. The likely result will be a congruence of multiple simultaneously employed strategies including: “democratization,” oppression, military intervention and destabilization. Again, it could be a mistake to assume one strategy for the whole region, but rather to assess it on a country-by-country basis, based upon continuing developments and progress in the ‘Awakening’.

READ MORE

Text Fwd: For Egypt, this is the miracle of Tahrir Square

Update

* Organizing Notes, Feb. 11, 2011
_______________________________________________________-

*Image source: Organizing Notes


* Text fwd from Bruce Gagnon on Feb. 10, 2011

Guardian

For Egypt, this is the miracle of Tahrir Square
There is no room for compromise. Either the entire Mubarak edifice falls, or the uprising is betrayed
By Slavoj Žižek
Guardian UK
Thursday 10 February 2011

One cannot but note the "miraculous" nature of the events in Egypt: something has happened that few predicted, violating the experts' opinions, as if the uprising was not simply the result of social causes but the intervention of a mysterious agency that we can call, in a Platonic way, the eternal idea of freedom, justice and dignity.



The uprising was universal: it was immediately possible for all of us around the world to identify with it, to recognise what it was about, without any need for cultural analysis of the features of Egyptian society. In contrast to Iran's Khomeini revolution (where leftists had to smuggle their message into the predominantly Islamist frame), here the frame is clearly that of a universal secular call for freedom and justice, so that the Muslim Brotherhood had to adopt the language of secular demands.



The most sublime moment occurred when Muslims and Coptic Christians engaged in common prayer on Cairo's Tahrir Square, chanting "We are one!" – providing the best answer to the sectarian religious violence. Those neocons who criticise multiculturalism on behalf of the universal values of freedom and democracy are now confronting their moment of truth: you want universal freedom and democracy? This is what people demand in Egypt, so why are the neocons uneasy? Is it because the protesters in Egypt mention freedom and dignity in the same breath as social and economic justice?



From the start, the violence of the protesters has been purely symbolic, an act of radical and collective civil disobedience. They suspended the authority of the state – it was not just an inner liberation, but a social act of breaking chains of servitude. The physical violence was done by the hired Mubarak thugs entering Tahrir Square on horses and camels and beating people; the most protesters did was defend themselves.



Although combative, the message of the protesters has not been one of killing. The demand was for Mubarak to go, and thus open up the space for freedom in Egypt, a freedom from which no one is excluded – the protesters' call to the army, and even the hated police, was not "Death to you!", but "We are brothers! Join us!". This feature clearly distinguishes an emancipatory demonstration from a rightwing populist one: although the right's mobilisation proclaims the organic unity of the people, it is a unity sustained by a call to annihilate the designated enemy (Jews, traitors).



So where are we now? When an authoritarian regime approaches the final crisis, its dissolution tends to follow two steps. Before its actual collapse, a rupture takes place: all of a sudden people know that the game is over, they are simply no longer afraid. It is not only that the regime loses its legitimacy; its exercise of power itself is perceived as an impotent panic reaction. We all know the classic scene from cartoons: the cat reaches a precipice but goes on walking, ignoring the fact that there is no ground under its feet; it starts to fall only when it looks down and notices the abyss. When it loses its authority, the regime is like a cat above the precipice: in order to fall, it only has to be reminded to look down …



In Shah of Shahs, a classic account of the Khomeini revolution, Ryszard Kapuscinski located the precise moment of this rupture: at a Tehran crossroads, a single demonstrator refused to budge when a policeman shouted at him to move, and the embarrassed policeman withdrew; within hours, all Tehran knew about this incident, and although street fights went on for weeks, everyone somehow knew the game was over.



Is something similar going on in Egypt? For a couple of days at the beginning, it looked like Mubarak was already in the situation of the proverbial cat. Then we saw a well-planned operation to kidnap the revolution. The obscenity of this was breathtaking: the new vice-president, Omar Suleiman, a former secret police chief responsible for mass tortures, presented himself as the "human face" of the regime, the person to oversee the transition to democracy.
Egypt's struggle of endurance is not a conflict of visions, it is the conflict between a vision of freedom and a blind clinging to power that uses all means possible – terror, lack of food, simple tiredness, bribery with raised salaries – to squash the will to freedom.



When President Obama welcomed the uprising as a legitimate expression of opinion that needs to be acknowledged by the government, the confusion was total: the crowds in Cairo and Alexandria did not want their demands to be acknowledged by the government, they denied the very legitimacy of the government. They didn't want the Mubarak regime as a partner in a dialogue, they wanted Mubarak to go. They didn't simply want a new government that would listen to their opinion, they wanted to reshape the entire state. They don't have an opinion, they are the truth of the situation in Egypt. Mubarak understands this much better than Obama: there is no room for compromise here, as there was none when the Communist regimes were challenged in the late 1980s. Either the entire Mubarak power edifice falls down, or the uprising is co-opted and betrayed.



And what about the fear that, after the fall of Mubarak, the new government will be hostile towards Israel? If the new government is genuinely the expression of a people that proudly enjoys its freedom, then there is nothing to fear: antisemitism can only grow in conditions of despair and oppression. (A CNN report from an Egyptian province showed how the government is spreading rumours there that the organisers of the protests and foreign journalists were sent by the Jews to weaken Egypt – so much for Mubarak as a friend of the Jews.)



One of the cruellest ironies of the current situation is the west's concern that the transition should proceed in a "lawful" way – as if Egypt had the rule of law until now. Are we already forgetting that, for many long years, Egypt was in a permanent state of emergency? Mubarak suspended the rule of law, keeping the entire country in a state of political immobility, stifling genuine political life. It makes sense that so many people on the streets of Cairo claim that they now feel alive for the first time in their lives. Whatever happens next, what is crucial is that this sense of "feeling alive" is not buried by cynical realpolitik.



- Slavoj Žižek is international director of the Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://www.space4peace.org/
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth. ~Henry David Thoreau

Text Fwd: Egypt - A Sleeping Giant Awakens

* Image source: imgur.com
Christians protecting Muslims while they pray during protests in Egypt.

(Informed at Ten Thousand Things)

Global Research
Egypt: A Sleeping Giant Awakens
by Rannie Amiri
February 5, 2011

Poor people gonna rise up
And get their share
Poor people gonna rise up
And take what’s theirs
And finally the tables are starting to turn
Talkin' bout a revolution

– Tracy Chapman’s Talkin’ Bout A Revolution, 1988



The sleeping Egyptian giant has finally awoken.

The Arab world’s most populous nation—85 million strong—has been in political hibernation for 30 long years.



The deep slumber is now over. The reign of Hosni Mubarak will end, sooner or later, as a rejuvenated population sheds apathy’s blanket.

After Israel , Egypt is the second-largest recipient of United States foreign aid. Other than what was embezzled, the $1.5 billion in annual assistance has been spent entirely on the military and bolstering Mubarak’s internal security apparatus. It ultimately ensured the Camp David state remained complaint with the diktats coming out of Tel Aviv and Washington.



Indeed, as a result of peace treaties with its eastern and southern neighbors, Israel has had a free hand in continuing the repression and subjugation of Palestinians.

Take, for example, the crippling, inhumane siege imposed on Gaza . Even the most basic good and supplies were prevented from entering the tiny enclave. (This was the price Palestinians paid for holding democratic elections, which Hamas handily won.) Egypt , to no one’s surprise, enforced all embargo restrictions asked of it.

When Israel launched a vicious military campaign upon Gaza ’s destitute population in December 2008, Egypt again became a willing accomplice. Many will contend Mubarak was complicit in those war crimes. By keeping the Rafah border crossing closed, he prevented the evacuation of both malnourished and maimed from a war zone.

Although Egyptians may have quietly seethed at this, it does not compare to the anger and resentment built up over decades of corruption and abuse. The people have grown weary of Emergency Law, implemented and maintained since Anwar Sadat’s 1981 assassination, that prohibits all forms of free speech, expression and assembly. It allows for the indefinite detention of any person without charge. Arrested civilians are then put on trial in front of closed military tribunals. The regime is also notorious for turning a blind eye to routine police brutality and torture.

In a Jan. 30 appearance on Meet the Press, Sec. of State Hillary Clinton commented on Mubarak’s inevitable removal from power:

“It needs to be an orderly, peaceful transition to real democracy, not faux democracy like the elections we saw in Iran two years ago, where you have one election 30 years ago and then the people just keep staying in power and become less and less responsive to their people.”

Iran ? Or Egypt ? Although far from perfect, Iran has held far more credible presidential elections than Egypt ever has. Why not hearken to Egypt ’s “faux democracy” of just two months ago when Mubarak’s National Democratic Party captured an amazing 420 of 518 parliamentary seats (while the Muslim Brotherhood’s independents went from 88 to one)?

It was a telling self-indictment. The U.S has always tolerated the trappings of democracy in Mubarak’s Egypt , including a rubber-stamp parliament and elections where opposition candidates were either banned or unable to run due to an avalanche of bureaucratic obstacles.

Because he assumed his son Gamal would succeed him, Mubarak also never appointed a vice-president, in violation of Egypt ’s constitution. That was until a few days ago when intelligence chief Omar Suleiman was hastily promoted to the job. Gamal has since fled to London .

In Tuesday’s protests, the scope of which was unprecedented in the history of modern Egypt , the world’s eyes were fixed on downtown Cairo ’s Tahrir Square . The hundreds of thousands gathered not only called for Mubarak’s ouster, but demanded he be put on trial. His hanging effigy conveyed to viewers that Egyptians will not be satisfied with a token cabinet reshuffle.

“ Cairo today is all of Egypt ,” said one. “I want my son to have a better life and not suffer as much as I did … I want to feel like I chose my president.”

Feeling the pressure, Jordan’s monarch King Abdullah II fired his cabinet as demonstrations in Amman continued. The Palestinian Authority under the discredited president Mahmoud Abbas vowed to hold municipal elections in the West Bank . Bahrain is ripe with discontent, to say the least. The same is true for Yemen, where President Ali Abdullah Saleh—who has ruled for 32-years—now says he won’t run for another term. Tunisians have already taken matters into their own hands.

Despite the best efforts of Mubarak, Saudi Arabia, the United States and Israel, the sleeping giant has awoken. And the mass protests we are witnessing in Egypt today … that is merely a yawn.

Rannie Amiri is an independent Middle East commentator.

Rannie Amiri is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Text Fwd: Is 1848 Repeating Itself in the Arab World?

* Image source: same as the link

Global Research
Revolution: Is 1848 Repeating Itself in the Arab World?
PART I: The Dynamics of Global Capitalism
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
February 5, 2011

Is history repeating itself? Have the events of 1848 in Europe repeated themselves in the Arab World? Will 2011 see the same outcomes as 1848? Only the Arab people can decide. Their fate is in their hands, but they should learn from the mistakes of 1848 and seriously address the role of the capitalist class.

PART I

The European Spring of 1848 and the Arab Spring of 2011

In 1848, revolutionary fervour broke across continental Europe. The waves of revolution were set in motion in France. It did not take long before the rest of Europe was hit with a tsunami of popular uprisings and revolts. Like a domino effect, country after country would be hit by revolt. Denmark, the German States, the Italian States, Belgium, Wallachia, and the Habsburg's Austrian Empire would all be shaken by popular revolt. The bases of the European revolts were the same as those in the modern-day Arab World.

Economic disparity, abuse of workers rights, and a lack of political equality were all causes for the wave of revolutions in 1848 Europe. Industrialization and economic and technological leaps were causing major socio-economic changes in European societies before and up to 1848. While in a very different historical context, this has also been occurring in today's Arab World.

In 19th Century Europe, fundamental economic changes, characterized by the consolidation of wealth, caused massive unemployment as well as the outbreak of famines.

This has also occurred in recent years in the Arab World, largely as a result of the brunt of neo-liberal reforms and rising food prices. Anger over lack of employment, lack of opportunities, corrupt government practices, and rising bread and food prices have actually been igniting riots and protests in the Arab World, specifically those states around the Mediterranean Sea, for several years before 2011. These past riots and protests were preludes to the highly tense situations in Egypt, Tunisia, and the Arab World.


The French Revolution of 1848: Europe's Tunisia or Iran?

1848 France was ruled by the landed property class, big industry, and the banking class. It was the working class that brought about the rise of this triad (landed property, big industry, and the banking class) through the French Revolution of 1789. In turn, this triad or "big capital" would systematically disenfranchize the working class by eliminating universal suffrage.

A new residency criterion was imposed in France by King Louis-Philip I who served the interests of big capital and was appropriately called the "Bourgeoisie King." French citizens had to prove that they lived in a riding for three years. To prove residency, the French working class needed letters of authentication from their employers. Thus, the working class and an overwhelming majority of the French were disenfranchized from voting and held hostage by big capital. French workers would also migrate from one place and riding to another place and riding for employment, because of the changing economic conditions, which would also make qualification for voting impossible. Unemployment would grip France and there would be a massive surplus of labour that would be readily exploited by organized capital. These unbearable conditions would led to the French Revolution of 1848.

In the French Revolution of 1789, the working class allied itself with big capital (big industry, the banking class, and landed property), but this would change in 1848. While big capital was fighting amongst itself, the working class was becoming an ally of the petty bourgeoisie in demanding a share in governing France and directing the course of French society. The House of Orléans was overthrown and the monarchy brought to a final end with the establishment of the Second French Republic.

Yet, the working class did not secure their rights after 1848. They held briefly the seat of power. The new taxation system failed and the capitalist class retained its control, thereby neutralizing efforts for genuine socio-economic reform in France. This led up to the 1851 Paris coup that was to make Charles Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte the emperor of the Second French Empire. The other outcome, after the defeat of Emperor Bonaparte in the Franco-Prussian War, was the 1871 establishment of the short-lived French government known by historians as the "Paris Commune." [1] Under the Paris Commune and its mixed socialist and anarchist government, France became history's first socialist republic, more than seventy years before the establishment of the Soviet Union. Under the Prussian occupation of France, the Paris Commune was ultimately crushed by an agreement and strategic understanding reached between the Germans and French organized capital.

What lessons can be learned from 1848?

The French Revolution of 1848 illustrates how capital can manipulate the desires of the working class and mainstream society. It also illustrates that the capitalist class was predominately in control of the state, despite the changes in political leadership. Finally, the outcome of 1848 in France illustrates that policies are deliberately fluctuated by organized capital as a means to lull mainstream society. In this context, history could repeat itself in the Arab World.



READ MORE

Video Fwd: More videos on people's protests in Egypt

See also Reality Zone
Guardian
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Egypt's Military-Industrial Complex
Pratap Chatterjee

A riot policeman fires tear gas at protesters in front of the al-Istiqama Mosque on 28 January, in Cairo, Egypt. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images

In early January 2010, Bob Livingston, a former chairman of the appropriations committee in the US House of Representatives, flew to Cairo accompanied by William Miner, one of his staff. The two men were granted meetings with US Ambassador Margaret Scobey, as well as Major General FC "Pink" Williams, the defence attaché and director of the US Office of Military Cooperation in Egypt. Livingston and Miner were lobbyists employed by the government of Egypt, helping them to open doors to senior officers in the US government. Records of their meetings, required under law, were recently published by the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington, DC watchdog group.

Although the names of those who attended the meetings have to be made public, the details of what was discussed are confidential. I called Miner to ask him about their meetings, but he referred me to Karim Haggag, the spokesman for the Egyptian embassy in Washington, who did not respond. Miner did confirm that he was a retired Navy pilot who had worked for clients like the Egyptian government, as well as several military contractors.

The cozy relationship between the lobbyists, members of the US Congress, Pentagon officials and the Egyptian government is easily explained: much is at stake. Egypt has received over $70bn in economic and military aid approved by the US Congress in the past 60 years, according to numbers compiled by the Congressional Research Service. Maj Gen Williams is the man in charge of the $1.3bn in annual US military aid supplied to the country.

Specifically, the aid money pays for US-designed Abrams tanks assembled in suburban Cairo under contract with General Dynamics. Boeing sells Egypt CH-47 Chinook transport helicopters, Lockheed Martin sells F-16s, Sikorsky Aircraft sells Black Hawk helicopters. Lockheed Martin has taken in $3.8bn from Egypt in the last few years; General Dynamics $2.5bn; Boeing $1.7bn; among many others.

In addition, hundreds of Egyptian military officers come for short training courses to the US each year. Two days after Livingston and Miner met with the US officials in Cairo, the embassy sent a cable to Washington with a list of Egyptian officials approved to take a three-week military training course in the US in February 2010. Under the "Leahy law" – a human rights requirement named after Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont that prohibits US military assistance to foreign military units that violate human rights – the embassy must, as a matter of routine, vouch for the prospective trainees.

One of the training courses listed in the cable made public by WikiLeaks was listed as one in how to handle explosives. The WikiLeaks cables show that numerous officials working for "state security", aged between 30 and 50 with ranks from major to lieutenant colonel, were given clean bills of health to take a variety of such specialised military training programmes.

After the US lobbyists returned to their offices in Washington, DC, Miner kept in touch with "Pink" Williams, corresponding via email. A little over three months later, an Egyptian military delegation led by Major General Mohamed Said Elassar, assistant to Mohammed Hussein Tantawi, the Egyptian minister of defence, came to Washington. Livingstone and Miner were on hand once again to take the Egyptian officials to meet with a number of members of Congress, as well to visit the office of the secretary of defence to discuss "US/Egyptian security issues".

So, when protesters in Cairo last week were struck by tear gas canisters fired by Egyptian security officials, it was not surprising that pictures taken by ABC TV would show that the canisters were manufactured in the US. Nor does it seem that surprising that a journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald would find 12-gauge shotgun shells with ''MADE IN USA'' stamped on their brass heads when he visited the wounded in a makeshift casualty ward in a tiny mosque behind Tahrir (Liberation) Square.

The photographs show that the tear gas comes from a company named Combined Systems Inc (CSI), which describes itself as a "tactical weapons company" and is based in Jamestown, Pennsylvania. A similar picture from the protests in Egypt was posted on Twitter of a "Outdoor 52 Series Large Grenade" grenade made by CSI, which is designed to discharge "a high volume of smoke and chemical agent through multiple emission ports". (CSI did not return calls for comment.)

Although CSI markets these products as "less-than-lethal", several incidents indicate that they can cause injury and death. Bassem Abu Rahmah, a Palestinian man, was reportedly killed on 17 April 2009, when a CSI 40mm model 4431 powder barricade penetrating tear gas grenade struck him in the chest, according to a report by the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem. Nels Cooper Brannan , a US marine deployed to Fallujah, Iraq, unsuccessfully sued CSI for injuries caused by an allegedly defective MK 141 flashbang grenade that caused serious damage to his left hand when it exploded accidently.

While the Egyptian protesters were facing tear gas grenades fired by security forces in Cairo, anotherdelegation of Egyptian senior military officials led by Lieutenant General Sami Hafez Enan, the chief of staff of Egypt's armed forces, was back in Washington to meet with Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. (No public records have been filed yet, so it is unclear if Miner and Livingstone were escorting them again.)

Within hours of the news of the huge protests, Enan cut short his trip and dashed back to Cairo last Friday, but his boss, Minister Tantawi, has kept in touch with Washington, making daily phone calls to US Defence Secretary Robert Gates. Both men – together with Egypt's spy chief, Omar Suleiman – are among President Hosni Mubarak's closest allies and enjoy close ties with Washington, according to the diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks. And it was these men that Thomas E Donilon, the US national security adviser, was frantically phoning last weekend to try to gauge how to prevent the collapse of the Mubarak regime.

It could days, maybe even weeks, before the future of the Egyptian government is decided, and with it, the relationship with the US. But one thing is clear: the Egyptian protesters are well aware of the close ties between officials in Cairo and Washington and not happy about the US training and tear gas shells supplied to the Egyptian military. Crowds gathered in Liberation Square last week chanted: "Hosni Mubarak, Omar Suleiman, both of you are agents of the Americans." The protesters believe that the billions in military aid that kept Mubarak in power have helped him keep democracy from flowering in Egypt.

Two years after Obama's famous speech in Cairo, in which he called for a "new beginning between the United States and Muslims", it might be a little late for his administration to heed the words of Mostafa Amin, Egypt's most famous columnist and journalist:

Maybe America gains a lot when it exports to us arms and cars or planes, but it loses more when it does not export the best that its civilisation has produced, which is freedom and democracy and human rights. The value of America is that it should defend this product, not only in its country but throughout the world! It may harm some of its interests, but it will make gains that will live hundreds of years, for the friendship of peoples live forever, because the peoples do not die, but governments change like the winter weather.

Video Fwd: INSIDE REVOLUTION SQUARE

Bruce Gagnon's Organizing Notes
Friday, February 04, 2011
INSIDE REVOLUTION SQUARE





I'm home in bed sick today.....finally caught up with me. Looks like I'll miss the VFP retreat this weekend.

This is an important report.

More: I was watching CBS News and they were talking about how the Egyptian transfer of power is going to take some time and that the public needs to be patient. Then one of talking heads starting recalling how various Iranians had once been brought to Egypt for torture and that it was known the CIA was involved. I started thinking that Mubarak and his agents must have lots of files and records to destroy before he leaves town. This could be one key reason why all of this back and forth is going on now. They are stalling for time.

Text Fwd: Institute for Policy Studies: Egypt: The end of the U.S. imperium in the Middle East?

* Text fwd from Corazon Vadez Fabros on Feb. 3, 2011

IPS expert Phyllis Bennis helps parse this rapidly unfolding story and what it may mean for the balance of power in the Middle East.

http://www.ips-dc.org/media/egypt_the_end_of_the_us_imperium_in_the_middle_east
Institute for Policy Studies
Egypt: The end of the U.S. imperium in the Middle East?
January 30, 2011 · By Phyllis Bennis

Text Fwd: [ Hankyoreh Editorial] Egypt’s revolution

Hankyoreh
[Editorial] Egypt’s revolution
Posted on : Feb.1,2011 14:11 KST

EXCERPT

More attention is focusing on Washington’s role in the situation that has arrived at this point. The United States sends about $1.3 billion dollars a year in military aid to Egypt, and major corporations in the military-industrial complex such as Lockheed Martin have concessions there. Washington is in a position to wield considerable influence on the military government in Cairo. It needs to send a signal so that the Egyptian government does not go against the people’s hunger for democracy.

Of course, the idea of an Egypt without Mubarak may be troubling for the United States. He has, after all, been a key companion in Washington’s Middle East policy, which regards the security of Israel as paramount. But quashing Egyptians’ desire for democratization after decades of suppression is not desirable for Washington’s long-term interests or those of the international community. There is a grave danger that thwarting the democratization drive could empower fundamentalists who depend on terror tactics, and lead to greater instability in the region and throughout the world. We hope that the United States does not repeat in Egypt the foolishness of supporting the military government that quashed the Gwangju Democratization Movement in the 1980s, which had the effect of delaying South Korea’s democratization and generating anti-U.S. sentiment.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Text & Video Fwd: WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TURN TO VIOLENCE?

Bruce Gagnon blog
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TURN TO VIOLENCE?

This morning we've learned via Al Jazeera TV that the Mubarak government has unleashed their secret police and thugs onto the peaceful people that have been gathered for days in the city square. There can be no doubt that despite milk-toast words about "democracy" and the "rule of law" from Obama, the U.S. has likely told Mubarak to take whatever steps are necessary to "regain stability" in his country. This would be the signal to use violence to disperse the people and to create division and fear as a strategy to quell the protest movement.

(Later this afternoon I heard a U.S. State Department public relations spokesman say that Hillary Clinton had called the "new" V-P of Egypt and told him that an immediate investigation was needed to prosecute those responsible for unleashing the thugs on the peaceful protesters. The media leaped to challenge that remark but he just repeated it and went on. This clearly indicates to me the total lack of seriousness with which the U.S. government views this incident.)

One news report said that Mubarak had sent out Oil Ministry workers, members of his political party, and state police into the square to beat up the pro-democracy crowd. MSNBC has reported that Obama had earlier sent a U.S. official, who has a long-time relationship with Mubarak, to meet with the Egyptian president and help guide his actions. There is no doubt in my mind that Mubarak would not be taking these hostile actions without the behind-the-scenes support of the U.S. military empire. Of course the U.S. must publicly call for peaceful resolution by renouncing the use of violence. But as Martin Luther King, Jr. used to say, the U.S. is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.

Let's see if the U.S. administration and Congress immediately pulls the plug on weapons grants/sales to the Egyptian government. Mubarak's government is the second largest recipient of weapons from the U.S. (just behind Israel) in the world. It is the U.S. weapons that have essentially kept the Egyptian people under control for 30 years. Where has the U.S. outrage been over torture and failed democracy during those brutal years?

Ben Wedeman of CNN tweeted:

bencnn White House issues pale, weak statement on situation in Cairo. Imagine if Tahrir were in Tehran.

UPDATE: Just to illustrate my point further how the corporate oligarchy works and thinks, here is a very instructive comment from the war criminal Tony Blair. In an interview with CNN, Tony Blair, former British prime minister and currently an envoy to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, defends President Mubarak, calling him "immensely courageous and a force for good."





See also

Wednesday, February 02, 2011
MORE CRITIQUE OF WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE

Wednesday, February 02, 2011
ONE VOICE MOVES HEARTS

Text Fwd: Egypt: Will U.S. And NATO Launch Second Suez Intervention?

Stop NATO blog
February 2, 2011
Egypt: Will U.S. And NATO Launch Second Suez Intervention?
Rick Rozoff


On February 1 General James Mattis, commander of United States Central Command whose area of responsibility includes Egypt on its western end, stated that Washington currently has no plans to reinforce naval presence off the coast of that country, but added that in the event of the closure of the Suez Canal:

"Were it to happen obviously we would have to deal with it diplomatically, economically, militarily...."

After the canal was nationalized in 1956 by the government of Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt was attacked by Israel, Britain and France.

The day before Mattis' statement the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Enterprise and its carrier strike group - consisting of a guided missile cruiser, three guided missile destroyers, a fast combat support ship and Carrier Air Wing One (which had been deployed for the Suez Crisis in 1956-1957) with fighter and surveillance aircraft and Seahawk helicopters - crossed through the Strait of Gibraltar from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea on its way to the Suez Canal. The warships are scheduled for operations in the Gulf of Aden off the coasts of Somalia and Yemen and in the Arabian Sea to support the war in Afghanistan.

In the words of the commander of the carrier strike group, the deployment "sends a strong signal that the Enterprise Strike Group has arrived to operate and integrate with our partners in the region." [1]

U.S. and NATO warships regularly transit the canal for operations off the Horn of Africa and for the escalating war in South Asia.

With the expansion of protests in Egypt calling for the resignation of President Hosni Mubarek, the prospect of the Suez Canal being closed would severely hamper Western military operations across the Arabian Sea from Somalia to Pakistan, the central locus of global naval deployments and warfighting in the 21st century. [2]

In addition to being a gateway for the passage of warships including carriers and their warplanes, the Suez Canal is a major transit point for oil emanating from the Persian Gulf to the Red Sea en route to the Mediterranean Sea for European consumption. "The waterway is the fastest crossing from the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian Ocean. Should it close, tankers would have to sail around southern Africa. About 7.5% of world sea trade is carried via the canal today."

"Energy industry analysts...view the intimidation factor posed by the U.S. military’s presence in the region as beneficial to Western corporate interests in case a new government in Cairo does indeed seek to block shipments of oil and other goods through the canal." [3]

This week it was announced that several European oil companies, among them Norway's Statoil, Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum, halted drilling in Egypt, closed down local offices and began evacuating the families of foreign workers as well as non-essential staff.

On January 31 U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates held phone conversations with his Egyptian and Israeli counterparts, defense ministers Mohamed Hussein Tantawi and Ehud Barak. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell would not disclose the contents of the talks to the press.

READ MORE

[Photos Fwd: PSPD] Korean solidarity for people in Egypt

All the image source: People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, Jan. 31, 2011

참여 연대, 2011년 1월 31일
The Egypt government should accept people's democratic demands and stop bloody oppression on them.
이집트 정부는 민주화 요구를 받아들이고 유혈 탄압을 중단하라
In front of the Egypt embassy, Seoul, Korea, Jan. 31, 2011
2011년 1월 31일 서울 이집트 대사관 앞