Group items tagged

Article from Jerusalem Post 7.11.13

"Regardless of how disappointed millions of Egyptians were in Morsi's rule, he was an elected president. It is hard to argue that Morsi's removal was anything but a military coup. As such, US law dictates that the $1.5 billion in annual aid to Egypt be cut. The Obama administration is likely to look for ways around that law, and a flexible approach is in order. Aid to Egypt flows from its peace agreement with Israel, so cuts could jeopardize that treaty. Nonetheless, if Egypt's generals fail to move in a more democratic direction, some curbs to military support should be on the table. Anti-American sentiments run high in Egypt, and US influence over events is limited. Still, the United States must use the few tools it possesses to help Egypt achieve a more stable path."

*Judith Miller is a middle east expert *Judith Miller - Morsi " 'obliterated' fundamental democracy in Egypt" *Calls Morsi's ouster a "soft coup" *Cutting off military aid a bad idea. We want to support the new government because "the United States has a strategic interest in Egypt." *Democracy should be more than just elections. *Israel "relieved" that Morsi was removed but worried about what will replace Morsi. Israel wants stability in Sinai Peninsula and the streets

the Muslim Brotherhood ... failed to exercise the art of modern-day inclusive, participatory, and consensus-building politics that is necessary to move post-Mubarak Egypt forward.

It has been especially surprising to watch many Egyptians and Americans try to cast a military coup - which is what the army executed when it deposed Mr. Morsi, detaining him and many of his Brotherhood allies - as a democratic tool. The Obama administration, hoping to avoid a legally mandated cutoff of United States aid to Egypt, thus further inflaming anti-Americanism there, has used tortuous rhetoric to avoid calling a coup a coup, or even condemning it. So have many lawmakers and analysts who say the surest way to protect American interests in the Egypt-Israel peace treaty, the Suez Canal and Egypt's cooperation in countering terrorism is to work with the army, Egypt's most powerful institution. A different but equally pragmatic case is made by Egyptian liberals, secularists and non-Islamists who bravely took to the streets to force the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak in 2011, voted (in many cases) for Mr. Morsi, then turned against him. As Mr. Morsi proved increasingly eager to impose Islamic authoritarianism on the country, the opposition said it collected more than 20 million signatures on a petition demanding his removal (surpassing the 13 million votes Mr. Morsi won in the 2012 election ) and rallied millions of protesters. In their analysis, the army was simply honoring the people's will when it forced Mr. Morsi out. Some Egyptians say they will do that again if the next president also fails them. The basic flaw in these arguments is that coups, forcible overthrows, whatever one calls them, do not provide a foundation for stability or sound representative government. And unlike Mr. Mubarak, Mr. Morsi was not an autocrat imposed by the army, but the country's first freely elected president. True, he was a disastrous leader. But as The Times has reported, remnants of Mr. Mubarak's old order worked hard to sabotage him. It would have been better if his opposition, including the protesters, had worked to defeat him at the ballot box.