Flashermac Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 So what does Al Jazeera have to say about the treatment of Jews in Arab countries - say Egypt, which this thread is about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 I've always heard the chinese charactor for chaos also means opporuntity. I don't know if its true but it may apply to this situation. Once again America is presented with an opporunity out of chaos. We don't have a good track record. The elder Bush had rock star status in the first Gulf war and we blew that opporunity. Clinton was handed Bin Laden on a platter and at least had an excuse of it violating the law or some such excuse but if there ever was a time to let the CIA do what its infamous for, it would have been that. The moderates in Iran reached out to the Dubya and he rejected them early in his presidency and the hard liners said 'see, you can't trust them' and got a firmer grip. Enough said about the invasion of Iraq. Mubarak is done. He's got the same future as video rental stores. The 'realpolitik' in me says we immediately secretly start reaching out to the groups that will get power including the Moslem Brotherhhood. Yemen is much, much trickier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaiHome Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 A pretty good opinion piece from today's Post. Makes a number of very good points. Can Mubarak follow path of South Korea? Published: 4/02/2011 at 12:00 AM Newspaper section: News As the world holds its breath waiting to see if the Egyptian people's amazing struggle for democracy ends in a breakthrough or a bloodbath, President Hosni Mubarak would do well to consider the South Korean option. Ultimately, South Korea's dictators and democracy were both winners. Like Egyptians, South Koreans endured decades of American-backed dictatorship. In the spring of 1987, South Korea's military government held sham elections not unlike the ones held in Egypt last year. However, in both places, a combination of repression and rising expectations proved a combustible mix. If the actual trigger for Egyptians was the sudden overthrow of Tunisia's dictatorship last month, Koreans drew inspiration from the "People Power" overthrow of Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines the year before. As in Cairo today, student-led demonstrations drew hundreds of thousands onto the streets of Seoul 24 years ago. Like Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, South Korea's Christians played a supporting role at the outset. After weeks of clashes and teargas, on June 29 the government announced that a free and fair direct presidential election would be held within six months. Given that almost exactly seven years earlier, the military unleashed a crackdown that killed over 200 citizens, the question we must ask is, what had changed? When facing persistent social unrest, all dictators invariably undertake a cost-benefit analysis of cracking down versus opening up. In 1980, South Korea's coup leaders correctly determined that there would be little or no cost for killing. Indeed, within months of wiping the blood off his hands, general-turned-president Chun Doo-hwan was one of president Ronald Reagan's first foreign guests at the White House. Later that same year, Seoul was awarded the 1988 Summer Olympics. Far from incurring any costs, South Korea's dictators were rewarded for their bad behaviour. China reached a similar conclusion in June of 1989. After two weeks of martial law, the butchers of Beijing calculated that firing on demonstrators in Tiananmen Square would be of great political benefit and little cost. Indeed, economic growth returned to double-digit rates within three years. In South Korea in 1987, by contrast, not only were the demonstrations much larger than in 1980, but the Reagan administration was now insisting that the Chun regime make the transition to democracy. More importantly, Korean military leaders revealed later that they had considered a crackdown, but feared losing the Olympics if they had turned the streets of Seoul red. Many pundits have declared that the United States is a mere bystander to the struggle for democracy in Egypt, powerless to shape the outcome. This could not be further from the truth. Not only does the US provide US$1.3 billion a year in foreign aid (largely to the military no less), but the US is also Egypt's leading trade partner. Since last Friday, the Obama administration has only hinted that future US assistance could be linked to the government's behaviour. If he has not already done so behind the scenes, President Obama must not waste a moment to make it clear to Mr Mubarak that if the Egyptian army opens fire on innocent demonstrators, US aid stops and sanctions begin. If Mr Mubarak still decides to crack down, then it is time to re-evaluate all US overseas assistance. If Washington cannot shape outcomes in the country that is its second leading aid recipient, then it is time to conduct an own cost-benefit analysis. If Mr Mubarak has time to read to the end of the Korean case, he might even fully embrace the decision to open up. Largely free and fair elections were held in South Korea in December 1987 as scheduled, but due to a divided opposition, the military's candidate (and a leader of the previous coup and crackdown no less) managed to win the election. We will never know if there would have been a military coup had one of the opposition candidates won. Once a civilian was elected president five years later, Mr Chun and his successor did briefly spend time behind bars, but they are now living out their days as senior statesmen. South Korea's transition to democracy was conservative and gradual, but democracy was the ultimate winner. Korean legislators may still favour fistfights over filibusters, but South Korea is now the most vibrant democracy in Asia. It is not too late for Mr Mubarak to start Egypt down that path. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter M. Beck is a POSCO Fellow at the East-West Centre. The article originally appeared in the Pacific Forum CSIS Pacnet series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Scrutinizer Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 I wouldn't call for a complete moratorium. For instance, I would feel not only guilty but a bit lacking morally if we didn't provide aid to places like southern Sudan for example and other places facing oppression or genocide or ethnicide. Propping up autocratic strongmen who side with us we can do without. Letting people starve and/or face murder and rape is another matter. Well, if your morals would be offended I am sure you as a private citizen could donate aid money. I say no more financial foreign aid from our dwindling tax coffers. We can help fund the UN (in step with the other countries percentage-wise in the UN) to do its job of policing and protecting the world if 'the world' so chooses to interfere. But morally I feel it is wrong to neglect our own citizens, children and country and place our dire needs below the rest of the world. We are a nation. Let's take care of our own house first before thinking where best to help out with BILLIONS of our hard earned tax monies. But that is just me. The problem is everyone has their pet charities (not to diminish the places and problems you cited, Steve) and we cannot cure all the ills of the world if we are bankrupt, our kids ill and under educated, our cities in decline, our people out of jobs, our finances in disarray and tax income declining (or taxes being raised astronomically to cover the bills) and states ready to declare bankruptcy. I mean fuck, we are in dire straits, sir. We need to get that through our heads and fix the damn problems in the country before getting all christian and worrying about the rest of the world who can't take care of themselves. We just can't afford it anymore, Steve. Maybe the Chinese can fix those problems for a while 'ey? They seem to have a serious vested interest of late. And yeah, I would instate a true TOTAL moratorium on all foreign aid, for all. Those billions would do wonders for our economy (even if we weren't borrowing from Peter to pay Paul) and would be better spent helping our own country pull itself out of the quagmire we have let our idiot politicians get us into. No more money, no more discounted weapons of war. But we will send you all the fucking lawyers you'd want or ever need. We have plenty to go around. JMHO. P.S. And ten years would be a short time in the scheme of world history. Okay, let's make it 12 years. Three presidential administrations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Scrutinizer Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 "Propping up autocratic strongmen who side with us we can do without." And yes, I totally agree with this. Never seems to work anyway, and just pisses people off to want to kill us even more than if we just let these people have their own form of government. If they don't like it they can do the same frigging thing they are doing right now in these countries. Fighting and revolting for their freedom and choice of a new government and leaders. Up to them same as it is up to us isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acockasian Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 So what does Al Jazeera have to say about the treatment of Jews in Arab countries - say Egypt, which this thread is about? I looked and was shocked to discover that Al Jazeera appears to have little to say about this! It does not seem fair that a country that not only survives, but thrives, on US foreign aid can have policies of racial and religious discrimination that would violate so many US laws if done in the US. After Scotland Israel was way up on my vacation list. Thats done now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 But are they government policies or policies of fringe crazies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 But are they government policies or policies of fringe crazies? p.s. I don't think you'll find anything because Egypt seized all Jewish property and expelled the Jews in 1948. I have no desire to defend Israel and property seizures, but judge both sides by the same standards. After all, Egypt is supposed to be #2 in foreign aid behind Israel. And they both treat their minorities like crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dexi Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Mubarak`s wealth has been estimated at $54 BILLION,mostly stashed in Swiss and UK banks.....public service must pay well in Egypt... :grin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Scrutinizer Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Mubarak`s wealth has been estimated at $54 BILLION,mostly stashed in Swiss and UK banks.....public service must pay well in Egypt... :grin: All from the tax dollars we send the country annually most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.