LONDON
(Reuters) - As protests escalate in Egypt and elsewhere, Western governments
are awkwardly trapped between strategic alliances, their own rhetoric on
democracy and rights and domestic political sympathy for those demonstrating.
Police and demonstrators fought
running battles in the streets of Cairo on Friday on a fourth day of
unprecedented protests by tens of thousands demanding an end to President Hosni
Mubarak's three decades of rule.
Hundreds have been arrested
following mass demonstrations inspired by events in nearby Tunisia, where President
Ben Ali fled into exile earlier this month after social media-fuelled protests
forced him from power.
Yemen's government -- another key
U.S. regional ally -- has also faced mounting protests as activists across the
Middle East and elsewhere gain inspiration from each other.
Washington and others have long
quietly relied on sometimes repressive regional rulers, seeing them as a
bulwark against Islamic extremism. Now they face few good options.
"They haven't managed this
balancing act very well and now they are caught in the middle," said
Rosemary Hollis, professor of Middle East policy studies at London's City
University.
"They have maintained this
polite fiction that they are in favour of democracy and openness but in reality
they have been happy to allow regimes to avoid reforms."
Hollis says the strong performance
of Islamists Hamas in 2006 Palestinian elections in the Gaza Strip scared many
policymakers and deterred them from pushing for genuine democratic reform
elsewhere in the region.
U.S. officials including President
Barack Obama have called for restraint, while Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton urged Cairo to engage the Egyptian people about reform and seize the
moment is to address aspirations.
British foreign secretary William
Hague said Egypt's authorities should not "suppress people's right to
freedom of expression", but again seemed keen to held back from taking
sides.
If Western capitals voice outright
support for the demonstrators as they did during protests in Iran in 2009, they
risk alienating old friends and further emboldening those on the streets.
If security forces crack down
brutally, Western leaders will fear the accusation of complicity in rights
abuses.
But if more leaders are ousted, a
tide of unrest could bring Islamist governments to power and hit regional
stability.
DIFFICULT CHOICES
"It's going to be very
difficult for the U.S. to tack away from Mubarak, even if they're careful not
to offer support for a crackdown," said Ian Bremmer, president of
political risk consultancy Eurasia Group.
Egypt is also seen as a key ally
against Iran, central to limiting weapon-smuggling to Palestinian Hamas
militants in the Gaza Strip. The Suez Canal remains crucial to Europe's imports
of oil and cheap Asian goods.
"The least bad option may be
to stick with nurse, for fear of finding something worse -- but at the same
time try to nudge in the direction of political and economic reform," said
Nigel Inkster, a former Deputy Chief of Britain's Secret Intelligence Service
MI6 and now head of transnational threats and political risk at London's
International Institute for Strategic Studies.
"Ultimately, the U.S. and
European powers can do little more than wait upon events and try to ensure they
do not unduly antagonise whoever comes out on the winning side."
Western leaders will also be
keeping a careful eye on their own public opinion. News organisations and a
growing number of politically active young people watch the Tunisian and
Egyptian protests closely on sites such as Twitter, and would be very critical
of perceived Western acquiescence in bloodshed.
"Part of the political
strategy in events like this has always been about influencing Western public
and media opinion and therefore to an extent government policy," said Mark
Hanson, a former new media strategist for Britain's Labour Party and
London-based social media consultant.
"These protesters are doing
that very well."
"UNTOUCHABLE
COMPENSATION"
Leaked classified US diplomatic
cables released by WikiLeaks on Friday showed diplomats continuing to press
Mubarak and his government toward democratic reform, the reduction of
censorship and the easing of a state of emergency.
But they also make it clear U.S.
financial aid to Mubarak's government -- particularly to the military who may
prove a deciding factor if protests continue to rise -- is a requirement for
good relations.
"President Mubarak and military
leaders view our military assistance program as a cornerstone of our mil-mil
relationship and consider the $1.3 billion in annual FMF (foreign military
funding) as untouchable compensation for making peace with Israel," says a
Febuary 2010 cable aimed at briefing US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral
Mike Mullen for a visit.
Egypt's army could decide Mubarak's
fate and act as kingmakers if they choose not to back him, deciding which other
political forces -- ranging from the Muslim Brotherhood to former UN nuclear
chief-turned-political dissident Mohamed El Baradei or Mubarak's son Gamal --
might gain influence.
Gamal, 47, is seen having allies in
government and business as well as in the West but less clout with the army.
Both Gamal and his father deny he is being groomed for succession.
"Gamal is the sort of person
they love somewhere like Davos," said City University's Hollis, referring
to the World Economic Forum of business and political leaders taking place in
Switzerland.
"But his last name is Mubarak
and that damns him on the streets. It's really the army that will decide. The
army elite is very close to Washington but you have to ask how much
anti-American -- and anti-Israeli -- sentiment there might be in the lower
ranks."
No comments:
Post a Comment