"Obama Presses for Change but Not a New Face at the Top"

[Clio the Leo]

"Obama Presses for Change but Not a New Face at the Top"
By DAVID E. SANGER and HELENE COOPER
Published: January 29, 2011

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s decision to stop short, at least for now, of calling for Hosni Mubarak’s resignation was driven by the administration’s concern that it could lose all leverage over the Egyptian president, and because it feared creating a power vacuum inside the country, according to administration officials involved in the debate.

In recounting Saturday’s deliberations, they said Mr. Obama was acutely conscious of avoiding any perception that the United States was once again quietly engineering the ouster of a major Middle East leader.

But after the president and his advisers met early Saturday afternoon in the Situation Room, Mr. Obama, through a description of the session issued by the National Security Council, once again urged Mr. Mubarak to refrain from violence against the protesters and to support “concrete steps” that advanced political reform within Egypt. He did not define what those steps should be or whether the White House believed they could take place while Mr. Mubarak was in office.

According to senior administration officials at the meeting, Mr. Obama warned that any overt effort by the United States to insert itself into easing Mr. Mubarak out, or easing a successor in, could backfire. “He said several times that the outcome has to be decided by the Egyptian people, and the U.S. cannot be in a position of dictating events,” said a senior administration official, who like others, would not speak for attribution because of the delicacy of the discussions.

The administration’s restraint is also driven by the fact that, for the United States, dealing with an Egypt without Mr. Mubarak would be difficult at best, and downright scary at worst. For 30 years, his government has been a pillar of American foreign policy in a volatile region, not least because of Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel. American officials fear that a new government — particularly one dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood or other Islamist groups — may not honor the treaty signed in 1979 by Mr. Mubarak’s predecessor, Anwar el-Sadat.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/world/middleeast/30diplo.html

[lunatica]

1. The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry...

Empire building is messy and sometimes it backfires and judging from history all empires end sooner or later.

Maybe if we can't take the oil anymore we'll start building alternate sources of energy.

[FrenchieCat]

2. The administration's public restraint is not driven by fear......

but rather a refreshing step away from previous Bush, et al hubris.

Read....
Cairo, Egypt - Then and Now
http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/01/30/cairo-egypt-then-and-now/

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[polmaven]

6. So you don't find diplomacy

as opposed to knee-jerk reaction refreshing? :shrug:

[Skittles]

3. makes both of them look like fools

[RichGirl]

5. The Obama Administration is preparing...

...for WHATEVER outcome..with Mubarak or without. As stated in other articles. I think it's very wise to let Egypt do whatever they are going to do without the U.S. butting in and trying to orchestrate the whole thing. That is why they hate us, after all. Think of how much better it would have been to let the Iraqi people decide whether they want Saddam gone or not. We HAVE TO stop being the policeman of the world.

Regardless of what Mubarak has done, it would be really bad if the U.S. tried to openly throw him under the bus. There are other regions in the ME and what we do in this situation will effect the whole.

I also think the Egyptian people will feel much more empowered if they do this on their own.

[polmaven]

7. Exactly right!

I don't understand why so many people are now clamoring for the president to do exactly what we all denounced when the last pResident did it.

[FrenchieCat]

8. Because they practice their own brand of hypocrisis!

It's ok to do it when it's your side.....

[polmaven]

9. Oh!

I guess I missed that day during my civics class. :hi:

[FrenchieCat]

10. What I understand is that as the Egyptians are allowed to act locally under their own accord,

it can help the world globally, as long as the US doesn't appear to be doing too much "meddling".

My biggest fear is that if we meddle too much and "take sides", we will put into question the fact that at some point, the Iranians will not allow to stand the fact that they have been outdone by the Egyptians. In time, the Iranians will try again to change their own government. However, if we appear to be "orchestrating" regime change in Egypt, we may not see that.....and that would be blowing a really advantageous (to the entire world) opportunity in Iran.

We were supposed to be changing the hubris that the prior administration exhibited for 8 years.....and we can't do that if we are hypocritical in trying to have a giant say in the future of the Egyptian people.

It appears that Pres. Obama, once again, has it right, and those advocating that he speaks up loudly, once again have it wrong! Why some progressives would demand loud cowboy diplomacy is truly amazing...especially when we can get quiet wisdom and real effective change by allowing history to play itself out.

[polmaven]

11. In sync with you

all the way.

[Phx_Dem]

13. Amen.

[Phx_Dem]

12. We shouldn't be pressing for a "new face at the top."

We've seen how butting in can make things can go from bad to much worse.

If the people of Egypt want Mubarak to step down, it's up to them to make it happen peacefully. Mubarak has been a decent partner of U.S., Isreal and other western democracies and a stable force in the Middle East. He's not perfect, but he's not a brutal dictator like Sadam Hussein either. It for the people of Egypt to decide and bring about, not us.

[FrenchieCat]

14. That's one of the reasons that ElBaradei is sounding anti-Obama in his own way......

for the time being, it's what he needs to do.....considering the distrust that many
Egyptians have for America's agenda of the past when it comes to them.

This change needs to be handled by the Egyptians, and the more neutral our government appears,
the better it will be in a long run.

Other ME countries will note that America is largely staying out of a civil conflict
with a country deemed an Ally and in which our government has a lot at stake in the outcome
...which will encourage others to act similarily without fear that this is an American
undertaking....or that America will play a heavy hand.