Live: Al Jazeera coverage of Egypt’s growing revolution

[AlicetheKurious]

What the hell drives all these other powerheaded generals and autocrats and plutocrats to resist and tear-gas such a simple thing for their own countries?

That's the wrong question, Jack. No bully willingly gives up power (duh!), whatever it costs others. The only thing that distinguishes them is the extent to which they believe they can get away with it. That's the main difference between the situation in Tunisia and those in Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen.

In my opinion, the decisive factor in all these cases is foreign intervention. In Tunisia's case, the world was taken by surprise. The uprising had been building up for weeks, but because Tunisia is a relatively small country, with limited geo-strategic value, and because Ben Ali had ruled it with an iron fist for so long, it remained under the radar until the last fateful days when it exploded onto the world's consciousness. The element of surprise and the very lack of precedent worked in the favor of the Tunisian revolutionaries -- the West and Ben Ali's Arab allies were caught with their pants down. In their panic, they abandoned him and, with the sole exception of Saudi Arabia, did everything they could to distance themselves and avoid being tainted by association.

Since then, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies have been working quietly and with devastating success to contain and subvert the Tunisian revolution to ensure that it poses no threat to their or the West's economic or strategic interests in the region. Their "weapon" of choice has been money, enormous sums of it, channeled to the Islamist elements in Tunisia, who have taken great pains to reassure the West that they will not be rocking any boats. In this, they have been given a big boost by the two main pan-Arab media networks controlled by Gulf monarchies, Al-Jazeera (Qatar) and Al-Arabiya (Saudi Arabia).

In Yemen and Bahrain, the stakes are much higher: both countries border the big kahuna itself, Saudi Arabia. In the case of Bahrain, like Saudi Arabia, it is an anachronistic and artificially-imposed monarchy, and also like Saudi Arabia, the ruling family is fundamentalist Sunni while a substantial number of the subjects are Shi'ite. These two factors alone have made it imperative that any revolution be decisively and permanently put down, no matter what. How imperative can be judged by the line of Saudi tanks that rumbled into Bahrain to help the government crush the uprising. Saudi Arabia is one of the world's biggest buyers of weapons, but they have rarely been used. The last time, I believe, was in Yemen in the 1960s, during the proxy war there between the "reactionary" pro-West regimes led by Saudi Arabia (in which the Saudis covertly collaborated with Israel) and the "progressive" front led by Egypt. Saudi Arabia has heavily invested in its soft power as a "religious" rather than a political authority figure among Arab states, and very, very rarely has it been willing to undermine that image by engaging in direct warfare or even using its huge arsenal of weapons.

Yemen not only shares a border directly with Saudi Arabia, its location right at the junction where the Red Sea meets the Gulf of Aden (the precious gateway from the Mediterranean to Africa and Asia) makes it a priceless asset that the West will do anything to keep under its tight control.

To make a long story short, in Bahrain and Yemen, powerful interests in the West and Saudi Arabia are committed to ensuring that the regime is not forced out, especially by pro-democracy revolutionaries, especially since no replacements for the current rulers are readily available**. Thus, US and Saudi support is a decisive factor in the regime's ability to persevere.

In Egypt, multiply that by 10. Even after the Tunisians rose up, most pundits failed to predict that the Egyptians would follow suit, so initially they had the advantage of taking the world by surprise. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies still have traumatic memories of when the Egyptian revolution in the 1950s and 1960s sparked anti-monarchist revolutions and uprisings all over the region and will do whatever they can to make sure history doesn't repeat itself.

Furthermore, if Yemen and Bahrain border Saudi Arabia, Egypt borders Israel. For nearly 40 years, the Israelis not only had no worries on their western front, but through the Americans, Israel was able to use Egypt to enforce its own policies in the Arab world. Israeli, and therefore American and, to a slightly lesser extent, European stakes in Egypt are astronomical. When Mubarak was forced out, it was problematic, but given how deeply the US and Israel had penetrated Egyptian state institutions, there was a Plan B and a Plan C and so on.

Plan B was to replace Mubarak with Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman (one of Israel's best friends in Egypt), a proposal that was vehemently rejected by the Egyptian people. Plan C was to have Mubarak's Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) take control and oversee the transition from Mubarak to a civilian government that would be acceptable to Egypt's American patrons.

Mubarak's Defense Minister, Field-Marshall Hussein Tantawy, and the other members of the SCAF are firmly in the Americans' pockets: not only is there no public oversight whatsoever on how the US's $1.3 billions in military aid are spent, it is estimated that all the SCAF members have richly profited from illegal kickbacks and commissions on weapons purchases during the past several decades.

However, it suited neither the Americans nor the SCAF for Egypt to be ruled openly by a military junta that is financially and militarily supported by the US. The SCAF, whose members have enjoyed tremendous privileges, has always cultivated a paranoid level of secrecy that not only preserved its mystique, but prevented unwelcome inquiry into its business interests.

In the past 9 months, it has become painfully clear that Plan C involved having the SCAF ostensibly transfer power to an elected parliament and president, while maintaining an iron grip on power from behind the scenes. I won't go into why this is so obvious, but it seems the idea was to allow a weak and deeply divided parliament to be elected (by fraud, if necessary), that would be dominated by the Islamists and the remnants of Mubarak's NDP, with a few others sprinkled here and there for show, but that this parliament would have no real power to make fundamental economic or foreign policy changes. Real power would remain in the hands of the SCAF, but would be later be manifested in the person of the president, whose job would be to ensure that nothing be done to threaten either the US', Saudi Arabia's or Israel's domination of Egypt. The SCAF gave itself until around 2013 to groom a suitable president and get him elected.

During the past 9 months, everything was done to isolate, fragment and demoralize the revolutionaries. As recently as last Friday, they had been written off by pretty much all the political players. The elections that would drive the final nail in their coffin were mere days away. The Islamists and the members of Mubarak's NDP strutted around and talked like they had the country all sewn up.

But, wait! ....

On Edit: My bad. Clearly the replacements were in fact readily available. Ali Abdullah Saleh has agreed to step down and hand over power to his vice president who, like Egypt's SCAF, will be tasked with what the US and its totalitarian allies laughingly call 'overseeing the transition to democracy'.

[Sounder]

Alice the Kurious wrote…

Their "weapon" of choice has been money, enormous sums of it, channeled to the Islamist elements in Tunisia, who have taken great pains to reassure the West that they will not be rocking any boats. In this, they have been given a big boost by the two main pan-Arab media networks controlled by Gulf monarchies, Al-Jazeera (Qatar) and Al-Arabiya (Saudi Arabia).

How does the establishment get away with making like Al-Quada is an enemy of society when they are its sponsors? It seems a lot like provocateurs in a ‘demonstration’ situation where the ‘cops’ come down on a group that is not even the folk that caused the trouble. What are the rewards that induce these folk to become occasional targets of the establishment even while being employed by the same elements?

Surely, all this fraud will implode upon itself, right?

[AlicetheKurious]

The Islamists in Tunisia, and for that matter, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, are to "al-Qaeda" what Conservative Protestants in the US are to the Klu Klux Klan. It's ridiculous to lump them together.

What are the rewards that induce these folk to become occasional targets of the establishment even while being employed by the same elements?

I have no idea, but it couldn't be that hard to find misfits, loners, individuals with a weak sense of self and various issues that make them ready for exploitation. Presumably the recruiters know exactly who they work for, though.

That being said, it couldn't be that easy, either: "al-Qaeda" seems to exist more in its supposed enemies' speeches and accusations than on the ground.

[AlicetheKurious]

I'm making one today, will be wearing it tomorrow.

[JackRiddler]

I'm making one today, will be wearing it tomorrow.

Image not visible, unfortunately.

[Seamus OBlimey]

Three US students 'released' in Egypt

Relatives say Egyptian authorities decided not to press charges against three accused of throwing petrol bombs in Cairo unrest

Paul Harris
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 24 November 2011 15.16 GMT



Three American students arrested in Egypt and accused of throwing petrol bombs during the current unrest in Tahrir Square have been released and will not be charged, a relative of one of the accused has said.

The three young men – Luke Gates, Gregory Porter, and Derrik Sweeney – had been picked up by the authorities during clashes near the Interior Ministry, Egyptian police had said.

The trio had also been shown on local television after their arrests, prompting fears they would be accused of being outside agitators in the violence gripping the Egyptian capital.

However, Joy Sweeney, the mother of Derrik, confirmed news reports that the three were set to be released shortly and charges against them would be dropped. "All three of them have been released. The attorney-general is not going to appeal," she told CNN on Thursday.

Sweeney said the news had been confirmed by the US consul general in Egypt, Roberto Powers. The diplomat had told her that the trio of students were now being taken to a local doctor for a medical examination and from there would go to a police station to have their paperwork processed ahead of being set free and returned to their student dorms.

Sweeney expressed her delight that the situation – which could have developed into a thorny diplomatic problem between Egypt and the US – had been resolved. "It is absolutely incredible. We are just so blessed and grateful right now," she said. Sweeney expected that her son Derrik, at least, would now be leaving the strife-torn country as Powers had warned that the students pictures had been displayed all over local news media and it might not be safe to stay. "It wouldn't be really be safe or prudent for him to be in the country," Sweeney said.

The three were in Egypt to study at the American University in Cairo. Gates is a 21-year-old exchange student from Bloomington, Indiana, who attends Indiana University, Porter, 19, is at Drexel University in Pennsylvania, and Sweeney attends Georgetown University and is from Jefferson City, Missouri.

"We are grateful for the news this morning that our student, Derrik Sweeney, and the other two American students have been released in Cairo. Our entire Georgetown community is deeply grateful to all those whose prompt attention and work led to their release," said Georgetown university president John DeGioia.

While in detention the three had been shown on Egyptian state television standing against a wall, looking scared, with pictures of their driving licences and ID cards spread out next to what the channel said were petrol bombs. Further footage, allegedly taken in Tahrir Square, showed demonstrators – at least one of whom was wearing a mask – with caucasian features, including a young man with blond hair.

Their apparent release is a dramatic turnaround by the Egyptian authorities who just hours earlier had appeared to be set to be held for at least four more days while police investigated the case.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/no ... d-in-egypt

The Revolution at Cairo’s American University

[JackRiddler]

.

In a little bit the sun will rise on what may be a decisive Friday in Egypt.

Just read this look back at the last seven months:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/24/ ... uare/print

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only.

November 24, 2011
The Tom and Jerry Show
Back to Tahrir Square

by ESAM AL-AMIN

When former Vice President (and intelligence chief) Omar Suleiman announced on state television last February 11the transfer of power from Hosni Mubarak to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), millions of Egyptians began celebrating in the streets the culmination of their revolution that rid them of their dictator. The demonstrators’ chant then was “the people and the army are one.” Indeed, the role of SCAF in refusing to crack down on protestors and forcing the resignation of Mubarak proved decisive in the three-week revolt.

Nine months later, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians are back in Tahrir Square and streets across the country. Ironically, their chant is now “The police and the army are one,” in a clear rejection of the violent tactics employed by the police against the demonstrators. In three days of confrontation since November 20 at least forty people were killed and more than 2,000 injured at the hands of the security forces. But this time the Egyptian youth will not pack up and go home. They are determined to reclaim their revolution and force the transfer of power from the military to a real civilian government.

But how did we get from there to here?

Shortly after Mubarak was deposed, SCAF promised to stay in power no longer than six months. It subsequently called for a popular referendum on March 19 that called for parliamentary elections, followed by writing a new constitution, and then presidential elections. Championed by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and other Islamic factions, the public approved the referendum with an overwhelming majority of 77 per cent, although secular parties wanted to first draft the constitution for the fear that Islamic parties would have an edge over them after the elections.

During this brief campaign it became clear to all political trends that the Islamically oriented parties, led by the MB, are better organized, well financed, and have the abilities and skills to mobilize the public to their cause. This fact prompted fear and panic not only from the secular, leftist, and liberal parties within Egypt but also from other Western powers led by the United States.

Furthermore, the traditional secular and liberal parties expressed their concern that if the elections were held soon, the Islamists were poised to win a large share of seats and dictate a new constitution that might curtail some freedoms or favor the application of Islamic laws. Despite the pronouncement by most Islamic parties, including the Freedom and Justice Party, the political arm of the MB, that the constitution writing committee would include all political parties and trends, most secular parties did not believe such assurances.

Throughout the summer most secular and liberal parties pressured SCAF to issue a decree that would impose supra-constitutional principles and thus foist them on the future parliament. The opponents of this argued that, on its face, this practice is undemocratic, usurps the rights of the people, and tramples upon their right to express their free will. They also argue that it is unnecessary since all parties have agreed on the nature of the state, namely to be a democratic and civil one.

Nevertheless, the proponents of this approach pushed hard to impose their vision. Consequently, Deputy Prime Minister Ali Al-Silmi, backed by SCAF, called for a conference of all political parties to approve his plan for the future constitution. But remarkably this document also called for a special constitutional privilege for the military, effectively according it a sovereign status. In effect, it called for its budget to be outside the purview of parliament and for a veto power over any strategic decision by the government. In short, it was similar to the role that the Turkish military played in the country since the military coup of 1960 until Prime Minister Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party was elected in 2002.

The rejection of Al-Silmi’s proposed document was swift and sweeping not only in principle by the Islamic parties, but also from other nationalist and secular parties because of its tilt towards the military. It was a disguised effort to keep the military outside the control and supervision of the future democratic institutions of the state.

But this was the latest episode of SCAF’s many attempts to manipulate the future course of Egypt. Since the very beginning it has been laggard in implementing the objectives of the revolution. The despised emergency laws were never repealed. While changing the name of the security apparatus, much of its senior personnel and tactics were retained. Over 12,000 civilians were charged and tried swiftly in military trials facing harsh sentences, while the most corrupt leaders of the Mubarak regime – including the deposed president and his sons- have been tried grudgingly in slow civilian courts.

Moreover, none of the reforms announced by SCAF came out of its own initiative. It either reluctantly adhered to final court rulings by the judiciary, or yielded to the demands of the people, built up over many weeks, eventually culminating in large demonstrations and sit-ins. To wit:

The sacking of Mubarak’s cabinet in favor of a new government supported by the people. The banning of Mubarak’s corrupt party and confiscating its assets. The dismissal of thousands of corrupt officials from local councils. The trial of senior leaders and ministers of the deposed regime. The opening of the Rafah crossing to ease the blockade on Gaza. Setting definite election dates after many delays. Changing elections laws to include parties’ list as well as individual candidates. Allowing expatriate citizens to vote outside of Egypt. Pointedly, none of these demands, as well as many others, were met without taking the matter to the streets. Often times, their decisions were too little too late, or with ineffective or inconsequential results.

For instance, all political parties have been calling for the activation of a law that bans from politics all individuals who were previously engaged in political corruption- effectively excluding all Mubarak’s Nationalist Democratic Party (NDP) officials. But SCAF dragged its feet for months while hundreds of those same NDP officials filed to contest the elections next week either as independents or as part of the lists of six new parties tied to the old regime. Ultimately, this past Monday, just one week before the elections, SCAF issued the Political Corruption Law that would make it almost impossible to impeach any candidate since they have to be disqualified only through the slow Egyptian judiciary.

Meanwhile, SCAF has been vulnerable to the tremendous pressures applied by foreign governments for different motives. Some Arab governments led by Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the U.A.E. used their financial leverage to bail out the deposed president by halting or slowing down his trial because of their strong ties to him. In addition, the U.S. and other Western countries insisted that SCAF give specific assurances regarding Western and Israeli interests, as well as secure certain concessions from the political Islamic parties. For example, under U.S. prodding, SCAF demanded and received assurance from the MB in late April that the group would not contest future presidential elections.

By June, SCAF was demanding that the group not advance one of its own to the position of Prime Minister, even if it won the elections. In August, the MB was told yet again that in any future government it should not push for senior posts such as foreign or interior ministries so as not to antagonize the West. While the group reluctantly agreed not to contest the posts of head of state or government, it was extremely dismayed and refused to adhere to further restrictions on its participation in politics.

Last July, the U.S. House Appropriations Committee earmarked $1.55 billion to Egypt on the condition that such aid should in part be used for “border security programs and activities in the Sinai” in order to insure Israel’s security concerns. It also directed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton certifies the humiliating demand that the Government of Egypt (supposedly democratically elected) “is not controlled by a foreign terrorist organization, or its affiliates or supporters, is implementing the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty, and is taking steps to detect and destroy the smuggling network and tunnels between Egypt and the Gaza strip.” Thus, when the Egyptian authorities acceded in late May to the demand by the Egyptian public to open the Rafah crossing and ease the blockade on Gaza, the crossing was closed again within just three days, due to U.S. and Israeli pressure. The status of the Rafah crossing is not currently very different from the Mubarak era.

By late September, SCAF finally set the parliamentary elections date for November 28. But it called for a staggered elections process to be implemented over three stages for the lower house as well as two stages for the upper house, effectively ending the elections process in March 2012. Many political parties and pro-democracy movements voiced their concerns that within such a system (with the banning of international elections monitors), the elections could be manipulated, especially when the same interior ministry (packed by Mubarak’s appointees) would supervise major parts of the electoral process.

To secure free and fair elections, SCAF started tacitly requesting concessions from the major political parties, especially the MB and other Islamically oriented parties. In return for their support of Al-Silmi’s supra-constitutional principles, SCAF pledged to guarantee free and fair parliamentary elections. But the MB and other Salafist parties refused even to show up to discuss the document. Meanwhile, other pro-democracy liberal and youth groups were extremely concerned about the extra constitutional powers given to the military in that document. Fearing the attempted power grab, most political parties and movements were actually united in their rejection, and called for a million-man demonstration in Tahrir square on Friday, November 18, insisting on the restoration of the objectives of the revolution. Recalling the early days of the revolution, hundreds of thousands of people gathered that afternoon not only in Tahrir, but also in other major cities including Alexandria, Suez, and across the Nile Delta.

After the impressive showing by all political factions: Islamic, secular, liberal, leftist, and youth groups, SCAF had no option but to withdraw the document. By Saturday, a few thousand activists from the youth movements that actually ignited the revolution last January, decided to stay in Tahrir square and stage a sit-in to demand the dismissal of the ineffective SCAF-controlled government, headed by Dr. Esam Sharaf since March, and call for the end of military rule.

That evening, for reasons that remain unclear, the security forces decided to evacuate the few thousand demonstrators by force. In doing so, they employed all the Mubarak-era tactics: teargas, rubber bullets, clubs, beatings, mass arrests, pepper spray, and physical and verbal humiliations. But the demonstrators refused to evacuate, fought back, and called for reinforcements after suffering many casualties. Within hours, Tahrir was again filled with tens of thousands of people raising their demands yet again.

If there was a lesson to be learned from the ousting of Mubarak, it was that when the people’s demands are denied, the ceiling of their demands are raised. By the third day of this manufactured confrontation, most political groups, with the exception of the MB, were not only protesting in Tahrir Square, but also across Egypt. The angry demonstrators now demanded the complete dismissal of the government, and the ouster of the military council to be replaced with an interim civilian presidential council.

The MB announced that although it supported the demands of the people it would not participate so as not to escalate the dangerous situation with the security forces. In its pragmatic calculation, the MB saw this latest episode as a deliberate attempt by the military to use the induced violence to postpone yet again the elections, which many believed the party would win. Similar to the agreement the MB struck with Suleiman in the days before Mubarak’s ouster, once again the MB thought of its immediate gains rather than the national consensus to force the end of military rule. As it reversed its decision last February within two days due to pressure from the streets, many of its members and supporters in the streets are openly demanding that they participate alongside the other young revolutionaries.

By Tuesday, November 22, SCAF head Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi and Chief-of-Staff Gen. Sami Anan, met with all political parties and prospective presidential candidates. After a five-hour marathon meeting, SCAF capitulated, and agreed to all the demands: To declare an immediate cease-fire; to release thousands of protesters that have been detained since Saturday; to treat all the injured and provide compensations to the families of the deceased; and to bring to justice all those responsible for the violence. On the political demands they further agreed to dismiss the government of Dr. Sharaf and appoint a national-unity government; to hold the elections on time starting next week; to guarantee free and fair elections; and to give a definite date for the transfer to civilian rule by holding presidential elections no later than June 30, 2012.

When Tantawi delivered his speech that evening by promising a new government, keeping the elections date intact, and the end of military rule by next June, people in Tahrir were no longer satisfied. They kept shouting, “You leave, we’re staying,” the same chant that eventually caught up with Mubarak.

The immediate problem now is the total lack of trust between the people in the streets and the military council. The people are tired of the cat and mouse game played by SCAF, where every major demand is only conceded through much struggle. Although it is true that SCAF was instrumental in accelerating the ouster of Mubarak, it is also now quite clear to the revolutionaries that SCAF has had a different agenda that oftentimes conflicts with the objectives of their revolution.

Now the revolutionaries have vowed to stay in Tahrir until SCAF cedes effective power long before next year to a new civilian national-unity government empowered to supervise the elections, supervise the writing of the constitution, and implement all their objectives without any interference or dictation by the military.

Esam Al-Amin can be reached at alamin1919@gmail.com

[JackRiddler]

(The failed link is a chart of the Egyptian demographic pyramid, from Wikipedia.)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... d_2005.svg

.

Reasons to take heart: The median age of the Egyptian population is 24 years. The gerontocracy can be swept away. It is possible.

Meanwhile, a slight line shift in DC. More like ass-covering lip-service to a theoretical line-shift. Well, more like, whoever wins this thing, we just love you to death. Literally.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/26/world ... nted=print

November 25, 2011

White House Urges Egypt’s Military to Yield Power

By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

CAIRO — The White House on Friday threw its weight behind Egypt’s resurgent protest movement, urging for the first time the handover of power by the interim military rulers in the Obama administration’s most public effort yet to steer the course of the Egyptian democracy.

“The United States strongly believes that the new Egyptian government must be empowered with real authority immediately,” the White House said in a statement.

“Most importantly, we believe that the full transfer of power to a civilian government must take place in a just and inclusive manner that responds to the legitimate aspirations of the Egyptian people, as soon as possible.”

The White House released the statement as tens of thousands of demonstrators

This is the maximum acknowledgeable number of protesters in the NYT style book. There is no higher number.

poured into Tahrir Square for what is expected to be the biggest display of anger in a week of protests against the military’s intention to retain power even after parliamentary elections that are scheduled to begin on Monday.

The statement is a significant escalation of the international pressure on the generals because the United States is among the Egyptian military’s closest allies and biggest benefactors, contributing more than $1.3 billion a year in aid.

But speaking out against the military could be a risky bet for White House if the transition to democracy moves out of the hands of the military to less predictable civilian control.

The military is the most powerful institution in Egypt and a key supporter of the United States in a country where anti-American sentiment and Islamist political movements are surging.

Since the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak in February, the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has held itself up as the sole guardian of Egypt’s stability against chaos and radicalism.

Until recently the United States had publicly endorsed its plans to guide a slow transition to civilian democracy in 2013 or later.

But the military council began spelling out plans to carve out permanent political powers and protection from civilian oversight under the next constitution. Those efforts exploded after the government used force to clear a small protest camp from Tahrir Square last Saturday, amid mounting unrest across the country.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton first referred obliquely to United States’ displeasure with the military’s power grab about two weeks ago.

Since then, the military escalated its tactics in confrontations that killed at least 38 civilians and injured more than 2,000.

As huge crowds of demonstrators gathered in Tahrir Square on Friday, state television reported that the generals had appointed a politician from the Mubarak era to head a new cabinet, potentially hardening the lines between the interim military rulers and protesters demanding their exit.

At the same time, the Obama administration urged the generals to transfer power immediately to a civilian government “empowered with real authority.”

The developments reinforced fears of a prolonged standoff after the generals vowed on Thursday to forge ahead with parliamentary elections despite a week of violence that is certain to tarnish the vote.

With a broad spectrum of civilian leaders — excluding the Muslim Brotherhood — joining calls for a “million man march,” large crowds of protesters began to assemble in Tahrir Square as Friday prayer began across the capital, responding to protesters’ appeals for a substantial display of support.

Late Thursday, the generals announced over the state news media that they planned to name a 77-year-old former Mubarak lieutenant, Kamel el-Ganzoury, as the new prime minister, though many Egyptians mocked him as “a dinosaur.”

The appointment of Mr. Ganzoury follows the resignation this week of the previous cabinet in capitulation to protesters’ demands. The last prime minister was a bureaucrat seen as serving the military council. Demonstrators, as well as most civilian parties, are now calling for the council to hand over real authority to a legitimate successor.

Despite those calls, state television reported Friday that Mr. Ganzoury had been appointed.

The political shifts have heightened the sense of turmoil in advance of Monday’s planned parliamentary vote.

Government news organizations reported on Thursday that at least one political party — the Social Democrats, perhaps the best established of the liberal parties founded in the burst of hope after the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak nine months ago — would boycott the elections as a sham intended to prop up military rule.

By day’s end on Thursday, the Muslim Brotherhood also appeared to distance itself from the military council. The powerful Islamist group stands to gain the most from early elections and for the moment had stepped to the sidelines of the protests.

As clashes with the security police stopped for the first time this week, the crowd in Tahrir Square grew larger on Thursday than the day before, reaching tens of thousands.

The generals were unmoved. “Egypt is not Tahrir Square,” Maj. Gen. Mukhtar el-Mallah, a member of the military council, declared early Thursday at a news conference. The generals claimed an open-ended mandate to hold power long after Monday’s parliamentary vote. “We will not relinquish power because of a slogan-chanting crowd.”

The declaration, after six days of violent confrontation in the capital and around the country, shifted the political struggle to a new and murkier phase.

Fulfilling a promise made in negotiations with political parties earlier in the week, the military pulled back the security forces who had battled protesters and constructed a concrete wall bisecting the street where most of the clashes had taken place.

The generals, meanwhile, issued an unusual apology for the deaths of at least 38 people during the week of unrest and the injuries of more than 2,000. But even as they hailed the dead as “martyrs,” the generals also appeared to justify killing them as criminals who had attacked the Interior Ministry. And they denied — despite the statements of many witnesses, doctors and even the health ministry — that security forces had fired live ammunition or birdshot in their clashes with protesters, further inflaming anger.

“The police are very committed to self-control, but I can’t give orders to anyone not to defend themselves,” General Mallah said.

But the council made clear in its news conference on Thursday that it was not ready to surrender any power, and the choice of Mr. Ganzoury appeared to show the generals’ preference for a prime minister who would serve in a subordinate role, as Mr. Ganzoury did under Mr. Mubarak.

Mayy el Sheikh and Dina Salah Amer contributed reporting from Cairo, and Alan Cowell from Paris.

[JackRiddler]

.

Meanwhile, the priesthood channels the Voice of Capital.

These guys never miss a chance to profit from misery, do they?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 868311.cms

25 Nov, 2011, 03.17PM IST, PTI
S&P downgrades Egypt sovereign rating

DUBAI: Standard & Poor's has downgraded its sovereign credit rating of Egypt, citing weak political and economic conditions, especially after violent clashes earlier this month.

The rating of Egypt has been cut one notch from 'BB-' to 'B+', indicating a slightly riskier credit profile for the country.

"The downgrade reflects our opinion that Egypt's weak political and economic profile... This follows the clashes between protesters and security personnel that began on November 20, 2011, and resulted in significant loss of life," S&P Ratings Services said in a statement on Thursday.

Since Saturday, protesters have indulged in frequent clashes with police near Tahrir square, the epicentre of the movement that led to Hosni Mubarak's ouster as President of Egypt nine months ago.

The Supreme Council of the Armed Forces has promised a swift investigation into the violence that left 39 people dead and more than 3,000 wounded and the prosecution of those responsible.

S&P has also affirmed its short-term 'B' rating for Egypt, with a negative outlook.

"In our view, policy responses in Egypt are difficult to predict both for now and, likely, following the untested election process. This is due to a highly polarised political landscape and highly centralised decision-making," the statement noted.

Last month, S&P indicated that Egypt's ratings could be further lowered if the political transition faltered in a manner that led to renewed political turmoil, which could put more pressure on the country's international reserves.

"... If continued political turmoil weakens Egypt's external metrics or other key indicators, we could lower Egypt's ratings. Conversely, we may revise the outlook to stable if Egypt's political transition strengthens the social contract and if government debt dynamics remain close to or better than our expectations," S&P said.

As per the statement, the first round of parliamentary elections in Egypt is scheduled to be held on November 28, while the presidential polls are expected by July, 2012.

[semper occultus]

Reasons to take heart: The median age of the Egyptian population is 24 years.

...or otoh reasons to be slightly concerned....doubling of the 1996 population by 2051....



www.iiasa.ac.at

[JackRiddler]

.

Different issue, semper. Population is a concern everywhere but growth rates are not physics, people make the decisions, and demographic projections almost always turn out wrong. But not at all what I'm talking about.

I mean, when young people are the vast majority there is a chance that change can be unimaginably radical and fast.

.

[AlicetheKurious]

This is the maximum acknowledgeable number of protesters in the NYT style book. There is no higher number.

I can barely type, I'm so tired. I went downtown at around 11:00AM. The first time I tried to enter Tahrir Square, at around 1:00PM, I was forced to go back, because the crowd on downtown streets was so big I couldn't get through. Much of downtown surrounding the Square was packed, including all the restaurants and coffee shops. I went back a couple of hours later and this time made it through. It was amazing, especially that exactly one week ago, I was so demoralized by the Muslim Brotherhood/Salafist spectacle that I described earlier.

This time the contrast couldn't be greater: these were the heroic revolutionaries, back in force. All the amazing activists were there, relatives of slain martyrs, students, and ordinary people from all classes and walks of life. Spirits were very high, and very defiant. There were a lot of people with bandaged heads or limbs, as well as black eyes or other bruises from police beatings, but they seemed happy, even exhilarated. The solidarity was inspiring. Once again, as during the 18 days of the January 25th revolution, people were discussing politics everywhere, and signatures were being gathered for a petition nominating 3 people to form a presidential council that would then appoint a Cabinet to take over the ministries: Mohamed el-Baradei, Hossam Eissa and Abdelmoneim Abul-Futouh. The first and the last are presidential candidates. All three men have a high reputation for independence, strength of character and integrity. Hossam Eissa is a Nasserist Socialist, while Abul-Futouh is an Islamist, but one who has been expelled from the Muslim Brotherhood for his independent and liberal views. He is also a medical doctor, and in contrast to the Muslim Brotherhood's leadership, who have callously continued and even escalated their political campaigning, he rushed to Tahrir Square several days ago to treat the wounded under terrible conditions.

The choking clouds of gas that had led to at least 4 deaths were gone, and there were no more shootings. The Central Security Forces (CSF), the military police and regular police have all withdrawn to a tight circle around the Ministry of Interior, behind a large cement barrier that was erected yesterday evening. After Kamal el-Ganzouri was appointed by the military junta (SCAF) to be Egypt's new prime minister, thousands of demonstrators left Tahrir and moved their sit-in a few blocks away, in front of the Cabinet headquarters, vowing to prevent him from reaching his office. It's 12:30AM, and I'm watching a direct broadcast of what's happening right now -- Tahrir Square is still packed, and the energy is amazingly high, the chants against the SCAF and now against Ganzouri are going strong. God, what are these people made of? I'm pooped, and I'm back in my comfy house, in my pajamas. Thousands of them have been camped out in the cold street for days, not to mention the horrors of the past few days. They're so brave, and so young, and so free. I feel so old.

[JackRiddler]

.

Old? Don't worry about it. I feel the same way whenever I experience the energy of OWS. (Not to compare a still play-acted revolution to the real thing, or the real repression we've seen here to the routine massacres and 12,000 convictions of civilians by military courts.)

.

[JackRiddler]

.

White House with stronger statement now directly calling on the generals to step down - and put their man Ganzouri, the 77-year-old Mubarak holdover, in charge. Cede power to the civilian front on Tuesday, after you fix the elections on Monday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/no ... tary/print

White House calls for Egyptian military to hand power to civilian regime

Washington increases pressure on ruling generals to cede power to civilian government as protests continue in Cairo

Chris McGreal
guardian.co.uk, Friday 25 November 2011 12.24 EST


The White House has called for the Egyptian military to surrender all power immediately to a new civilian government that is due to be elected within the next few days.

In a marked increase of pressure on the ruling generals after days of hesitancy, Washington appears to have withdrawn its support for the army to retain a significant political role after next week's parliamentary elections.

But the US nevertheless threw its weight behind the ruling military council's plan to press ahead with the elections despite days of protest and dozens of deaths among demonstrators. Protesters have demanded the vote be postponed because the army would still have ultimate authority in running the country until the middle of next year.

The White House said the army council should swiftly cede full control to the newly appointed prime minister, Kamal Ganzouri, and his government.

"The United States strongly believes that the new Egyptian government must be empowered with real authority immediately. We believe that Egypt's transition to democracy must continue, with elections proceeding expeditiously, and all necessary measures taken to ensure security and prevent intimidation," the White House said in a statement.

"Most importantly, we believe that the full transfer of power to a civilian government must take place in a just and inclusive manner that responds to the legitimate aspirations of the Egyptian people, as soon as possible".

Previously, Washington had only condemned the violence in broad terms, angering many Egyptians by implying that the security forces and protesters were equally responsible.

It also previously urged the military to speed up the transition to civilian rule but did not publicly question the army's oversight of the process nor its plan to retain significant political power for many months, possibly years.

The White House statement marks a shift from its more ambiguous positions in which it sought to avoid publicly criticising the military regime which receives about $1.3bn a year in aid from the US.

In Cairo, more than 100,000 people packed into Tahrir Square on Friday for the biggest demonstration since the current showdown began, with activists accusing the generals of trying to extend the old guard.

Organisers called the demonstration "the last chance million-man protest." Swelling crowds chanted, "leave, leave" and "the people want to bring down the field marshal", in a reference to the military leader Mohamed Tantawi, who took over power from Mubarak.

Pro-reform leader and Nobel peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei was mobbed by hundreds of supporters as he arrived in the square and took part in Friday prayers. The demonstrators have vowed not to leave the plaza until the generals hand power to a civilian presidential council.

Thousands of pro-democracy protesters took to the streets in other cities, including at least 10,000 in Alexandria and smaller crowds in Luxor and Assiut in southern Egypt.

About 5,000 supporters of the military staged their own demonstration in Cairo, several miles north of Tahrir in the district of Abbassiyah, not far from the defence ministry.

Tensions have risen ahead of parliamentary elections, which are due to begin on Monday. The elections are to be held in stages that end in March, and the military said on Friday it would extend the voting period to two days for each round in an apparent effort to boost turnout in response to the unrest.

Faced with this fresh wave of demonstrations, matching those which removed Hosni Mubarak from power after 30 years in February, Washington is concerned that the political crisis could further deteriorate and lead to the army reasserting full control or a political vacuum in which the Muslim Brotherhood wins power without the constraints imposed by the planned new constitution.

The White House would appear to be trying to avoid the mistake it made during revolution that broke out in January when it initially tried to keep Mubarak in office by pressing him to agree to cede some of his powers.

Some in Egypt regard the military government as a product of US machinations as it sought to ensure political stability and keep Islamists from taking power as Mubarak's rule collapsed. But the army is popular in Egypt, and it was widely welcomed when it took direct control of the government in February.

The White House said that since the start of the Arab Spring, the US has spoken out against violence and repression and "in defence of universal rights including the freedom of peaceful assembly". It says it supports for "political and economic reform that meets the legitimate aspirations of ordinary people throughout the region".

Washington is throwing its lot in with Ganzouri who on Friday said he has been assured by the army that he will have more power than that of the outgoing prime minister who resigned with his cabinet earlier this week as the latest wave of demonstrations centred on Cairo's Tahrir square grew.

Ganzouri, who was prime minister for three years in the 1990s under the ousted ruler, Hosni Mubarak, said he will wait until after the parliamentary elections to form a new cabinet. Ganzouri said that he is certain Tantawi is not intent on staying in power.

The White House said it is confident that the political crisis will be resolved. "Egypt has overcome challenges before and will do so again. The United States will continue to stand with the Egyptian people as they build a democracy worthy of Egypt's great history," it said.


© 2011 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

[AlicetheKurious]

Woke up to the news that the camp in front of the Cabinet headquarters, which had grown considerably during the night, was attacked this morning using police trucks packed with Central Security Forces (CSF) troops and gas. Online newspapers report that one young man was run over by a police truck and killed, but witnesses say that he was hit by a tear gas canister and that he was soaked in blood and badly hurt but not killed. There are more wounded, but I don't know yet how many or how severely. Armed only with rocks and their bare hands, some of the protesters were able to repel the attack and chase the police away. Those who had escaped to nearby Tahrir Square are slowly making their way back.

Here's a video filmed earlier this morning, just after the attack:



The protesters in Tahrir Square are urgently calling for more people to join them.

On Edit: It's now confirmed that the young man, Ahmed Sayed Sorour, was killed. A photo of him taken at the scene (graphic).

On Edit: It turns out that there were actually two people killed at the Cabinet headquarters camp, one fatally shot (with what, we aren't sure yet) and one whose pelvis was crushed by a police truck. Whether he is still alive or not has not yet been confirmed.