The Redhunter

Different Views on the Right

I think these excerpts capture the essence of these two editorials, but follow the link and read the whole thing if you prefer.

The optimistic view

Stand for Freedom
The Weekly Standard
William Kristol
February 14, 2011

It was not so long ago, after all, when conservatives understood that Middle Eastern dictatorships such as Mubarak's help spawn global terrorism. We needn't remind our readers that the most famous of the 9/11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta, was an Egyptian, as is al Qaeda's number two, Ayman al Zawahiri. The idea that democracy produces radical Islam is false: Whether in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian territories, or Egypt, it is the dictatorships that have promoted and abetted Islamic radicalism. (Hamas, lest we forget, established its tyranny in Gaza through nondemocratic means.) Nor is it in any way "realist" to suggest that backing Mubarak during this crisis would promote "stability." To the contrary: The situation is growing more unstable because of Mubarak's unwillingness to abdicate. Helping him cling to power now would only pour fuel on the revolutionary fire, and push the Egyptian people in a more anti-American direction....

It's understandable that conservatives should be wary of people taking to the streets--even when they are entitled to do so. It's also reasonable for conservatives to warn of the unanticipated consequences of ostensibly hopeful developments....

Conservatives are used to focusing on the downsides of situations. And there are potential downsides ahead, to be sure. But there is also a huge upside to a sound and admirable outcome in Egypt. American conservatives should remember our commitment, in the words of Federalist 39, to "that honorable determination which animates every votary of freedom, to rest all our political experiments on the capacity of mankind for self-government."

Egypt turns out to have its votaries of freedom. The Egyptian people want to exercise their capacity for self-government. American conservatives, heirs to our own bold and far-sighted revolutionaries, should help them.

The pessimistic view:

The Egyptian Precipice
National Review
The Editors
February 11, 2011

The interest of the United States in Egypt is to avoid the worst case -- chaos, or a takeover of the state by the Muslim Brotherhood. That means we should want a very deliberate process of transformation, playing out over an extended period rather than all in a rush in the coming weeks or months. The best way to buy time for careful change shepherded by the Egyptian military is to do as much as possible now to meet the protesters' reasonable demands, beginning with Mubarak's resignation....

Elections have to be delayed so that players besides the Brotherhood can organize. We want to give independent political parties, journalists, and activists the space they need to build the foundations of a democratic polity. It very well may be that there's no way to deny the Brotherhood a role in the political process, but we shouldn't welcome that fact, and we shouldn't tell ourselves ridiculous bedtime stories about what the Brotherhood is, as Director of National Intelligence James Clapper did in his congressional testimony yesterday.

Count us as cautiously pessimistic on Egypt. It needn't go the way of Iran in 1979. Yet we should remember that Egypt -- for all the hope represented by the young, tech-savvy protesters -- is a society with basically illiberal values. Simply throwing elections on top of such a society is not a formula for liberal democracy.

Our friend Bill Kristol of The Weekly Standard writes, "An American conservatism that looks back to 1776 cannot turn its back on the Egyptian people." No one should turn his back on the protesters, who have risked their lives for what they imagine will be a better future. But we should be careful about comparisons to the American Revolution. In 1776, America already had a vast amount of experience with elections, self-government, and the rule of law; we were already in important respects a democratic society.

Egypt doesn't have that luxury, which is why its revolution must be handled with the utmost care.

What does President Obama Think?

If the views of retired Air Force Lt. General James R. Clapper, recently appointed by the president to replace Dennis Blair as the Director of National Intelligence are any indication, we're in deep trouble:

He has since, ah, "clarified" his statement, or rather, the White House clarified it for him, but readers can judge for their own what he and the Administration really think.

It's already been reported that the White House has reached out to the Brotherhood, and has thought to bring them into a post-Mubarak Egypt.

President Obama offered some remarks yesterday after Mubarak's resignation had been announced. Following are what I think are the key excerpts:

By stepping down, President Mubarak responded to the Egyptian people's hunger for change. But this is not the end of Egypt's transition. It's a beginning. I'm sure there will be difficult days ahead, and many questions remain unanswered. But I am confident that the people of Egypt can find the answers, and do so peacefully, constructively, and in the spirit of unity that has defined these last few weeks.

For Egyptians have made it clear that nothing less than genuine democracy will carry the day. ...

The United States will continue to be a friend and partner to Egypt. We stand ready to provide whatever assistance is necessary -- and asked for -- to pursue a credible transition to a democracy. I'm also confident that the same ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit that the young people of Egypt have shown in recent days can be harnessed to create new opportunity -- jobs and businesses that allow the extraordinary potential of this generation to take flight. And I know that a democratic Egypt can advance its role of responsible leadership not only in the region but around the world....

And above all, we saw a new generation emerge -- a generation that uses their own creativity and talent and technology to call for a government that represented their hopes and not their fears; a government that is responsive to their boundless aspirations. One Egyptian put it simply: Most people have discovered in the last few days that they are worth something, and this cannot be taken away from them anymore, ever....

The word Tahrir means liberation. It is a word that speaks to that something in our souls that cries out for freedom. And forevermore it will remind us of the Egyptian people -- of what they did, of the things that they stood for, and how they changed their country, and in doing so changed the world. Thank you.

What Does Democracy Mean in the Middle East?

Barry Rubin reminds us why we shouldn't be too optimistic about elections in the Muslim world:

1. Iranian revolution, 1978-1979: Mass protests by a wide coalition against dictatorship. Result? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is now president.
   
2. Beirut Spring, or the "Cedar Revolution", 2005: Christians, Sunni Muslims, and Druze unite against Syrian control. Moderate government gains power. Result? Hezbollah is now running Lebanon.
   
3. Palestinians have free elections, 2006: Voters protest against corrupt regime. Result? Hamas is now running the Gaza Strip.
   
4. Algeria holds free elections(1965?): Voters back moderate Islamist group. Result? Military coup; Islamists turn (or reveal their true thinking) radical; tens of thousands of people killed.
   

The jury is still out on Iraq. Turkey held a lot of promise for many years, but has taken a serious turn toward Islamism in recent years.

All in all, not a good track record.

Polling Data

I'm not so sure that the Egyptian's idea of democracy and liberty is in any way similar to our own. A poll published by the Pew Research Center on Dec 2 isn't encouraging. Some key findings about Egyptians:

30 % have a favorable view of Hizbollah
66 % have an unfavorable view of Hizbollah, with 4% undecided
49 % have a favorable view of Hamas
48 % have an unfavorable view of Hamas, with 3% undecided
20 % have a favorable view of al Qaeda
72 % have an unfavorable view of al Qaeda, with 8% undecided

I don't know whether to be happy or not to know that according to the poll people in some other Muslim countries the numbers are even higher. Returning to Egyptian attitudes:

75 % favor laws stipulating the stoning of people for adultery, and the cutting off of hands for theft

59 % favor a democratic form of government
22 % say that in some circumstances a non-democratic form is preferable,
16 % don't care one way or the other

Unfortunately, this or any other Pew poll that I could find doesn't discuss how popular the Brotherhood is in Egypt, but googling around indicates that they're not liked by a lot of Egyptians.

On The Other Hand

It's just possible that elections will marginalize extremist groups like the Brotherhood. It is true that they derive some of their support from people who are disaffected or oppressed by autocratic governments. Remove the autocracy and you remove some of the attraction for these groups.

The question is how strong is the Islamist attraction people have for groups like the Brotherhood as opposed to the attraction just because of a reaction to the autocracy. I'm not sure, but we're certainly going to find out.

Do Polls Matter?

It seems to me that as often as not history is not so much decided by majorities, but by which group is the most organized and determined. Polls matter to the extent that they show how much support extremist groups have.

Neither the Jacobins in France nor the Bolsheviks in Russia took power immediately after the Ancien Régime was overthrown. Polls often don't show a lot of support for extremist groups, yet they end up at the top because they are organized, ruthless, and often underestimated by their opponents.

It's not at all certain that the Muslim Brotherhood will come out on top, but we should be worried that they might, and we need to take all the steps we can to marginalize them. The first step is for the Obama Administration to at least recognize them for the threat to Egypt and the world that they are.