Bush Diplomacy in Action

[Guest MikeSC]

Egypt's Mubarak Calls for Democratic Election Reforms

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

Published: February 26, 2005

 

Filed at 8:27 p.m. ET

 

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- In a surprise and dramatic reversal, President Hosni Mubarak took a first significant step Saturday toward democratic reform in the world's most populous Arab country, ordering the constitution changed to allow presidential challengers on the ballot this fall.

 

An open election has long been a demand of the opposition but was repeatedly rejected by the ruling party, with Mubarak only last month dismissing calls for reform as ``futile.''

 

The sudden shift was the first sign from the key U.S. ally that it was ready to participate in the democratic evolution in the Middle East, particularly historic elections in Iraq and the Palestinian territories. Mubarak's government has faced increasingly vocal opposition at home and growing friction with the United States over the lack of reform.

 

``We have moved a mountain,'' said Rifaat el-Said, leader of the opposition Tagammu party. ``This should open the gate for other democratic reforms.''

 

But Mubarak's order to parliament declared the amendment must state that any potential candidate be a member of an official political party and win the endorsement of parliament, which is dominated by the president's ruling party.

 

Most opposition parties and reform activists, therefore, said the initiative, though welcome, did not go far enough and that they feared it was only cosmetic. All acknowledged that Mubarak was likely to stay in power after the September vote.

 

One party has held a lock on power for more than half a century and every president has been unopposed in elections since the 1952 revolution overthrew the monarchy.

 

Egypt currently holds presidential referendums every six years in which people vote ``yes'' or ``no'' for a single candidate approved by parliament. Mubarak, who came to power in 1981 after the assassination of Anwar Sadat, has stood in four ballots, winning more than 90 percent each time.

 

Mubarak made the announcement in a nationally televised speech, surprising even some in his inner circle, one source close to the presidency said.

 

Touting ``freedom and democracy,'' Mubarak told an audience at Menoufia University, north of Cairo, that he asked parliament and the consultative Shura Council to amend the constitution's Article 76 on presidential elections.

 

The changes would set a direct vote ``giving the chance for political parties to run'' and ``providing guarantees that allow more than one candidate for the people to choose among them,'' Mubarak said.

 

The audience broke into applause, with some shouting, ``Long live Mubarak, mentor of freedom and democracy!'' Others recited verses of poetry praising the government.

 

Ayman Nour, who is one of the strongest proponents of an open election and who was arrested by Egyptian police last month, praised Mubarak's announcement in a statement from jail. Nour called it ``an important and courageous move'' toward ``comprehensive constitutional reform,'' in a statement read by his wife, Gamila Ismael.

 

The need for parliamentary approval, however, likely would deny participation by the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's largest Islamic group and probably the most powerful rival to Mubarak if an open vote were held. In a statement Saturday, the group -- whose supporters make up the largest opposition bloc in parliament -- demanded further reforms, including greater freedom to form political parties, and the end to Egypt's nearly 25-year-old emergency laws.

 

The rules would also exclude three well-known political activists who have started a campaign to allow their run for presidency: feminist writer Nawal el-Saadawi, sociologist Saad Eddin Ibrahim, and former opposition member of parliament Mohammed Farid Hassanein.

 

Mohammed Kamal, a leading member of the ruling party's policy-making committee, said parliament would propose an amendment within two weeks, and a national referendum to approve it would be held within nine weeks.

 

George Ishaq, spokesman for the Kifaya, or ``Enough,'' movement that has led a series of anti-Mubarak protests since December, said the move was not complete. ``Freedom and democracy is a normal request for people,'' he said. ``We need more than this.''

 

Political analyst Mohamed el-Sayed Said criticized Egypt's constitution as ``obsolete, replete with gaps and contradictions'' and said other articles in the document should also be changed.

 

The announcement came amid a sharp dispute with the United States over reform -- particularly over the arrest of Nour, head of the opposition Al-Ghad party.

 

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized Nour's detention and put off a Mideast visit planned for next week. A senior U.S. official cited Rice's displeasure with the arrest and other Egyptian actions and said Rice wanted to see what steps were taken before going to Cairo.

 

Egypt, the second largest recipient of U.S. aid, was the first Arab nation to sign a peace treaty with Israel, in 1979, and often mediates in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

 

As the Bush administration presses allies for political change, even reformers in the region are touchy about U.S. interference.

 

``If this happened by the pressure from the United States, we don't want it,'' el-Said, the Tagammu leader, said. ``In my view, it came from the mobilization of public opinion.''

 

Hisham Kassem, a top official in Nour's al-Ghad Party, said he had mixed feelings about the initiative, which he called mostly cosmetic.

 

``I reject this as a member of a party whose leader has been arrested,'' he said. ``Ayman Nour is the only credible candidate who could have faced Mubarak.''

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/internatio...artner=homepage

Rice refused to go to Egypt over some of Mubarak's recent actions and he made more concessions for freedom. It's not perfect --- it's not even acceptable, yet --- but the first steps in the right direction are being made.

-=Mike

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

President Hosni Mubarak took a first significant step Saturday toward democratic reform in the world's most populous Arab country, ordering the constitution changed to allow presidential challengers on the ballot this fall.

 

Yeah -- me, myself and I...

[Guest MikeSC]

President Hosni Mubarak took a first significant step Saturday toward democratic reform in the world's most populous Arab country, ordering the constitution changed to allow presidential challengers on the ballot this fall.

 

Yeah -- me, myself and I...

I thought his invisible friend's economic policies were sound.

-=Mike

[Conspiracy_Victim 0]

President Hosni Mubarak took a first significant step Saturday toward democratic reform in the world's most populous Arab country, ordering the constitution changed to allow presidential challengers on the ballot this fall.

 

Yeah -- me, myself and I...

Sounds like something out of that Richard Dreyfuss movie Moon Over Parador .

 

"Which one are you going to vote for?"

 

"I'm going to vote for Blue Simms."

 

"Why not? It's a free dictatorship."

[MrRant 0]

Allah is gonna be pissed.

[2GOLD 0]

Allah is gonna be pissed.

 

Has Allah ever been happy?

Seriously, has he?

 

Where is the happy go lucky Allah?

[Guest CronoT]

Allah is gonna be pissed.

 

Has Allah ever been happy?

Seriously, has he?

 

Where is the happy go lucky Allah?

I declare this sig-worthy.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Has Allah ever been happy?

Seriously, has he?

 

Where is the happy go lucky Allah?

Well if you were hoarding all those virgins for those that blow themselves up in public places you'd have quite the pent-up frustration of not being able to sample the goods...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Alright! So the #2 recipient of US aid makes a symbolic (at least) stride toward democratic reform!

 

Let's see Egypt down...that leaves only a few other countries with poor human rights records and/or undemocratic governments left that we deal with...

 

Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia...

 

Heaven forbid we trade with Cuba, though.

[Vyce 0]

Don't forget Turkmenistan.

 

Don't worry, they're all on the list for eventual democracy franchises.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Don't forget Turkmenistan.

 

Don't worry, they're all on the list for eventual democracy franchises.

Yeah, Turkmenistan has a pretty poor human rights record and an authoritarian government, too. I don't know how closely we associate with them, though. We are pretty buddy-buddy with their horribly oppressive Uzbek neighbors and the nearby dictatorship in Pakistan, though.

[Vyce 0]

Don't forget Turkmenistan.

 

Don't worry, they're all on the list for eventual democracy franchises.

Yeah, Turkmenistan has a pretty poor human rights record and an authoritarian government, too. I don't know how closely we associate with them, though. We are pretty buddy-buddy with their horribly oppressive Uzbek neighbors and the nearby dictatorship in Pakistan, though.

The Pakistan situation vexes me.

 

I'm pretty much convinced that we know where Osama bin Laden is, and that he's in Pakistan.

 

Well.....when I say "know", I don't mean, we can point out EXACTLY where he is on a map. I don't think it's as simple as pointing to an X.

 

But I think we probably have some good intel that he's in certain sections of Pakistan, but for whatever reason (likely that we're trying to keep on Pakistan's good side so they'll aid us in the war on terror) we don't press the issue with them.

[Guest MikeSC]

Alright! So the #2 recipient of US aid makes a symbolic (at least) stride toward democratic reform!

 

Let's see Egypt down...that leaves only a few other countries with poor human rights records and/or undemocratic governments left that we deal with...

 

Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia...

 

Heaven forbid we trade with Cuba, though.

I would list the countries who made changes based on European diplomacy --- but I'm drawing a total blank in naming one.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Alright!  So the #2 recipient of US aid makes a symbolic (at least) stride toward democratic reform!

 

Let's see Egypt down...that leaves only a few other countries with poor human rights records and/or undemocratic governments left that we deal with...

 

Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia...

 

Heaven forbid we trade with Cuba, though.

I would list the countries who made changes based on European diplomacy --- but I'm drawing a total blank in naming one.

-=Mike

What the fuck does that have to do with what you quoted?

[Guest MikeSC]

Alright!  So the #2 recipient of US aid makes a symbolic (at least) stride toward democratic reform!

 

Let's see Egypt down...that leaves only a few other countries with poor human rights records and/or undemocratic governments left that we deal with...

 

Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia...

 

Heaven forbid we trade with Cuba, though.

I would list the countries who made changes based on European diplomacy --- but I'm drawing a total blank in naming one.

-=Mike

What the fuck does that have to do with what you quoted?

Read the first sentence.

 

Don't be afraid --- words won't hurt you.

 

Our diplomacy is starting a possible trend towards democratization in the Middle East --- an approach that liberals could not have opposed more than they did.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Alright!  So the #2 recipient of US aid makes a symbolic (at least) stride toward democratic reform!

 

Let's see Egypt down...that leaves only a few other countries with poor human rights records and/or undemocratic governments left that we deal with...

 

Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Russia, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia...

 

Heaven forbid we trade with Cuba, though.

I would list the countries who made changes based on European diplomacy --- but I'm drawing a total blank in naming one.

-=Mike

What the fuck does that have to do with what you quoted?

Read the first sentence.

 

Don't be afraid --- words won't hurt you.

 

Our diplomacy is starting a possible trend towards democratization in the Middle East --- an approach that liberals could not have opposed more than they did.

-=Mike

I was asking why you quoted what I wrote. Because what you wrote (about Europe?) after you quoted me had nothing to do with what I wrote.

 

Also I was suggesting that maybe BECAUSE THEY'RE THE #2 RECIPIENT COUNTRY OF US AID that maybe they should have had some decent democratic credentials to begin with to earn that status.

[Guest MikeSC]

Because you're bitching about American diplomacy, ignoring that we're the ONLY ones who get shit done.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Because you're bitching about American diplomacy, ignoring that we're the ONLY ones who get shit done.

    -=Mike

So you think we should deal heavily with horrible human rights abusers and authoritarian regimes?

 

Our GWOT allies like Thailand & Indonesia are using the GWOT as an excuse to crack down on dissident groups & to curtail civil liberties.

[Guest MikeSC]

Because you're bitching about American diplomacy, ignoring that we're the ONLY ones who get shit done.

    -=Mike

So you think we should deal heavily with horrible human rights abusers and authoritarian regimes?

 

Our GWOT allies like Thailand & Indonesia are using the GWOT as an excuse to crack down on dissident groups & to curtail civil liberties.

And if you fail to realize that democracy tends to be a process and not an event, you'd realize how idiotic your incessant carping sounds.

-=Mike

..."Yeah, they have more freedom. But it's not PERFECT, yet! It's all America's fault!"

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Because you're bitching about American diplomacy, ignoring that we're the ONLY ones who get shit done.

     -=Mike

So you think we should deal heavily with horrible human rights abusers and authoritarian regimes?

 

Our GWOT allies like Thailand & Indonesia are using the GWOT as an excuse to crack down on dissident groups & to curtail civil liberties.

And if you fail to realize that democracy tends to be a process and not an event, you'd realize how idiotic your incessant carping sounds.

-=Mike

..."Yeah, they have more freedom. But it's not PERFECT, yet! It's all America's fault!"

So how do we decide which human rights villain or ruthless dictator gets copious amounts of US aid? How come Egypt did and Cuba didn't?

 

And I didn't say it was all America's fault. Stop putting words in my mouth. It's the fault of the authoritarian leaders & the human rights abusers. I think it's ludicrous to prop up these assclowns, though. But I guess it's idiotic to wish your country didn't aid dictators.

[Guest MikeSC]

Because you're bitching about American diplomacy, ignoring that we're the ONLY ones who get shit done.

    -=Mike

So you think we should deal heavily with horrible human rights abusers and authoritarian regimes?

 

Our GWOT allies like Thailand & Indonesia are using the GWOT as an excuse to crack down on dissident groups & to curtail civil liberties.

And if you fail to realize that democracy tends to be a process and not an event, you'd realize how idiotic your incessant carping sounds.

-=Mike

..."Yeah, they have more freedom. But it's not PERFECT, yet! It's all America's fault!"

So how do we decide which human rights villain or ruthless dictator gets copious amounts of US aid? How come Egypt did and Cuba didn't?

 

Because, since it is OUR money, WE have every right to decide who gets it.

And I didn't say it was all America's fault.  Stop putting words in my mouth.  It's the fault of the authoritarian leaders & the human rights abusers.  I think it's ludicrous to prop up these assclowns, though.  But I guess it's idiotic to wish your country didn't aid dictators.

The funny thing is, we prop them up less than most countries do. We're trying to get Egypt and Arabia to open up and money is the best way to pull that off.

 

We could always invade, but then you'd gripe.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Because, since it is OUR money, WE have every right to decide who gets it.

 

Hey, you--the guy who kills everybody who disagrees with you--you get an invasion.

 

You, over there--the guy who doesn't let women vote--here's $500 million.

 

The guy in the corner. Yeah, you, Mr. Government-Controlled-Media. It's sanctions for you, buddy.

 

Seems random to me.

 

The funny thing is, we prop them up less than most countries do.

 

Oh, I see. My bad. That makes it okay then.

[Guest MikeSC]

Because, since it is OUR money, WE have every right to decide who gets it.

 

Hey, you--the guy who kills everybody who disagrees with you--you get an invasion.

 

You, over there--the guy who doesn't let women vote--here's $500 million.

 

The guy in the corner. Yeah, you, Mr. Government-Controlled-Media. It's sanctions for you, buddy.

 

Seems random to me.

 

The funny thing is, we prop them up less than most countries do.

 

Oh, I see. My bad. That makes it okay then.

You have two ways to force changes.

 

1) Militarily.

 

2) Diplomacy --- or, in simple terms, money.

 

If money can accomplish what military force can, why not?

-=Mike

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Because, since it is OUR money, WE have every right to decide who gets it.

 

Hey, you--the guy who kills everybody who disagrees with you--you get an invasion.

 

You, over there--the guy who doesn't let women vote--here's $500 million.

 

The guy in the corner. Yeah, you, Mr. Government-Controlled-Media. It's sanctions for you, buddy.

 

Seems random to me.

 

The funny thing is, we prop them up less than most countries do.

 

Oh, I see. My bad. That makes it okay then.

AND there is nothing quite like having a lesser of two evils to choose from when coming to a decision. Freedom you see, is all about CHOICE!

[Guest MikeSC]

I love that libs will permit authoritarian thugs to control countries, because democracy seldom occurs overnight.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I love that libs will permit authoritarian thugs to control countries, because democracy seldom occurs overnight.

-=Mike

*I* love generalizations.

 

Pardon me if I think human rights violations and authoritarian rule shouldn't be rewarded.

[Guest MikeSC]

I love that libs will permit authoritarian thugs to control countries, because democracy seldom occurs overnight.

          -=Mike

*I* love generalizations.

 

Pardon me if I think human rights violations and authoritarian rule shouldn't be rewarded.

And you support not doing anything to fix it.

-=Mike

...Go to war? You gripe. Using money? You gripe...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I love that libs will permit authoritarian thugs to control countries, because democracy seldom occurs overnight.

           -=Mike

*I* love generalizations.

 

Pardon me if I think human rights violations and authoritarian rule shouldn't be rewarded.

And you support not doing anything to fix it.

-=Mike

...Go to war? You gripe. Using money? You gripe...

Yeah, because propping up authoritarian regimes with huge amounts of aid (a la Egypt) or military invasions (a la Iraq) are the only two possible solutions.

 

But I would lean toward the second option--although I am hesitant to play world police and impose our values in other places. I don't know if you have read my posts, but I have stated that I support the war in Iraq because of the prospect of a free Iraq. I am pretty ambivalent about the war, though, for other reasons.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

While in some ways this is encouraging, it's also got to raise a few red flags. Mubarak has done what he's had to do to control Islamism in the wake of what happened to Anwar Sadat. I prefer Mubarak's semi-authoritarian regime to a fundamentalist Islamic government coming to power.

[Guest MikeSC]

While in some ways this is encouraging, it's also got to raise a few red flags. Mubarak has done what he's had to do to control Islamism in the wake of what happened to Anwar Sadat. I prefer Mubarak's semi-authoritarian regime to a fundamentalist Islamic government coming to power.

I have too much faith in democracy to assume it'll allow that to happen.

-=Mike