obamas egypt license kill

Obama written on a sidewalk in Toronto with chalk.
Obama written on a sidewalk in Toronto with chalk.

President Obama’s pallid audio address this morning from Martha’s Vineyard made it sound as though he regarded the events in Egypt as a rude imposition on his vacation.


Instead of enunciating a firm and clear policy, he moved from banality to platitude before veering off-course with a disquisition about the struggles America had before it came a full democracy.

The only listeners who derived satisfaction from Obama’s talk must be the Egyptian generals whom Obama mostly referred to in elliptical terms. Ending a biannual military exercise is supposed to cow the junta in Cairo into refraining from massacring Egyptians? No word about a coup in Cairo?

Obama said continued “engagement” with Egypt will help create a democracy, but he himself barely appears engaged with the upheaval taking place.

The most he could do was announce that his “national security staff” will…study the problem some more.

If he was ever apprehensive, Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi can relax. Obama spoke but he did not speak a language that the generals will interpret as anything but a license to kill. So much for Obama’s lofty expressions about a new beginning in his address to the Muslim world in Cairo in June 2009.

Obama was vague about the history of what has taken place in Egypt over the past year. He referred to the “complexity of the situation.” But it isn’t really all that complex. A power struggle between two sides, neither of which is particularly appealing, has been taking place.

The longer it continues, the more radicalized the Muslim Brotherhood will become. This is neither in Egypt’s nor America’s interest.

Obama began by referring to the several decades of ties between American and Egypt, but this was not based on true friendship. Instead, it amounted to Washington bankrolling an authoritarian regime that was easily toppled during the Arab spring.

It is unlikely that many Egyptians regard those decades of eleemosynary aid to the Mubarak regime with particular pleasure.

Obama further tried to console Egyptians by making it clear that the “United States strongly condemns” what is taking place. Big deal. It is Obama’s passivity that deserves condemnation. A forceful move would have been to suspend aid to Egypt’s military.

So far, Washington appears to have derived zero leverage from continuing aid. Until Obama acts, Egypt’s military will interpret his inaction as acquiescence to its brutal measures.

What Obama’s foreign policy appears to amount to is abdication, a passive surrender to events. Egypt is not Syria. America has long been directly, intimately engaged in its affairs. But Obama is acting as though he’s an innocent bystander, wringing his hands over the terrible things he’s witnessing but incapable of actually trying to influence events.

No doubt Obama was right to state “America cannot determine the future of Egypt.” But this is a straw man. Who said America could determine its future? What it could have attempted to do was nudge Egypt toward compromise. Now it may be too late.

Obama may have acted like he was putting Egypt on notice, but the only thing the generals will end up noticing is his passivity.

Source: Press TV



  1. The United States was never a ‘democracy’; Athens has, still, the only national history as a full democracy. We are a representative republic, with no claim to perfection but we have the best presentation of the finest form of government since the Roman Republic, with the exception of Switzerland which has Constitutional safeguards which we do not. The Swiss, presumably, studied our constitution, parsed every one of the Federalist Papers and Antifederalist Papers, then crafted a representative republic which is, de facto, superior to our own. The Swiss have a tremendous advantage in that no one elected to federal office can serve more than a single term in that office, throughout his or her lifetime. Grifters, grafters, liars, and thieves cannot find a job for life in the Swiss legislature, never mind the lazy and the stupid. The US Congress has moss backed denizens of all six bad types of bad actors who cannot hold a real job, run for federal office, and stay there for life. Not good.

    The Athenian democracy was one in which any citizen in good standing could run for any office, get elected by acclimation, and serve no more than 30 days in that office. He or she could be re-elected as often as the people would put him in office, but could only serve for 30 days before having to stand for election again. A street sweeper could be elected president, serve in that office for 30 days, then go back to his broom and dustbin. Once again, there was no permanent home in office for people who had no business being in that office in the first place.

    A fatal weakness in the US Constitution (one of multiple serious flaws) is the absence of a provision for ‘term limits. Once elected to Congress, the only way to get rid of the bum is to elect another person in his or her place, or pray that the crooked bastard vapor locks. Until the amendment to the Constitution during the Truman administration, there was no limit to the number of times the president could be elected. FDR was elected 4 times. Another fatal flaw is the ‘Obligations of Contract’ clause, the ‘Taxation Clause’ a vey close second. Allegedly, Alexander Hamilton crafted both of those articles, very carefully. Bear in mind that Hamilton was Britain’s man on the ground inside the new American government, was a consummate con man as well as a liar, thief and traitor; it’s no wonder that Aaron Burr shot him down in the street like a diseased dog. None of the delegates to the Convention really paid any close attention to the after effects of these articles in the hands of wicked men who would later come to power, but Hamilton could see forward fifty, a hundred years with a laser focus, but writers of the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers saw through the deceit and wrote, extensively, about the flaws prior to ratification.

    Still, we had a functioning republic, with separation of powers and a logical means of bringing into office the people who would pass the laws. The House of Representatives is The People’s House, the member being directly elected, from the first, by the citizens in each congressional district. The representative put forward, and protected, the interests of his friends and neighbors ‘back home, having been put in office by them for that purpose. Members of the Senate were appointed by the legislatures of their home States, to represent and protect the interests of that State; the 17th Amendment (of very doubtful provenance) brought popular election of the senators, a hideous mistake for the republic, but a huge boon to commercial interests. No one has proven conclusively that the 17th Amendment, as offered in its original form, was ever lawfully ratified; the 16th was, in fact, ratified by only 3 States, but still we’re suck with the IRS (Recommended reading: The Law That Never Was); 16A was so wholly and obviously crafted to benefit only the private banks that it makes real Americans sick.

    The Electoral College was put in place to ensure that the President was elected by all of the States, and not by the two or three States with a large numerical superiority; New York, Florida and California cannot elect the president by virtue of ‘one man, one vote’. All of the people in the nation decide, through the Electoral College, who the president will be. There are incidents in which a candidate won the popular vote but lost the election through the lawful function of the Electoral College. Generally, our system has worked in the best interest of the republic.

    The Vice President is, in fact, a legislative post. He sits as President of the Senate, so the original intent of having the runner up in a presidential election serve as president of the Senate was a very sensible precaution, since it provided a legislative balance. Since the President and Vice President, at the time, were of different political parties, the original function inhibited the establishment of an Imperial Presidency, a circumstance such that the citizens of the time had a deep horror. This provision has been changed, and now the President of the United States and the President of the Senate are from the same party, have the same agenda, and now the force to push that agenda forward,

    So far as I know, the United States and Switzerland are the two nations who went from the status of a colony to a fully functioning republic without the horrific intervals of a necessary dictator followed by the gradual dilution of the dictatorial powers which then devolve upon office holder elected from among the citizenry. Look about the globe. So many, many countries were just abandoned by the colonial powers with no preparation for self government or any guidance in self rule, and now look at them. Several produced ‘strong men’ who held the new nation together, made it stable by force, brought forth prosperity through ‘protectionism’, then progressively relaxed the authoritarian strictures. The eventual results would have been representative republics, but most of these blooming republics are back to square one, which requires a dictator, stabilization by force, etc. Thirty, forty, fifty years of progress toward liberty gone. The US bears the bulk of the burden for these horrors, but who is pulling the strings which make the US dance about like a marionette? Hmm. Do your research, and figure it out.

  2. i think article has some wrong point. every religion resulting with violence, is missinterpreted. Muslim brotherhood are proven violent and their goal is well known, to rule geographical area once belong to Otoman empire. Religion is just excuse. they actualy helped Arab springs, and pushed a bit harder in case of Libya. one exception here is Syria, the troublemaker is here Saudis. they are not Muslim Brotherhood ruled.
    west is pushing hardliners , creating new block replacing old good enemy of Soviet union. in this case Russia will have a huge problem and in final we will have confrontation of civilization. young people dont wat to be framed with religions,. they want to live , to learn and to chalenge life. we do not need to forget hard fact that Hitler was absolutly democraticaly elected, like Mr. Morsi, but German people failed to remove him from power. democracy has also red line. Gen. Sisi has maybe made good decision. unfortunately too many colaterall innocent muslim dies. it is a tragedy for people who gave faith and life for disguised Muslim Brotherhood. Center of Muslim Brotherhood is in London, not in Cairo. Despite good faith and strenght, uneducated people can lead to epic tragedy. USA and military complex is desperately in need of new enemy for their bombs and wars. with Russia on their side. why are secular states destroyed? think.

Comments are closed.