I seem to remember an argument five years ago or so in which a voice that sounded very much like my own suggested that dealing with a member of the Muslim Brotherhood might not be so bad. At least they know the language of politics, they can "talk the talk," as the saying goes. Certainly Mohammed Mursi (yes, we are now going to have that Mursi/Morsi argument just as we had Usama/Osama) speaking to Christiane Amanpour in English yet, said all the right things. "Democracy is indivisible, whether you are man or woman, Muslim or Christian it's all the same."
Mursi is newly resigned from the Brotherhood and pledged to a unity government. He also occupies a radically downgraded presidency vis-a-vis the Suppreme Council of the Armed Froces. If one puts on the Pollyanna hat perhaps all is well in the world of Egypt, but yet....
Whether one belives that Islam is undemocratic or democracy is un-Islamic, a sporty course lies ahead for the concerns of the West.
Egypt currently is absolutely littered with those big. black bombs so beloved of cartoonists, and all the fuses are lit. There is the economy bomb, and the demographics, bomb, the bomb of the Muslim Brotherhood itself--yes, it is a historically moderate organization, but one needs not read much of Sayid Qutb to realize that there is a deep current of absolute horror at cultural norms that are completely accepted in the West. Those with personal experience in the religions of the West generally have little understanding of the depth of committment to the will of God that imbues the adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood.
It is true they are not the hardest of the hardcore Salafists, but they are not a bunch of Cleveland ward-heelers either, and some of the actions we could see in the near term may be shocking. Beyond those obvious bombs there are still more. What of the Coptic Christian population, what of the military? We now contribute the better part of a Billion dollars annualy, I think, mostly to buy Egyptian acquiesence to the goings on in the Gaza Strip. What if that money disappears—certainly there will be a great outcry to cut that funding. What will happen if that should take place?
I am reminded of that famous Chinese curse about "may you live in interesting times."
--Basilisk
Not even sure how "interesting" the times are. Seems more of the same ole, same ole. Trumped up media events rise to the level of spectacle...and then the smart players cash in.
Posted by: jonst | 25 June 2012 at 07:32 AM
If you don't think it's "interesting," you might be not be reading between the lines.
Posted by: Basilisk | 25 June 2012 at 07:41 AM
Basilisk---I know very little about Egypt other than a visit to see the Pyramids 30 years ago. You mentioned shocking actions. Any prognosis on what might happen to the Suez canal?? I would think that was the Wests major concern.
Posted by: r whitman | 25 June 2012 at 08:07 AM
The canal is one place where I would not expect change, but certainly we are in terra incognita now
JP
Sent from my iPhone 4S
Posted by: Basilisk | 25 June 2012 at 08:11 AM
All
Americans have an unhealthy obsession with fair elections. We believe that if the franchise is widely applied and the election honestly administered, then the result will be beneficial to the majority. This philosophy produced the Maliki government, the Hitler government, the Mussolini government, etc. The Ikhwan exist as an organization to create Sharia law states. Eventual withdrawal from the treaty with Israel is inevitable. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 June 2012 at 08:13 AM
Yeah, democracy is the worst form of government--except for all the others. I cant imagine the Ikhwan can completely change its spots, so despite Mursis protestations, I expect big changes. Im not so sure about the timing. It may not feed the 24-hour news cycle.
JP
Sent from my iPhone 4S
Posted by: Basilisk | 25 June 2012 at 08:36 AM
Basilisk
I would settle for Marcus Aurelius, but after him came Commodus. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 June 2012 at 10:08 AM
"Americans have an unhealthy obsession with fair elections."
True enough, but rather at odds with the fact that, even in highly energized times, fully 40% of Americans eligible to vote don't do so, and a large portion of those who do vote do so based on thirty-second sound bite advertisements they saw while watching their favorite reality television show.
Americans tend to think, also, that elections = democracy.
Posted by: Bill H | 25 June 2012 at 10:38 AM
Bill H
OK. We are obsessed with other people's elections. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 25 June 2012 at 11:16 AM
You cannot be serious about Marcus Aurelius.
Marcus Aurelius: "Christians are harmless but I have to kill them for the reason of state."
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 25 June 2012 at 11:28 AM
And the status of their women....
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 25 June 2012 at 11:28 AM
reading between the lines is, by definition,reading what is in the mind of the beholder. The story is same ole, same ole, via "lines". New bad guy may or may not become new good guy. Old good guy might become new bad guy.
And how many of our officials really have a clue what is going on? That will not stop us.
And then, as the Col has, I believe, been pointing out to us....whatever we think is going on we will run through our cultural filters. And turn a drama into something like a good guy/bad guy farcial western. Or Super Hero Story. That we understand.
This is same ole, same ole, to me. Fixing America is what is interesting to me.
Posted by: jonst | 25 June 2012 at 12:35 PM
Basilisk, come now - Christiane Amanpour will get another 'exclusive' interview, nice ratings and yet another book. And all the polisci crowd will get to bleat about the victory of democracy.
Posted by: Fred | 25 June 2012 at 12:38 PM