Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald examines the lunacy of American foreign aid to Egypt:
Egypt is the center of anti-Americanism in the Arab and Muslim world. Its press is violently and hysterically anti-American and antisemitic (not just anti-Israel). The government claims it can "do nothing" about this, whenever questions are raised -- but just let a single item appear about the grooming of Mubarak's son for the presidency, or a hint of the stratokleptocracy (rule by corrupt and thieving military men), and that paper, and the writer, are read the riot act. Apparently anything that damages the standing of Mubarak can be controlled, but the same control is impossible when murderous hysteria and hatred are whipped up against America and Israel.Why does Egypt receive military aid at all? Against whom will this aid be used? Is it mighty Libya, now mostly disarmed? Could it be that Egypt, outraged at the behavior of the northern Sudanese Arabs, will attack them? So far, Egypt has not shown the slightest indignation about the Jihad being conducted from Khartoum over the past 20 years, though it will, to "please the Americans," engage in some desultory attempts to persuade the Sudanese government to pretend to engage in pretend negotiations.
That weaponry can only be used in three ways. First, and obviously, against Israel -- either directly, or by funneling weapons to jihadists in Gaza or elsewhere. Second, it can be used by the Egypt decides to bully Ethiopia with the threat of military force, should that drought-and-famine afflicted African country dares to divert any of the Nile headwaters for its own desperate irrigation needs. Egypt believes it has a divine right to the Nile waters. No other countries need apply, especially not if they are black Christians, as Ethiopians are seen to be still -- despite the widespread and deliberate efforts from within Ethiopia by Muslims to carry out da'wa and overwhelm the Christians.
And third, all such weaponry potentially can fall into hands even more malevolent and deadly than those of the plump Egyptian generals. It is known that many in the Egyptian ruling class were in the pay of Saddam Hussein, and delivered military secrets to him that likely included secrets about American weaponry, American plans. The Muslim Brotherhood, of course, is growing again in power and influence, and made immense gains in the last election. Egypt is full of people who are sympathizers with Al Qaeda and Gemaa Islamiyya; many are well-placed. The celebrated Ayman al-Zawahiri, for example, a former surgeon, comes from a most important Egyptian family. His great-uncle was Azzam Pasha, the Secretary of the Arab League, who back in 1948 threatened the Jews of Mandatory Palestine with a "massacre the likes of which would not have been seen since the days of the Mongols." The notion that all of these people are marginal, or easily identified and rooted out, is nonsense.Back in the early 1980s, there were battles royal over military aid to Saudi Arabia, most notably that involving the AWACS. Every Saudi hireling jumped into the lobbying picture to present Saudi Arabia as what it was not then and never has been -- a "staunch ally" of the United States, a "friend" whose good will we needed. No, we needed nothing of the sort. We needed to bring Saudi Arabia to heel, or at least to see it clearly as the hostile polity with a hostile ideology that it is. Had we done so, we might have begun to impose taxes on gasoline and similar taxes, in order to recapture oligiopolistic rents. But the siren-song began in earnest; the choirmaster was Prince Bandar, he of the Plantagenet hunting-lodge Wychwood, and the Aspen estate, where a small mountain was knocked down at his demand so that he might better enjoy the view. Joining in were all those ex-ambassadors who came trooping in, and the Fred-Dutton P.R. campaign, and every single company doing business with Saudi Arabia, including the Whitney Corporation with its hospital contracts, and United Technologies, and of course the oil companies -- oh, they all certainly had American interests in mind, didn't they? Just the way those companies that are today lobbying for a continuation of the absurd foreign aid to Egypt have our best interests in mind. That aid now amounts to nearly $60 billion. It is being sent to a country that has opposed every element of American foreign policy, that has failed to meet a single one of its solemn commitments under the Camp David Accords, and that in its controlled media (just try making fun of Mubarak's son) fans the anti-American and anti-Israel flames throughout the Arab and Muslim lands.
What exactly would Egypt have to do in order to get the American government to cut off all aid? Anything short of an outright invasion of Israel, it would seem, will not do it. The Bush Administration has a chance to show that it understands that no Muslim country can be permitted to acquire major weaponry -- that all of it is a potential threat, whether in Iraq, or Iran, or Syria, or Saudi Arabia, or Egypt itself. It should make an intelligent attempt to stop the self-defeating farce of "aid to Egypt." After all, what is it that the Egyptians threaten? What can do if such aid is cut off? Cease to be so wonderfully cooperative? Start an anti-American campaign in their press which has been so pro-American? Stop their scrupulous adherence to the requirement, under the Camp David Accords, that they will cease all "hostile propaganda" against Israel? Start behaving badly toward the Copts, whom the Muslims in Egyptian have treated so very wonderfully? Oppose our taking strong measures to disarm Iraq, or possibly Iran?
What, exactly, could the Egyptians threaten that they do not already do? The example of the threat to cut a mere $30 million from American aid quickly got Egypt's attention and made it hastily arrange a new trial for the “reformer” Saad Eddin Ibrahim. What might a threat to cut it all accomplish? And if it were to be cut, and the American aid no longer seen to be propping up the corrupt regime, would that lead to an increase in anti-American feeling? Would it make Egypt more threatening to Infidel interests if it had to go hat in hand to rich Arabs? Or would that going hat in hand cause Egyptians to rediscover the only thing that might save them, at this point, from pan-Islamism (i.e. Islam)? That one saving thing is not a return to the pan-Arabism of Nasser, but rather a renewed emphasis on Egypt, on "Egyptianness." This can be encouraged by clever political figures, including the small secular opposition, which is now forced to navigate between the Scylla of Mubarak's Family-and-Friends Plan and the Charybdis of Akef's Muslim Brotherhood. It could also be encouraged by the Copts, who must come to understand that their only hope is some new direction for Egypt that will deemphasize both Islam and Egypt's supposed "Arab" identity. Even the latest monumental archeological discovery can be put to political use: pyramids and mummies from Egypt's pre-Islamic past should be more than a way to inveigle tourists.American taxpayers should not be funding those who, fundamentally -- and not just the "fundamentalists" if we may continue the polyptoton -- do not wish them well, and indeed, hate them. For we are Infidels. And it is not right that we should prosper while they do not. Islam is "to dominate and not be dominated." The world, for Muslims, is turned upside down. It is contra fidem, contra naturam. It cannot be. The topsy-turviness must end. It is Islam that should prevail, always and everywhere. And if we can convince the Infidels to fund us, through Combat and Call, possibly more of the latter and less of the former, well -- all the better.
Those in Washington should get a grip. Think about Islam, think about what Egypt has done, has voted, has spoken, has acted (or failed to act) over the past 30 years.
Yes, Sadat was wonderful (actually, he wasn't), and so in lieu of flowers it was awfully grand of you Americans to keep sending $2 billion a year. But really, he's been dead a while, hasn't he?
Get real.
"...to pretend to engage in pretend negotiations." - HF
This phrase sums up our entire experience with the Muslim world.
We've been watching a performance for the last 30 years. I distinctly remember wondering about an expiration date on the Camp David accords when they were signed. How long would our "aid" continue, I wondered? Indefinitely?
We were so "even-handed," such "honest brokers" were we. But those were the days when the jihad reached Israel alone. We could afford to negotiate her future, but we cannot now afford to engage in pretend negotiations on our own future with Islam.
We need a real (not a pretend) divorce. The children are grown, we find, so it is time to cut the child support.
I don't think Hosni will go down without a shot . . . like Abbas to Hammas(Abbas looks like he's ready for the one-way Hams to Paris trip). No, Mubarak will fight to the end. I used to think these arms were for Israel--and, ultimately, they will be--but I'm now starting to see that Mubarak thinks he needs deadly arms of all kinds for his own population. Yes, he wants his son to take over, but he's also aware his region is a tinderbox, with Jihadists and neocons abound, each wanting to transform the middle least . . . ultimately(with different methods)into the same final result . . . theocracy . . . the will of the people. Mubarak will fight to stave this off. I think he's running very scared. Sure, he's a scoundrel and a thief, but he's also scared and will arm himself to the teeth to take on the brothers when they attack. The same is true for Jordan(here Arms are more clearly seen as needed for defence for the Jordanian crown against the true believers--which is everyone), and, I would argue, even Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The question is what do we do? I think, like Hugh, to approach things on a case by case basis. Jordan, yes. Their King sings the right words and is helpful--allegedly--in intel matters. If this is true and he continues to sing the right words--he should get the aid. The fact that everyone hates the US and the Jews is not his fault; in fact, he shows courage by his actions. Egypt, no. let them stew, or threaten them. I think there vulnerable. Failed state, corrupt and 'moderate,' with teeming believers growing in number with no jobs . . . say to Egypt, control the borders with Gaza, if necessary perhaps a joint cleaning out mission in Gaza(such a move is actually in his interest to show much-needed strength, have him stop the incitment against Jews/Israel, but stop the talk about democracy/human rights fiction. If he doesn't do our bidding, let him turn to Iran.
Afhanistan-yes. Pakistan-no. Karzi shows he can work with us--help out interest in return for building up the country--and-to date--we have shed little blood and treasure--and this region was(AND IS--SEE TRIBAL BORDERLANDS)a Bin Laden sanctuary. Parkistan--push them against the wall--say not a dime more in aid--but we'll redouble our Indian aid unless you give us free reighn in the tribal regions. If they say no, lets make a deal with Karzi and forget Musharef--except where he keeps his nuclear arms.
Iraq. No and yes. No in the sense we should pull out, they have a PM now anyway, seems to me we've served our mission. If they wish to have an army--let them patch one together. But yes in the sense at a strong presence on the ground In Kurdistan--perhaps a counselate where we can watch our interests in neutral ground. This will upset the Iranians, Shia and Sunni's; isn't that the point.
We need to set an intelligent policy that looks for shades of good and evil, black and white; and not to be wedded to some ridiculous notion of democracy on the move, but rather will you, Mr. Despot, do our bidding. If the answer is no, then our answer should be no. No tit without tat.
... but I'm now starting to see that Mubarak thinks he needs deadly arms of all kinds for his own population.
Yes, but the hundreds of Abram M1 tanks he is producing under licence?
That the Administration did not remonstrate about the stockpile of arms and drugs, awaiting the Palestinian groups to break through the Gaza Egyptian border, which they did, under the nose of Egypt is something to ponder.
Worse was the movement over at least the previous 5 years of Hezbollah and other "operatives" through the arms smuggling tunnels, under the eyes of the Egyptians, for training and hands on practice of shaped charges against Istraeli armour, and later used so effectively in Iraq.
Certainly anyone living in the region and with only half a mind had to look cynically on stated US foreign policy.
If the US had expected anyone to take them seriously they should have behaved seriously.
But then we must remember that the $2 billion/annum aid to Egypt was a Carter concoction along with the State Department, with a similar result as his other machinations.
On US funding in Egypt I have 2 thoughts:
1. Another egregious example of wasteful spending by an entrenched group ..... our useless State Dept. and those that give away freely our tax monies.
2. I am not sure how useful these monies are to the Egyptian military. Some time ago, my wife and I were awakened at an empty train station (southern Egypt) by an incessant thumping sound. This noise I discovered when I opened the blinds to our sleeper car came from a young Egyptian soldier pounding on the end of a wrong sized cartridge with his combat boot. The magazine still refused to accept the cartridge regardless of his efforts. The only problem I saw was that his carbine was aimed at our window. I told my wife, 'go back to sleep, we're safe'. Now if he had been wielding a sword I would have been concerned.
To keep distributing Jizyah on the basis of some wrong impressions conveyed by some outwardly attractive leader long dead, whether that leader is Saint Sadat or the "plucky little king" (as he was formulaically known) King Hussein of Jordan, and on by the light still arriving here from that long-dead star -- svet nepogashennoj luny, as the mordant Pilniak would, and did, put it -- is not sensible.
As for Jordan, mentioned by a poster above as still deserving of American aid, I disagree. Jordan is not Deerfield graduate Abdullah, he of the thick neck and the attractive "Palestinian" wife (these good-looking wives, just like Queen Noor, or the wife of the Qatari ruler, are put to maximum use, but should not be permitted at gatherings or dinner-parties to confuse shallow Western leadres about the proper policies, and attitudes, required if their own peoples are to be spared unpleasantness, expense, physical danger). More than 90% of the people in Jordan hate the United States. Not "dislike." Hate.
Stop the Jizyah now distributed to the Arabs in Western Palestine. And to the Arabs in Eastern Palestine, or Jordan, as well.
There is no need. It does not win friends. And aid from outside merely allows people not to scramble to survive, and if you don't have to scramble to survive, you have more time for marching around with black balaklavas and kalashnikovs, more time to learn to make bombs, more time to arrive en masse to join the riot-in-progess. "Poverty" is not the problem in the Muslm world, as far as Infidels are concerned. For money, unless it is earned, that is unless it comes from work rather than the unmerited oil trillions or the unmerited Jizyah furnished by the foolish (to date) policies of Western govenrments that fail to see that wealth itself is the greatest weapon in the Greater Jihad (that against them, and all Infidels), as it is in the Leser Jihad (that against Israel), it will necessarily be used as an instrument in the Jihad, against those very peoples and polities who have been supplying that aid.
And yet, US corporations evidently remain undiscouraged from investing in the place.
From ZDNet: "Egypt's goal: To be the land of offshoring"
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6037977.html?tag=nl.e589
This isn't the kind of "engaging" investment that will help to open the place up (as is so often argued on the subject of, say, Cuba), but rather, the kind that will continue to prop up the regime and fund Islamic extremism.
The corporations-- including General Motors, Microsoft and Oracle-- will profit in the short run, not caring the long-term consequences may come back to bite all of us.
"these good-looking wives, just like Queen Noor, or the wife of the Qatari ruler, are put to maximum use, but should not be..."
(I gather that doudy trollop, the 'wife' of the beloved palestinian homunculus doesn't rate a 'shout out' in your list???)
But where else can you find haughty/fawning millionaires and billionaires showing off their diamonds?
'You know, my diamonds were far bigger than hers, and she's a goddamned queen!'
These rentable "queens" make the all the rounds in such notable old haunts as NY, London, Washington, Paris, and Larry King. It helps Westerners to pretend they are peers of "royalty", while the Muslims pretend they are peers of the Western world...
Any money given as aid to any country needs to have strings attached, and lessened over time. when welfare reform was introduced in the US there were cries of how how the Republicans were taking food away from kids. but in the end it did make people less dependent on the government, and you had less on the dole. just take one giant leap forward, you need welfare reform for countries like Egypt, and others.
Why give any aid to any muslim country? They hate everything western. Everything we stand for and fought for.
Let them starve and eat oil. Cut off all aid to every muslim nation. Help nations that appreciate what we do. Lets not feed the nations that want to destroy us especially Egypt, Pakistan and Indonesia.
Hugh, she, the King of Jordan's wife, is a hottie . . . no doubt about it. I think Turkey would fall into your category of 'moderates in name only' or 'moderates from the historical perspective' BUT no longer. I note that Turkey is at the forefront of anti-western, anti-semetic, anti-cartoon fervor . . . almost as if they want to make up for their Kemalist past ASAP. Note the 'best-selling' movie with Gary Bussey as a Jewish, organ-selling surgeon(funny, he doesn't look Jewish--but I guess to the Turks, we all look the same). The kids are burning US and Israeli Flags like it's going out of style and stabbing Priests for good measure. I think their making themselves look just fine in the Saudi's eyes or the Paks. Doesn't it just make your eyes moist with pride with a moderate Muslim embraces Jihad.
Why should USA sqander her tax payers money like this? Pakistan,Palestine and Egypt- All anti American countries,swearing "Death to America"! How can the common citizens allow this to happen? Egypt,for instance, is suppressing the Christian Gopts,destroying their churches,and atleaslt,America can warn Egypt that the free money will be stoped,if they continue harassing these original people of Egypt..Same thing with Pakisthan-They go on a rampage and destroy all American businesses like McDonald,KFC,Pizza Hut,and Christian schools for that cartoons of Mohamed,in which,America has no part at all.Their favorite slogan is :Death to America". now the Palestenian Hamas is so Anti American, what is the necesity of giving free aid? In what way it heals America?
Some body must put a stop to this unwise scattering of hard earned money,which can be used for the Katrina relief,or for the homeless problem in America.
A Public Free Speech Fest?
Maybe someone ought to organize a public Ridicule-Free Speech Fest to be held on a particular date in major cities -- a t-shirt could be designed with, say 20 images on it -- one of the images would ridicule atheism, another theism; that leaves 18 -- of the 18 remaining, 9 images would ridicule the 9 largest religions on the globe, and then the other 9 would be images or symbols used by and respectful of the 9 largest religions. Then hundreds or even thousands of the shirts could be sold in advance of the Fest to those who'd be attending and would wear them there in support of free speech.
The virtue of it is that no one could say Islam -- or even religion -- was being singled out. It would thus be absolutely clear that it was a Fest-rally for free speech, not a rally merely against something, for example Islam. Though some Muslims around the world would probably still freak out, burn things, and kill people, they could not argue that the point of the Fest was to offend Muslims, since all the other religions, and atheism too, would also be offended. Free speech would be center stage. Two benefits would result. 1) The intolerance of many Muslims, by comparison with other religious and non-religious people, would stand out in even clearer relief than it does now, and people would wake up a little more to the dangers facing the West, and 2) other Muslims might start to get a little inkling of what free speech means as a positive value in itself and not merely against them.
I guess this is pie-in-the-sky stuff, but I'm trying to brainstorm a little.
I think people misunderstand the purpose of international aid. The US government is not an altruistic body of dogooders. The whole purpose of foreign aid is to gain influence and benefits (money, power, prestige, etc.). The best way to get people to do what you want is by making them reliant on you for money.
Who in the world -- both in the west and east -- would give the U.S. a fig were it not for the millions and billions which the U.S. gives them?
By giving the Egyptian, Jordanian, Israeli, etc. governments so much money, it is able to dictate agendas to them. It can arm-twist Israel to carry out a murderous and euphemistically-named "peace process", it can get Egypt and Jordan to sign agreements and put on a show as if they're part of the peace agreement, etc.
The "foreign aid" doesn't go to the people but to the ones in control. It doesn't make a difference to the U.S. if the foreign aid is stolen by the senior officials and the people don't get it, because the main thing is that the US obtains its goals, and its the people in control of the country who determine that. That's why, for instance, the US and the EU know for years that all the aid money to the Palestinians have been siphoned off to the corrupt top officials, and despite an occasional protest for official appearances, they couldn't care less.
The people high-up in the U.S. government may pronounce high-sounding altruistic goals for the US foreign aid, but in truth, the goals are not altruistic but selfish. They are not for the benefit of the American people either, but for the benefit of the elites in power.
In the real world, this is called realpolitik.
It is naive to believe that polticians are altruistic individuals concerned with the billions of suffering poor cluttering the world. Politicians are among the most self-serving individuals that exist.
biorabbi,
While I agree with Hugh's excellent analysis, I stand with you on Jordan's King Abdallah. Right now, the Jordanian King is the only thing standing in the way of a Hamas style takeover of Jordan and tthe Jihadists all know it. In fact, I would go further and advocate a breakup of the Saudi family state and returning the Hijaz to the Hashemites.
It is widely believed among non-Islamist Jordanians that the Amman hotel bombing was planned because it was thought that Abdallah would be attending the targeted wedding. There are still militants who have never forgiven the Hashemites for Black September and their pro-Western moderation is a major irritant to the Sunni "street".
That Abdallah, like his father, has an attractive queen, who is also a public figure and does not wear hijab, is another slap at the Islamists.
By the way, I agree that Queen Rania is a real cutie. Muy Caliente!
-----------------
Hugh,
Despite my support for the Jordanian monarchy, I would be willing to accept another scenario. Expel the Muslims from Judea and Samaria to create the Christian state in federation with Israel with Bethlehem as its capitol. As the expelled muslims establish their Hamas theocracy across the Jordan river, Abdallah and the Hashemites will be given the Hejaz to compensate for the loss of Jordan.
Since that is unlikely in the near future, the Hashemite monarchy in Jordan is about the best government we can hope for anywhere in the Muslim world.
The Egyptian Muslims, contemptuous of their infidel ancestors, once sold mummies by the ton to then be used as resin-rich fuel for the boilers of steam locomotive when trains first reached the afric continent.
We now burn something else coming from the soil of the Middle East.
Until we can find other sources of fuel for our infidel economies, the game of 'foreign aid' cum bribery -for influence (to allow our businesses to sell Western goods like electronics, planes, heavy machinery, ships, autos, etc.) in these markets- will continue.
It's just business, not personal (as the Mob says).
As we replace Islamically-controlled fossil fuel, we will still need to have footholds in Egypt, etc., if we want our products to be bought by their people.
If they keep using them to attack us, we may have to reduce both aid and access to our goods.
Then they can throw rocks at our effigies and curse us in their crumbling mosques.
(Which they have plenty of practice at already.)