maybe a tactic to slow down the momentum of the protests? who knows. he was ill and weak already and too old to run for president again, his next plans were to install his son.
Egypt Unrest: Mubarak Steps Down!
- Thread starter Majnun
- Start date
maybe a tactic to slow down the momentum of the protests? who knows. he was ill and weak already and too old to run for president again, his next plans were to install his son.
AZADPAKISTAN2009
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 37,669
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
- Location
They just need the police and army to crack , and mubark pupet is gone what a selfish man -
Prayers with Egyptian brothers and hope they win their freedom
Prayers with Egyptian brothers and hope they win their freedom
Majnun
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 891
- Reaction score
- 0
But that isn't easy at all. Its the most difficult task, to have the Army crack in a country like Egypt.
Majnun
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 891
- Reaction score
- 0
monitor
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,570
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
People power in Egypt
Photo: AFP
Syed Fattahul Alim
The spark of people power that erupted into flames in small Tunisia is now raging through the Middle East. The biggest of the Arab countries, Egypt, is at the moment boiling. The regime of Hosni Mubarak is witnessing the worst challenge to its existence during its nearly three decades of rule with an iron first.
Tens of thousands of people, an overwhelming proportion of whom comprises the youth, are on the streets and fighting pitched battle with police in Cairo, Alexandria, Ismailia, Suez as well as in other parts of the country. Egypt's venerated armed forces that the 82-year-old president had deployed to quell the mass upheaval and safeguard him and his authoritarian rule, are unwilling to crush the uprising using brute power. On the other hand, they are reported to have been fraternising with the crowds demanding the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak.
And Mubarak, in his desperate bid to hold on to power, has already dismissed his cabinet of ministers, appointed his first ever deputy Mr. Omar Suleiman, the erstwhile chief of Intelligence, as vice president and Ahmed Shafik, the former aviation minister, as prime minister.
But the choice of Suleiman, known for his Israeli connections, as a successor, if you will, has hardly been a prudent one, if only for his history of extreme loyalty to the president. He even saved Mubarak once from an assassination attempt. Given the mood of the protesters on the street, any second attempt by him to save the president from the present predicament may turn out to be counterproductive.
But will the Egyptian people, who have come out in thousands on the street since January 22 in the wake of Tunisian dictator Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali's flight from Tunis amid a similar popular upsurge on January 14, be placated by such cosmetic changes with the actual rein of power still in the president's hand?
Will they trust Mubarak and allow him to continue in power, forgetting the absolute poverty under which about half of the country's 84 million people are living? Will they forgive the ruling elite, which is corrupt to the marrow, to continue plundering the nation's resources like before? Will the youthful members of the new generation under 30 leave the street without having any assurance for job and the promise of a better life in the future?
Mubarak's offer of an olive branch in terms of more democracy and economic improvements as assured in his Friday's televised address to the nation would hardly have any appeal to the angry masses out there. Because the Egyptians are left with little faith in him, considering the history of his rule, which is tarnished by denial of democracy, gagging of press freedom and suppression of any criticism or opposition to his rule.
Strangely though, in the face of the wrath of the masses, the embattled president is still trying to put up a bold face as he warned the public against any chaos. That means he is still betting on his continued grip on the state of affairs in spite of the popular revolt that has shaken his edifice of power at its base.
The question that naturally arises is where is the president drawing his strength and arrogance from in the midst of such a deep political crisis that the nation is going through and the challenge thrown to his authority?
The explanation lies in his government's staunchest international ally, the US and its attitude towards Egypt at this moment. Is the US yet ready to get rid of Mubarak?
From the US president Barack Obama's televised address, it appears, though, he has advised Mubarak not to use brute force to quash the popular revolt, but take "concrete steps" to advance political reform within Egypt. He, however, stopped short of defining what such steps should be. The still bigger question is: given the volatile atmosphere all around and his (Mubarak's) authority teetering on the edge, is Mubarak at all in a position to take up any long-term reform measure and also deliver it?
The fact of the matter is that the US does not want to see a post-Mubarak power vacuum in Egypt, which it considers as its Middle Eastern anchor of stability, and a bulwark of peace with Israel -- a peace deal that was reached in 1979 when President Anwar Sa'adat, Mubarak's predecessor, was in office.
Since then the US has been counting on Mubarak's secular, dictatorial though, regime as the pivot of its Middle Eastern policy. Now that the crowd outside the president's house is fuming for a decisive change, it has become totally dicey, who would succeed Mubarak.
If the US pushes too hard for a change, like it did in the case of Iran in 1979, or Philippine in 1986, that may prove to be equally fatal for US's interest in the region. In that eventuality, the spectre of Muslim Brotherhood, the only effective opposition Egypt is left with after all the oppression and the work of the hated secret police, will get the upper hand.
But can a façade of secularism that is devoid of democracy and freedom, be a real safeguard against extremism in the region? Was not the police state of Tunisia's Ben Ali a secular one? Are Yemen and Algeria are also not governed by secular dictators?
In fact, these dictators have been denying their countrymen freedom and democracy for long with the support of USA, on the hollow pretext of fighting Islamic extremism. Meanwhile, these corrupt, police states have been fleecing the people, depriving them of all kinds of freedom.
Now the people of Egypt have woken up. They are not going to accept any window dressing in the name of political reform in Egypt with the same old Mubarak or any of his alter ego continuing in office.
The Egyptian people have suffered too long. Their march to freedom must not be stopped halfway.
Syed Fattahul Alim is a senior journalist.
Photo: AFP
Syed Fattahul Alim
The spark of people power that erupted into flames in small Tunisia is now raging through the Middle East. The biggest of the Arab countries, Egypt, is at the moment boiling. The regime of Hosni Mubarak is witnessing the worst challenge to its existence during its nearly three decades of rule with an iron first.
Tens of thousands of people, an overwhelming proportion of whom comprises the youth, are on the streets and fighting pitched battle with police in Cairo, Alexandria, Ismailia, Suez as well as in other parts of the country. Egypt's venerated armed forces that the 82-year-old president had deployed to quell the mass upheaval and safeguard him and his authoritarian rule, are unwilling to crush the uprising using brute power. On the other hand, they are reported to have been fraternising with the crowds demanding the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak.
And Mubarak, in his desperate bid to hold on to power, has already dismissed his cabinet of ministers, appointed his first ever deputy Mr. Omar Suleiman, the erstwhile chief of Intelligence, as vice president and Ahmed Shafik, the former aviation minister, as prime minister.
But the choice of Suleiman, known for his Israeli connections, as a successor, if you will, has hardly been a prudent one, if only for his history of extreme loyalty to the president. He even saved Mubarak once from an assassination attempt. Given the mood of the protesters on the street, any second attempt by him to save the president from the present predicament may turn out to be counterproductive.
But will the Egyptian people, who have come out in thousands on the street since January 22 in the wake of Tunisian dictator Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali's flight from Tunis amid a similar popular upsurge on January 14, be placated by such cosmetic changes with the actual rein of power still in the president's hand?
Will they trust Mubarak and allow him to continue in power, forgetting the absolute poverty under which about half of the country's 84 million people are living? Will they forgive the ruling elite, which is corrupt to the marrow, to continue plundering the nation's resources like before? Will the youthful members of the new generation under 30 leave the street without having any assurance for job and the promise of a better life in the future?
Mubarak's offer of an olive branch in terms of more democracy and economic improvements as assured in his Friday's televised address to the nation would hardly have any appeal to the angry masses out there. Because the Egyptians are left with little faith in him, considering the history of his rule, which is tarnished by denial of democracy, gagging of press freedom and suppression of any criticism or opposition to his rule.
Strangely though, in the face of the wrath of the masses, the embattled president is still trying to put up a bold face as he warned the public against any chaos. That means he is still betting on his continued grip on the state of affairs in spite of the popular revolt that has shaken his edifice of power at its base.
The question that naturally arises is where is the president drawing his strength and arrogance from in the midst of such a deep political crisis that the nation is going through and the challenge thrown to his authority?
The explanation lies in his government's staunchest international ally, the US and its attitude towards Egypt at this moment. Is the US yet ready to get rid of Mubarak?
From the US president Barack Obama's televised address, it appears, though, he has advised Mubarak not to use brute force to quash the popular revolt, but take "concrete steps" to advance political reform within Egypt. He, however, stopped short of defining what such steps should be. The still bigger question is: given the volatile atmosphere all around and his (Mubarak's) authority teetering on the edge, is Mubarak at all in a position to take up any long-term reform measure and also deliver it?
The fact of the matter is that the US does not want to see a post-Mubarak power vacuum in Egypt, which it considers as its Middle Eastern anchor of stability, and a bulwark of peace with Israel -- a peace deal that was reached in 1979 when President Anwar Sa'adat, Mubarak's predecessor, was in office.
Since then the US has been counting on Mubarak's secular, dictatorial though, regime as the pivot of its Middle Eastern policy. Now that the crowd outside the president's house is fuming for a decisive change, it has become totally dicey, who would succeed Mubarak.
If the US pushes too hard for a change, like it did in the case of Iran in 1979, or Philippine in 1986, that may prove to be equally fatal for US's interest in the region. In that eventuality, the spectre of Muslim Brotherhood, the only effective opposition Egypt is left with after all the oppression and the work of the hated secret police, will get the upper hand.
But can a façade of secularism that is devoid of democracy and freedom, be a real safeguard against extremism in the region? Was not the police state of Tunisia's Ben Ali a secular one? Are Yemen and Algeria are also not governed by secular dictators?
In fact, these dictators have been denying their countrymen freedom and democracy for long with the support of USA, on the hollow pretext of fighting Islamic extremism. Meanwhile, these corrupt, police states have been fleecing the people, depriving them of all kinds of freedom.
Now the people of Egypt have woken up. They are not going to accept any window dressing in the name of political reform in Egypt with the same old Mubarak or any of his alter ego continuing in office.
The Egyptian people have suffered too long. Their march to freedom must not be stopped halfway.
Syed Fattahul Alim is a senior journalist.
monitor
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,570
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
Egypt next in line
It is to stem the tide that the Obama administration is consulting Hosni Mubarak while the sultans from Libya to Saudi Arabia, forgetting their differences, have been united.
Farooq Sulehria
“Can Mubarak be toppled?" BBC's Jon Leyne asked the US secretary of state on Thursday. Hillary Clinton, even when two deaths and 1,500 arrests had already been reported, responds: "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."
The New York Times enlightens us as to why "the Egyptian government is stable." In a front-page article on Jan 26, it says: "An uprising in Tunisia, a peripheral player in the region, is not the same as one in Egypt, a linchpin. The Egyptian government is a crucial ally to Washington." Should one characterise The New York Time's approach as imperial hubris? Or is it historical amnesia?
In January/February 1979, Iran was a similar lynchpin, as was Iraq in July 1958. True, autocratic regimes often do not crumble overnight. The case of Tunisia is significantly exceptional. Egyptians may not be able to emulate the alacrity their Tunisian cousins have shown in toppling Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. One may even expect Hosni Mubarak to survive the way Ahmedinejad survived the summer of discontent in 2009. Muhammad ElBaradei, a bad omen for Egypt, will be ready to play the Hossein Mousavi. Luckily for the Tunisian revolution, it was "leaderless." The masses in Tunisia took their fate in their own hands, instead of mortgaging it to any particular party or leader. Hence, Tunisians, once they were on the streets, did not return until Ben Ali had fled. Even after his ignominious exit, Tunisians did not give up. They brought down the interim government since it co-opted ministers from Ben Ali's party, the RCD. At the time of this writing, protestors are camping out in the heart of the capital, Tunis, demanding the interim prime minister Mohammad Ghannouchi resign.
In case of Iran, the workers, except in the transport sector, did not stretch their muscle. It is indeed hard to say if Egyptian unions will emulate their Arab cousins or will follow the example of their Iranian counterparts. However, the beginning of Hosni Mubarak's end has certainly begun. Cairo has witnessed the biggest mobilisations ever since the 1977 bread riots. Cairo may calm down temporarily, but Tunisian message has been heard loud and clear, and much beyond Egypt. People in Jordan, Algeria and Yemen have taken to the streets in massive numbers.
It is to stem the tide that the Obama administration is consulting Hosni Mubarak while the sultans from Libya to Saudi Arabia, forgetting their differences, have been united. In an exercise of damage control, the Obama administration has sent its assistant secretary of state for the Near East, Jeffrey D Feltman, to Tunis. His mission is to "confer with the interim government."
Tunisians are being lured with a promise of elections in six months. Washington is manoeuvring in all essentials to restore the old regime without Ben Ali. This cynical fraud is being presented as promised "democracy." Meantime, the Western media that ignored Tunisian developments to the point of censorship until Jan 12, have taken up the Arab cause. Not just television networks and the press, but even academics at media departments are alerting their students to the role of the "new media" - a liberating technology - like Facebook and Twitter have played in Tunisian/Egyptian developments. A BBC blogpost, for instance, says about Egypt: "Sites including Facebook and Twitter have been key tools in organising the protests, but are reported to have been blocked across the country at times."
As for the Murdoch press, the British tabloid, The Sun, described the Tunisian upheaval as the "first Wikileaks revolution." It was the same Sun that had viciously attacked Julian Assange for putting at risk the lives of "our boys" in Afghanistan.
Foreign Policy, a "sober" tool of US imperialism, was hardly better. A day after Ben Ali fled, Foreign Policy's Elizabeth Dickinson, in an essay titled "First Wikileaks Revolution?", concluded: "Tunisians didn't need more reasons to protest when they took the streets these past weeks - food prices were rising, corruption was rampant, and employment was staggering. But we might also count Tunisia as the first time that Wikileaks pushed people over the brink."
Wikileaks "pushed people over the brink"? Does Ms Dickinson really believe that Mohammad Bouazizi, the youth whose self-immolation ignited Tunisian intifada, had read Wikileaks before he killed himself on Dec 17? And does she really think Tunisians, Egyptians, Jordanians, Saudis and the rest of the Arabs would need some leaked cables, dispatched by bored clerks at US embassies, to find out that their sultans were corrupt, that most of their unfortunate countries had rising prices and staggering unemployment?
As the media in the West highlight the liberating role being played by the "social media" headquartered in the USA, one hardly finds a mention of the brutal military/police apparatuses built in the Middle East under Western tutelage. It is these apparatuses that have sustained the oppressive sultans on their thrones. That is the real Western "contribution" in the Middle East. Had Wikileaks and "social media" been so liberating, Europe and North America would have been forced to withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq by now.
The eerie silence has been broken. It is not surprising, therefore, that the sultans on their thrones are shaking. Faiz Ahmed Faiz comes to mind:
We shall see
Certainly we, too, shall see
The day that has been promised us
Which is written with God's ink
We shall see!
When the mountains of cruelty and torture
Will fly about like pieces of cotton
Under the feet of the oppressed
This earth will shiver, shake and beat
And over the head of oppressors
When lightening will thunder.
We shall see!
The writer is a freelance contributor.
Email: mfsulehria@hotmail.com
It is to stem the tide that the Obama administration is consulting Hosni Mubarak while the sultans from Libya to Saudi Arabia, forgetting their differences, have been united.
Farooq Sulehria
“Can Mubarak be toppled?" BBC's Jon Leyne asked the US secretary of state on Thursday. Hillary Clinton, even when two deaths and 1,500 arrests had already been reported, responds: "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."
The New York Times enlightens us as to why "the Egyptian government is stable." In a front-page article on Jan 26, it says: "An uprising in Tunisia, a peripheral player in the region, is not the same as one in Egypt, a linchpin. The Egyptian government is a crucial ally to Washington." Should one characterise The New York Time's approach as imperial hubris? Or is it historical amnesia?
In January/February 1979, Iran was a similar lynchpin, as was Iraq in July 1958. True, autocratic regimes often do not crumble overnight. The case of Tunisia is significantly exceptional. Egyptians may not be able to emulate the alacrity their Tunisian cousins have shown in toppling Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. One may even expect Hosni Mubarak to survive the way Ahmedinejad survived the summer of discontent in 2009. Muhammad ElBaradei, a bad omen for Egypt, will be ready to play the Hossein Mousavi. Luckily for the Tunisian revolution, it was "leaderless." The masses in Tunisia took their fate in their own hands, instead of mortgaging it to any particular party or leader. Hence, Tunisians, once they were on the streets, did not return until Ben Ali had fled. Even after his ignominious exit, Tunisians did not give up. They brought down the interim government since it co-opted ministers from Ben Ali's party, the RCD. At the time of this writing, protestors are camping out in the heart of the capital, Tunis, demanding the interim prime minister Mohammad Ghannouchi resign.
In case of Iran, the workers, except in the transport sector, did not stretch their muscle. It is indeed hard to say if Egyptian unions will emulate their Arab cousins or will follow the example of their Iranian counterparts. However, the beginning of Hosni Mubarak's end has certainly begun. Cairo has witnessed the biggest mobilisations ever since the 1977 bread riots. Cairo may calm down temporarily, but Tunisian message has been heard loud and clear, and much beyond Egypt. People in Jordan, Algeria and Yemen have taken to the streets in massive numbers.
It is to stem the tide that the Obama administration is consulting Hosni Mubarak while the sultans from Libya to Saudi Arabia, forgetting their differences, have been united. In an exercise of damage control, the Obama administration has sent its assistant secretary of state for the Near East, Jeffrey D Feltman, to Tunis. His mission is to "confer with the interim government."
Tunisians are being lured with a promise of elections in six months. Washington is manoeuvring in all essentials to restore the old regime without Ben Ali. This cynical fraud is being presented as promised "democracy." Meantime, the Western media that ignored Tunisian developments to the point of censorship until Jan 12, have taken up the Arab cause. Not just television networks and the press, but even academics at media departments are alerting their students to the role of the "new media" - a liberating technology - like Facebook and Twitter have played in Tunisian/Egyptian developments. A BBC blogpost, for instance, says about Egypt: "Sites including Facebook and Twitter have been key tools in organising the protests, but are reported to have been blocked across the country at times."
As for the Murdoch press, the British tabloid, The Sun, described the Tunisian upheaval as the "first Wikileaks revolution." It was the same Sun that had viciously attacked Julian Assange for putting at risk the lives of "our boys" in Afghanistan.
Foreign Policy, a "sober" tool of US imperialism, was hardly better. A day after Ben Ali fled, Foreign Policy's Elizabeth Dickinson, in an essay titled "First Wikileaks Revolution?", concluded: "Tunisians didn't need more reasons to protest when they took the streets these past weeks - food prices were rising, corruption was rampant, and employment was staggering. But we might also count Tunisia as the first time that Wikileaks pushed people over the brink."
Wikileaks "pushed people over the brink"? Does Ms Dickinson really believe that Mohammad Bouazizi, the youth whose self-immolation ignited Tunisian intifada, had read Wikileaks before he killed himself on Dec 17? And does she really think Tunisians, Egyptians, Jordanians, Saudis and the rest of the Arabs would need some leaked cables, dispatched by bored clerks at US embassies, to find out that their sultans were corrupt, that most of their unfortunate countries had rising prices and staggering unemployment?
As the media in the West highlight the liberating role being played by the "social media" headquartered in the USA, one hardly finds a mention of the brutal military/police apparatuses built in the Middle East under Western tutelage. It is these apparatuses that have sustained the oppressive sultans on their thrones. That is the real Western "contribution" in the Middle East. Had Wikileaks and "social media" been so liberating, Europe and North America would have been forced to withdraw from Afghanistan and Iraq by now.
The eerie silence has been broken. It is not surprising, therefore, that the sultans on their thrones are shaking. Faiz Ahmed Faiz comes to mind:
We shall see
Certainly we, too, shall see
The day that has been promised us
Which is written with God's ink
We shall see!
When the mountains of cruelty and torture
Will fly about like pieces of cotton
Under the feet of the oppressed
This earth will shiver, shake and beat
And over the head of oppressors
When lightening will thunder.
We shall see!
The writer is a freelance contributor.
Email: mfsulehria@hotmail.com
monitor
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 8,570
- Reaction score
- 7
- Country
- Location
Army n Egypt not seems to want crack down on protesters rather they are also supporting the protest . bbc /cnn have shown a army officer joining the crowd of protesters and chanting . its very likely that Mubarak regimes time is over . some commentator of my country are speculating that its a matter of 24 hours to 72 hours we will see some dramatic change in Egypt .
Fasih Khan
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2010
- Messages
- 1,556
- Reaction score
- 0
Your Government is using the same Cheap Tactics in Occupied Kashmir. Shameful Isn't It ?
Get back to Topic ... Murarek Should Step down earliest possible. People Do Not want you any more ''Mr. President''.
Last edited:
twoplustwoisfour
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2010
- Messages
- 1,589
- Reaction score
- 0
Can someone tell this ignorant Indian exactly WHAT triggered these protests? As far as I know, the protesters want an end to the Mubarak regime. But why exactly? IMO Egypt was one of the more politically and economically stable countries in the region... 
Obambam
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2011
- Messages
- 3,646
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
hundreds of people have already died in EgyptJets and military helicopter flying low in Cairo etc. May Allah grant victory to Egyptions.
Hosni Mubarak OFF !!
This brings back memories of 1989 China which resulted in EU and US sanctions. I wonder what the double standard West is going to do now eh?
Similar threads
