By Cliff Montgomery – Nov. 30th, 2011
Members of the U.S. corporate media have put on quite a show of apparent confusion over the new wave ofrevolutionary protest in Egypt. The protests are occurring even as the country enjoys a strong turnout for itsparliamentary elections, which began on Monday.
‘But why protest the U.S.-backed ruling generals for their management of things in the post-Mubarak era,’ thecorporate talking heads often seem to ask, ‘when elections now are happening across Egypt?’
As readers might expect, the corporate mouthpieces simply ignore what the military cabal has been doing inthat country.
Egypt’s ruling military council calls itself the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). Earlier this month,SCAF-appointed deputy Prime Minister Ali al-Selmi called for the installation of so-called “supra-constitutionalprinciples.”
“The proposed principles would give the military permanent powers to intervene in the political process, wouldshield the military budget from public scrutiny, and would have allowed the SCAF to dominate the selectionprocess for the committee charged with writing Egypt’s new constitution,” states a press release from HumanRights First, a non-partisan, non-profit international organization dedicated to preserving human rights andbasic dignities. It is based in New York City and Washington D.C.
Even though “al-Selmi and the SCAF have recently backed away from some of these claims duringnegotiations with representatives of political parties,” the proposals continue to provoke “almost universalcriticism from political parties from across the [Egyptian] political spectrum opposed to what was seen as abrazen power grab by the military,” adds the press release.
“The SCAF appears to be reverting to the pattern of rule employed by former President Mubarak for decades,”Human Rights First’s Neil Hicks declared in the press release.
“It is portraying itself and its authoritarian practices as essential bulwarks against instability, extremism and anti-Western sentiment, while at the same time allowing such forces to bubble up to the surface from time to timeto play on the fears of secularists, religious minorities and the West,” Hicks continued.
“This was a dangerous game under Mubarak that contributed to Egypt producing some of the most virulentreligious extremists in the region. It ultimately failed to produce a stable, sustainable government in Egypt. It isreckless to believe that a return to military-dominated authoritarianism in Egypt would produce anything butfurther instability, economic uncertainty and political violence,” Hicks flatly stated.
Hicks pointed out that SCAF also needs “to restore basic political freedoms […], to end the trial of civilians bymilitary courts, to cease attacks on independent civil society organizations and to release detained bloggersand cease attacks against independent journalists.”
This damning assessment of SCAF’s activities appears to gel with recent messages from the military councilitself, “one of whose members has said the new parliament would not be able to dismiss the government orpick new ministers,” according to a Reuters article printed yesterday.
“The new parliament’s main task is to select a 100-member constituent assembly to write a constitution thatwill then be put to a referendum,” continued Reuters.
“Whether that can be done before the planned presidential election in June is hard to say,” declared the newsservice. “Nor is it clear if a new president will immediately dissolve parliament.”
But two things are clear.
First, “on paper, the generals will have the final say over all matters of state until the new president is installed,”stated Reuters.
Second, “[the U.S.-backed generals] may discover that the popular legitimacy enjoyed by the next assemblyproves irresistible.”
“Were they to ignore parliament the way Mubarak did,” continued Reuters, “they might face a new wave ofunrest from Egyptians who now know the power of the street.”
That is a power which is becoming ever more obvious, and it is slowly taking over from Egypt to Wall Street andMain Street.
But Reuters has one matter wrong: It is not the “power of the street”–it is simply actual democracy, the voicesand power of the people themselves. And it cannot be stopped.
