Revolutions in the Middle East

[KanadaHye]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Islam is the problem, not the solution and Khamenei, would have us forget about Iran's little green revolution the other year.

The plan that Israel and the west have in store for these "falling dictatorships" is what they call moderate Islam. It's basically a pu$$y version that has some elements of Islam mixed in with secular values. Not the dreaded sharia law. So the citizens will be free to mess up their lives like any other upper class ruling country.

[Federate]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

Hosni Mubarak and son Gamal Mubarak have resigned from the ruling NDP party but Hosni still remains president.

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

And has there been a sudden run on apricot-coloured paint in Armenia, and have the shops suddenly run out of apricot coloured fabric, and big Armenian flags?

[Federate]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

And has there been a sudden run on apricot-coloured paint in Armenia, and have the shops suddenly run out of apricot coloured fabric, and big Armenian flags?

Everything (except eggs) seems to be following the normal laws of supply and demand in Armenia Though there is a rumour a certain cyclops was spotted after months of absence describing his colourful dreams to someone who does not wish to answer questions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Al-Arabiya has retracted the news that Hosni Mubarak resigned from the ruling party NDP though Gamal's resignation seems to be valid.

[londontsi]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

The plan that Israel and the west have in store for these "falling dictatorships" is what they call moderate Islam. It's basically a pu$$y version that has some elements of Islam mixed in with secular values. Not the dreaded sharia law. So the citizens will be free to mess up their lives like any other upper class ruling country.

Egypt it is basically a poor country.
Although it has some natural resources its population is huge and not prepared (educated) for efficient use.
For many years it has existed and adjusted itself to living off massive economic aid (US).
Obviously this came at a price.

These would be the challenges for any radical, honest and nationalistic government.

[ninetoyadome]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

"Plan B» Azerbaijani authorities: in the event of popular unrest to dissolve parliament
Revolution in the Arab world is seriously concerned about the Azerbaijani government. The presence of dissatisfaction among the population support the government and ideologues who advise to develop new and serious program to avoid the fate of Arab leaders.

A reliable source in the government camp, a well-informed on the latest developments told the newspaper "Yeni Musavat" that the Cabinet of Ministers of Azerbaijan face serious and fundamental changes.

In the first phase by Prime Minister Artur Rasizade will be dismissed. Along with him will be dismissed Deputy Prime Minister Abid Sharifov Elchin Efendiyev, Agriculture Minister Ismat Abbasov, head of the Customs Committee, Fazil Mammadov, head of the Committee of Water Resources and Land Reclamation Ahmed Ahmadzadeh and several heads of other committees and departments.

"There are also shifts in power structures and in the presidential administration. However, these changes are still at the discussion stage and kept a closely guarded secret. Generals loyal to President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, but knows that if his power will be threatened, this time, the generals will not solve the issue, and to prevent the possible development of events is not excluded that the president will donate and most loyal generals to him. The most interesting here is the candidate for prime minister of Azerbaijan. The most serious candidate for this position is the head of Ministry of Emergency Situations Kamaladdin Heydarov. However, its poor reputation both domestically and abroad, excludes this possibility.

At the moment the leading candidate for prime minister is the Minister of Finance Samir Sharifov. He had not politicized and does not belong to any clan. He has good relations with Western countries, especially the United States. It spoke well about the godfather of color revolutions, George Soros. In a country such as Azerbaijan, against the backdrop of a world revolution, the appointment to the post number two in the country of a person with these qualities, it is very important, "- says the source.

Also, the source said that in addition to implementation in the coming days of this scheme, the authorities have developed yet and the plan B ».

"If Azerbaijan will start riots and unrest in the background of these efforts of the opposition, the government will resort to" Plan B », which involves the dissolution of parliament and hold new elections. However, this contingency plan to be implemented only in extreme cases, when will the wave of protests and riots "- the source said, noting that fully deprived of the opportunity to mend relations with the U.S. government of Azerbaijan decided to stay the course.

/ Panorama.am /

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http://voskanapat.info/blog/plan_b_vlastej_azerbajdzhana_v_sluchae_nachala_narodnykh_volnenij_raspustit_parlament/2011-02-04-3911&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&twu=1&usg=ALkJrhjZyStRoEZ6ruzLkLavCFQecfzwzA

[KanadaHye]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

Egypt it is basically a poor country.
Although it has some natural resources its population is huge and not prepared (educated) for efficient use.
For many years it has existed and adjusted itself to living off massive economic aid (US).
Obviously this came at a price.

These would be the challenges for any radical, honest and nationalistic government.

Most of that massive aid was used for the military. The good part about being broke is nobody expects money from you. The bad part is it's ripe to install a system that runs on debt in which case, much is expected of you.

[londontsi]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

The bad part is it's ripe to install a system that runs on debt in which case, much is expected of you.

Sounds like a recipe for a revolution.

What another one?

[Lernakan]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

Critical Connections: Egypt, the US, and Israel

by Alison Weir, February 05, 2011

Minimally explored in all the coverage of the momentous Egyptian uprising taking place over the last 10 days are the Israeli connections.

A central and critical reality is that it is US tax money that has propped up Hosni Mubarak’s despotic regime over the past 30 years, and that this money has flowed, from the beginning, largely on behalf of Israel.

Israel is generally a significant factor in events in the Middle East, and to understand ongoing happenings it is important to understand the historic and current Israeli connections.

The violent creation, perpetuation, and expansion of a state based on ethnic expulsion of the majority inhabitants has been central to Middle East dynamics ever since Israel was created by European and American Zionists in 1948 as a self-identified "xxxish State."

Israeli leaders and outside observers realized from the very beginning that the only way to maintain such a violently imposed, ethnically based nation-state was through military dominance of the region. For Israel to achieve this military dominance required two things:

(1) The creation of a military more powerful than all the others in the region combined. Israel has achieved this through a uniquely massive influx of US tax dollars and technology, occasionally purloined but largely procured through the machinations of its lobby. (Among other things, Israel has several hundred nuclear weapons, a fact almost never mentioned by American media or the American government.)

(2) The prevention of any other nation in the region from becoming a threat. Israel has attained this goal through several strategies: divide and conquer techniques, direct invasions and attacks (or pushing the U.S. to carry out attacks), and the propping up of despots who would openly or tacitly agree (sometimes in return for similarly large influxes of American tax money) not to support the rights of those oppressed and ethnically cleansed by Israel.

For the past 30-plus years, Egypt has been among those despotic regimes supported by the U.S. and Israel in return for turning its back on Palestinians.

The Egypt-Israeli peace treaty of 1979 has occasionally been mentioned in news reports on the current uprising. That treaty was an arrangement in which the Egyptian leader of the time, Anwar Sadat, stopped opposing Israel’s previous ethnic cleansing of close to a million indigenous Palestinian Muslims and Christians (at least 750,000 in 1947-49 and an additional 200,000 in 1967). This removed the most populous and politically significant country from the Arab front opposing Israel’s illegal actions and led the way for other nations to "normalize" relations with the abnormal situation in Palestine.

In return, Israel gave back to Egypt the Sinai, Egyptian land it had illegally annexed in its 1967 war of aggression. (Egypt had almost managed to re-conquer this land and more in 1973, but the most massive airlift in American history, engineered by Henry Kissinger under pressure from the Israeli lobby, was sent to Israel, preventing this outcome.)

Also in return, the United States agreed to give Egypt more US tax money than any other nation, with the exception of Israel. Since 1979, Egypt has received an annual average of close to $2 billion in economic and political aid from American taxpayers (most of whom have known nothing about this use of our money). The arrangement has allowed Mubarak to stay in power for decades despite periodic attempts by Egyptians to free themselves from his ruthless rule.

At the same time, it’s important to note that the U.S., as broker of the peace treaty, gave Israel even greater rewards: guaranteeing Israel’s oil supplies for the next fifteen years; assuring Israel of American support in the event of violations; committing to be "responsive" to Israel’s military and economic requirements; and promising a variety of major transfers of technology and aid, including $3 billion to relocate two Israeli air bases out of the Sinai, where, as journalist Donald Neff noted, they had no right to be in the first place.

In fact, the American financial arrangement with Israel, which had begun years before Egypt’s, has been far cozier than Egypt’s: Israel gets considerably more money from the US, even though its population is one-tenth of Egypt’s; there is little U.S. oversight of how it uses that money; and, unlike Egypt, which receives its allotment monthly, Israel receives its handout in a lump sum at the very beginning of the fiscal year (which means that Americans then pay interest for the rest of the year on money that the government has already given away, while Israel makes interest on it).

In the cases of both Israel and Egypt, the Israel lobby’s role in procuring this U.S. tax money has been central. While this fact is largely missing from US media reports and many liberal/left analyses, it is frequently referred to in Israeli and xxxish media. For example, a current xxxish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) report states: "The question of whether to stake a claim in the protests against 30 years of President Hosni Mubarak’s autocracy is a key one for the pro-Israel lobby and pro-Israel lawmakers because of the role they have played in making Egypt one of the greatest beneficiaries of U.S. aid."

As conditions change in Egypt, U.S. lawmakers known for their allegiance to Israel are evaluating what to do about U.S aid. Many such Israel partisans have particularly powerful and relevant positions, such as Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the foreign operations subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee; Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), the chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee; Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-N.Y.), the ranking Democrat on the House Middle East subcommittee; Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.), ranking member on the Foreign Affairs committee and the author of last year’s sweeping Iran sanctions law; and Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev), member of the subcommittee on the Middle East of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. A person close to the Israel lobby notes: "No matter what happens, clearly one of the top criteria Congress is likely to use is Egypt’s approach to its peace treaty obligations with Israel."

Through the years a variety of Egyptian groups have opposed the Egyptian regime, some using violence (while the regime has used greater violence against them). This is virtually always reported without context and in extremely negative terms, without noting that it is routine for resistance movements to use violence; the American Revolutionary War was not known for its nonviolence. Yet, Israeli-centric U.S. media rarely discuss this.

In recent years, Mubarak has collaborated with Israel in closing off the Gaza Strip, largely imprisoning 1.5 million men, women, and children, resulting in a humanitarian disaster in which children suffer malnutrition, stunting, and trauma, and 300 Gazan patients have died through lack of essential medical supplies or being denied exit passes for medical care. Egyptian citizens, furious at their nation’s complicity in this cruelty, have been powerless to stop it.

Israel has long worked to create enmity between Egypt and the U.S. In the early 1950s the Israeli secret service, the Mossad, hatched a plan to firebomb areas in Egypt where Americans gathered — and to make these attacks appear to be the work of Muslim extremists. The plot was discovered and caused a scandal in Israel known as the "Lavon Affair," but few Americans have ever heard of it. Some analysts suspect that other such plots succeeded and that the little-known Israeli attack on the U.S. Navy ship USS Liberty may have been a similar false-flag operation. (Certainly, there is little doubt that the U.S. would have attacked Egypt if Liberty crewmembers had not succeeded, against all odds, in getting a distress signal out before Israel succeeded in sinking the ship with all men aboard.)

Another little-discussed result of the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty was the creation of an international peacekeeping force in the Sinai, known as the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO), charged with mediating between Egypt and Israel. It is telling that this force was not placed on Israeli land but instead occupies Egyptian territory.

Its current head is Ambassador David M. Satterfield, an American diplomat who served extensively in the Middle East, was Senior Advisor on Iraq for former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and held a number of other high positions in the state department, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.

In 2005 Satterfield was named as having provided classified information to an official of the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group, AIPAC. According to documents, Satterfield had discussed secret national security matters in at least two meetings with AIPAC official Steven J. Rosen, who was subsequently indicted by the U.S. Justice Department (later quashed over the objections of the FBI.)

In 2004 Satterfield presided at a State Department conference on the 1967 war. A Washington Report on Middle East Affairs report on this conference stated that Satterfield repeatedly referred to Palestinian terrorism while failing to mention Israel’s brutal attacks on Palestinian civilians. The article reports "Satterfield’s remarks dampened audience expectations for an even-handed U.S. approach to peacemaking."

Among those in the audience at the conference’s panel on the USS Liberty, though not on the panel itself were USS Liberty survivors, trying to tell their story. State Department moderator Marc Susser quickly cut them off, and his treatment of the survivors reportedly "bordered on abusive."

Now, David Satterfield is heading up international forces occupying Egyptian land charged with being a "neutral" mediator between Egypt and Israel.

It is unknown whether his conversations with AIPAC continue.

http://original.antiwar.com/alison-weir/2011/02/04/critical-connections-egypt-the-us-and-israel%C2%A0/

[bell-the-cat]

Re: Revolutions in the Middle East

And has there been a sudden run on apricot-coloured paint in Armenia, and have the shops suddenly run out of apricot coloured fabric, and big Armenian flags?

The tinder is there. All it needs is a spark.

EGYPTIAN PROTESTS NOT TO SET PRECEDENT FOR ARMENIA - SHARMAZANOV

Tert.am
31.01.11

The current unrest in Egypt cannot set a precedent for Armenian,
Edward Sharmazanov, spokesman of the Republican Party of Armenia
(RPA), told a news conference on Monday.

"There is certain dissatisfaction in Armenia, but there are no
preconditions for a social unrest. The Armenian authorities were
resolute enough in implementing the post-crisis program, as can be
seen by their efforts to combat corruption and conduct open work with
the media. Never before were our authorities so open. While certain
people need shocks, we need a strong Armenia," he said.

ARMENIA IS NOT HEDGED AGAINST SUCH A REVOLT LIKE THE EVENTS IN EGYPT, ARMENIAN SOCIOLOGIST THINKS

ArmInfo
2011-01-31 13:06:00

ArmInfo.The events taking place in several Arab countries today may
also happen in Armenia, chairman of the Armenian Union of Sociologists,
Gevorg Pogosyan, said at today's press-conference when replying
to ArmInfo correspondent's question about the disorders in Tunis
and Egypt.

He also added that the threat of the Egyptian scenario's repetition in
our country will be caused the worsening social and economic situation
in the country, the public protest against the government which cannot
improve the life of its citizens.

'Moreover, when the country cannot stabilize politically as well
as economically, self-liquidation is threatening it. The tendencies
available in Armenia do not inspire optimism. Here the situation may
be out of control any moment', - he said.

At the same time, he did not rule out participation of the
leading superpowers in destabilizing process and later in possible
"self-liquidation" of the country.

THE MARGINALIZATION OF ARMENIAN SOCIETY
Armen Arakelyan

hetq
[ 2011/01/31 | 15:15 ]

Will the dispossessed electorate be a factor for future change?

The public rallies organized by Tigran Karapetyan, the periodic
protests staged against the Armenian government, the president and
the mayor's office, verify that a new political impetus or force
is taking shape in Armenia - the marginalization of the masses;
i.e. the formation of an Armenian lumpenproletariat. (In German the
word literally means "rag proletariat").

This gradual marginalization process of society continues in Armenia.

What are the causes and where might it lead? First, this societal
marginalization is a product of Armenian government policy, which
at its core results in the deepening of the social divide. Some
might argue that it results from the government's inability to halt
the process.

The economic, social and judicial policies of the regime are
directed towards satisfying the interests and requirements of a very
specific elite segment of society and, as a rule, aims towards the
monopolization of all essential commercial and economic sectors.

As a result, small and medium sized businesses are disappearing. Thus,
the middle class is vanishing as well. Society is being divided into
rich and poor segments. The former, comprised of a limited segment
of monopoly oligarchs are becoming the only practical guarantee for
the retention of power by the authorities. The ranks of the poor are
being filled with ever increasing segments of society marginalized
from that government and its various power bases.

Given such proportionality, it is this latter sector that is taking
the full brunt of each deterioration in social life based on objective
conditions - inflation, low wages, etc. This actual anti-socialization
also becomes possible by setting disparities within the human rights
defense field. Informal divisors are placed between the privileged and
those remaining below who shoulder the full burden of responsibility.

This state of affairs that has arisen in Armenia pushes a wide variety
of social issues to the front and center - guaranteeing minimal
conditions of human life and defense of certain inalienable rights.

This current reality pushes all others to the backburner - all
national, political, ideological and cultural issues.

In the past, if one occasionally saw small groups of people protesting
in front of various government buildings that their rights had been
violate, now such sights are a daily occurrence.

Moreover, the threats voiced by these disgruntled individuals and
groups to take drastic action are growing.

It is clear that a resistance movement has started from these once
isolated and limited actions that still remain mostly unorganized. Any
type of consolidation remains restricted to individuals sharing the
same narrow set of problems, people from similar social "castes".

Thus, it is too premature to speak about any type of mass social
movement.

This is due to two realities. First, since this budding movement is
spontaneous it lacks any real political content and isn't being lead by
any political force. Second, the traditional Armenian mentality of -
"I don't get involved with others" - also prevents needed organizing
and mobilization. Thus we wind up with street vendors, incensed that
they can no longer ply their wares, protesting separately; those who
bring in goods from Turkey, angry with a doubling of freight rates,
protesting on their own; and disgruntled community leaders doing
their own thing.

Nobody supports the other. Nor do the protestors want, or understand
the need, to mobilize a common front for struggle.

Thus, within the ruling circles, the growing belief is that
there isn't really anything serious to worry about. Even if these
protests of separate social sectors expand, they will never lead to
a all-encompassing movement of social unrest. This also allows the
authorities to keep neglecting the underlying causes for the protests
and their cause and effect links.

To a certain degree, the government is correct in its approach. The
problem is that the political forces still remain indifferent to the
impulses arising from the society automatically consolidating via the
process of marginalization. Certain forces are simply not capable of
assuming leadership of the movement, given that they find themselves
in a insignificant position.

The problem facing the government and the ruling coalition forces is
not to lead this movement but to extinguish it, or at best, to keep
it manageable. The regime would like to avoid any potential headaches
if possible.

With this aim in mind, conveniently exploiting the "Tigran Karapetyan
phenomenon" is a true brainstorm. On the one hand, the blossoming
social protest movement is discredited and deprived of any content,
and on the other, those segments of society caught up in the phenomenon
are manipulated and depoliticized.

In Armenia today, only three forces have the potential to place the
movement on a positive political track: the ARF, the Heritage Party
and the HAK. The first two are clearly in a wait and see holding
position and have no overwhelming desire to get active. Then too,
they simply aren't able to.

HAK (Armenan National Congress) possesses all the requirements to
assume a leadership role for the burgeoning movement. But it displays a
principally incorrect approach regarding it. The HAK sees the movement
as merely an uncontrollable "lumpen" mass, and not as a movement with
which to politicize society.

In reality, however, HAK is waging a struggle against the same
underlying causes that are at the core of the marginalization process.

What has started is also a struggle for civil rights, draped in a
veil of super-socialized issues.

It is also clear that this spontaneous social movement, if placed on
a systematic, institutional basis, can be infused with real political
content because, no matter how tragic, that segment of society is
being marginalized that should perform the role of the middle class.

HAK, by artificially inserting a differentiation between these two
categories, is simply depriving itself of the opportunity/possibility
of becoming active and, in general, is alienating itself from the real
social demands of the people. This just might lead to the eventual
marginalization of HAK itself because the self-serving nature of its
actions will become evident.

Recently, we learnt that a session of the HAK's economic affairs
committee convened and that members discussed such matters as the
forcible cessation of street trade and recent governmemt steps leading
to the illegal increase of custom duties by the government and the
monopolization and oligarchic domination of the economy. It would
thus seem that the HAK is trying to crystallize its positions and
possible solution options.

This signifies that the possibility still exists for the HAK to assume
leadership of the movement.