|
Egypt At Dawn's Early Light: Response From America's Media
15 February 2011 By Stephen
Lendman
What's unfolding looks different
than what protesters demand. World headlines partly
reflect it, mostly outside America, especially on US
television reporting an illusion of change, when, in
fact, coup d'etat rule is in charge, headed by
authoritarian generals used to giving, not taking
orders.
On February 13, Al Jazeera's
said, "Egypt army tries to clear Tahrir," adding:
Scuffles broke out "as soldiers
tried to remove activists from the epicenter of
Egypt's uprising...." Hundreds courageously remained,
saying they won't leave until "more of their demands
are met."
As a result, "(S)oldiers shoved
pro-democracy protesters aside to force a path for
traffic to start flowing through Tahrir Square for the
first time in more than two weeks."
Tents were removed. Al Jazeera's
James Bays reported "flashpoint" confrontations,
saying:
"I think it reflects a bigger
problem, that the military believes that now Mubarak
is out, it's time for stability. But some of the
protesters think not enough has been done yet. They
don't want to clear that square until the army (is)
handed over to a civilian government."
As a result, they threaten more
rallies if Egypt's ruling Supreme Military Council
ignores their demands. Protest leader Safwat Hegazi
spoke for others saying:
"If the army does not fulfill
(them), our uprising and its measures will return
stronger."
They demand:
-- Mubarak's cabinet and all
remnants of his regime ousted, especially top
officials like Omar Suleiman, a hated man they'll
never accept in any capacity;
-- an immediate end to Egypt's
Emergency Law, a harsh police state measure since
1981;
-- dissolution of its parliament
in place after rigged late 2010 elections;
-- a transitional five-member
presidential council made up of four civilians and one
military person to prepare for free, fair and open
democratic elections in nine months or sooner;
-- a new constitution;
-- media freedom;
-- abolition of military and
emergency courts;
-- free formation of political
parties, and more.
It's not happening, a cabinet
spokesman saying no major reshuffle will occur,
adding:
"The shape of the government will
stay until the process of transformation is done in a
few months, then a new government will be appointed
based on the democratic principles in place."
A senior army officer announced
on state television that the military will "guarantee
the peaceful transition of power in the framework of a
free, democratic system which allows an elected,
civilian power to govern the country to build a
democratic, free state."
Take those comments with a grain
of salt as well as most other official statements,
concealing what's likely planned. Nonetheless, on
February 13, Al Jazeera said military officials
dissolved parliament, suspended the Constitution, and
announced September elections, giving no other
specifics.
What it means remains to be seen
under militarized coup d'etat rule. It assures no
democracy as long as it lasts and none afterwards if
likely manipulated elections follow, leaving generals
in charge behind the scenes.
Military rulers also pledged to
honor "all regional and international obligations and
treaties." That one's likely true to avoid
confrontations with their Washington paymaster and
Israel after nearly four decades of peace.
Al Jazeera's Sherine Tadros,
however, said questions remain over how civilian rule
transition will occur, quoting one activist saying:
"I'm worried about the future.
Nobody knows what's coming. We need to rebuild our
country and economy because we are venturing into the
unknown."
Indeed, they've got great reason
to worry because what's planned won't tolerate real
democracy, only its facade as in America, Israel, and
most other states. For sure expect none in Egypt and
other Arab countries controlled by imperial
Washington.
BBC's top story headlined,
"Egypt's army struggles to clear Tahir Square
protesters," saying:
"There is a tense stand-off in
Cairo's Tahrir Square as protesters who have camped
there for 20 days thwart army effort to clear the
area."
Moreover, thousands more joined
them after military police head, Mohamed Ibrahim
Moustafa Ali, said, "We do not want any protesters to
sit in the square after today."
As a result, anger grew as they
saw "hundreds of policemen (enter) the square,"
chanting: "It's a new Egypt, the people and the police
are one." Crowds chanted back: "Get out, get out!"
Scuffles then broke out, BBC's Paul Danahar saying:
"There was growing anger in the
square as more soldiers began slowly but forcefully to
squeeze the protesters out of the areas they had been
holding for weeks. Then a roar went up from the crowd
as they realized hundreds of policemen had entered the
square," the same ones who attacked, gassed, beat, and
arrested them days earlier. "There was a tense
stand-off as the two sides confronted each other
before the police" moved back and left.
Haaretz featured a Reuter story
headlined, "Thousands flood Cairo square, defying army
bid to quell protests," saying:
Using loadspeakers, protesters
said: "They must respond to our demands," (not) remove
us from the square." They explained that some of their
leaders were detained, dozens more taken to an army
holding area near Egypt's museum.
New head of state Field Marshall
Mohamed Hussein Tantawi called for an immediate return
to normality. Mubarak's appointed Prime Minister Ahmed
Shafiq said:
"The first priority, no question
about it, is security. An equally important priority
is to provide the elements needed for the daily life
of citizens."
Protesters responded saying:
"There is no enmity between the
people and armed forces....We ask you not to attack
our sons. This is not the (behavior) of the armed
forces. This is a peaceful protest. We demand that the
armed forces release all our sons that have been
arrested in Tahrir."
"We stood by the army in their
revolution (the 1952 coup toppling King Farouk). They
need to stand with us in ours. The goal was never just
to get rid of Mubarak. The system is totally corrupt
and we won't go until we see some real reforms," one
protester adding, "I am going to be buried in Tahrir.
I am here for my children. Egypt is too precious to
walk away now."
Another said, "I was going to
leave today, but after what the military has done, the
millions will be back again. The corrupt system still
stands. It has gone back to using the only thing it
understands - force. If we leave, they won't respond
to our demands."
London's Guardian, Telegraph,
Independent and other newspapers featured the same
story about protesters refusing to leave.
On February 12, Robert Fisk's
London Independent Article headlined, "A tyrant's
exit. A Nation's joy," saying:
"All day, the demonstrators had
been telling the soldiers that they were brothers.
Well, we shall see." Assuming power, "a series of
contradictory (military) statements (followed),
indicat(ing) that Egypt's field marshals, generals and
brigadiers were competing for power in the ruins of
Mubarak's regime."
Israel wants Suleiman. Head of
state Field Marshall Tantawi wants his chief of staff,
General Sami Anan, to handle day-to-day affairs.
Pro-democracy supporters "are
thus now less important than the vicious infighting
within the army." In fact, Egypt's military high
command was part of Mubarak's regime. His vice
president, prime minister, deputy prime minister,
defense minister, and interior minister were all
generals. So was Mubarak.
"Sadly," said Fisk, "Egypt is the
army and the army is Egypt....It therefore wishes to
control...." Its rhetoric stresses normalcy, leaving
affairs of state to them to establish reforms. In
fact, they intend "divid(ing) up the ministries of a
new government," to solidify military control,
whatever new faces emerge.
Fisk recalled celebratory
outbreaks after WW I ended. Everyone "burst out
singing." It was "genuine and deserved. Yet that peace
led to further immense suffering." Unless
pro-democracy advocates stay vigilant and keep
protesting, expect weeks of sustained courage again
ending in tears, Fisk saying:
Rhetorically, (t)he army has
decided to protect the people. But who will curb the
power of the army," hungry to get power portfolios now
that they're up for grabs.
AP headlined, "Protesters press
for voice in Egyptian democracy," saying:
After 30 years under Mubarak,
they're making demands they want met. Egypt's military
now runs the country, its future to "be shaped by
three powers: the military, the protesters, and the
sprawling autocratic infrastructure of Mubarak's
regime" still in place, including "the bureaucracy,
the police, state media and parts of the economy."
Despite promising change,
"elderly generals are no reformers, and their move to
push out Mubarak may have been more to ensure the
survival of a ruling system the military has
(controlled) since a 1952 army coup." The powerful,
"deeply secretive military has substantial economic
interests, running industries and businesses that it
will likely seek to preserve."
Response from
America's Media
Overseas headlines in part, at
least, reflect reality, what's largely suppressed at
home, reporting pretense of a new nonexistant dawn.
Front page news in The New York Times, early
Washington Post editions, Los Angeles Times and
Chicago Tribune reported nothing about Tahrir Square
clashes. Instead, The Times headlined, "Military
Offers Assurances to Egypt and Neighbors," saying:
"As a new era dawned in Egypt on
Saturday, the army leadership sought to reassure
Egyptians and the world that it would shepherd a
transition to civilian rule and honor" all
international commitments and obligations. Though
protesters want democratic change, they "embraced
their new reality with humor, mild arguments and
celebrations," quoting one of their leaders, Amr
Hamzawy, saying the military's tone has been "very,
very positive."
A later Times Kareem Fahim/J
David Goodman article headlined, "Egypt's Military
Dissolves Parliament; Calls for Vote," saying:
"The announcement went a long way
toward meeting the demands of protesters," when, in
fact, specifics are absent, most demands haven't been
met, Mubarak regime officials remain, and militarized
coup d'etat control is in charge. Four words only
mentioned protests: "(P)ockets of protests continued,"
the article stressing "normalcy return(ing) to the
capital...."
The Los Angeles Times reported,
"Tents give way to traffic in Tahrir Square,"
reflected "the military's determination to restore
normalcy to the nation's capital."
The Chicago Tribune headlined, "A
reborn Egypt gets back to business....tingling with
freedom, look(ing) ahead," quoting one protester,
Ragab Abdou, saying: "I woke up with the idea that we
can do something. Democracy. Freedom. Do something we
haven't done for 30 years." They haven't done it now
either, an explanation the Tribune omitted.
A later Washington Post edition
headlined, "Egyptian soldiers clear protesters from
Tahrir Square, as pockets of tension bubble up in
Cairo," saying:
"Some weary demonstrators
evacuated voluntarily. Others stood their ground or
scuffled with soldiers," implying they might be
agitators, not committed pro-democracy fighters.
The Wall Street Journal.com also
headlined, "Egypt's Military Moves to Clear Tahrir
Square," saying:
It wants "to restore order after
weeks of mass demonstrations," quoting Egypt's new
military rulers pledging "a peaceful transition of
power in the framework of a free and democratic
system." No timetable or specifics were given.
For now, entrenched military rule
will "oversee a political transformation" in its own
image far different from democratic change. Savvy
protesters fear it, vowing to continue struggling
until their demands are met. They're far from being
free and won't be without sustained mass grassroots
pressure, the only way change ever comes, never from
the top down anywhere.
Stephen Lendman lives in
Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished
guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the
Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central
time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs
are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add
Comments |