Egyptian Uprising

January 2011 passed by this year with the protests in Tunisia, which resulted in the removal of former Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. Jordanian King Abdullah II dismissed Prime Minister Samir Rifai and his cabinet, replacing Rifai with ex-general and former premier Marouf al-Bakhit. There have also been protests in Yemen and several other Arab countries.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Mess O'Slightly-to-the-Left O'Potamia - Pro-Mubarak Demonstrators
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

Egypt has been engulfed with popular, peaceful protests. After police initially cracked down, the army refused to fire on the crowds. As seen in this article by The Atlantic, the activists are organized and have very clear objectives. Today, after millions gathered in Tahrir (Independence) Square in Cairo, Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak announced that he will not be seeking re-election in September and wants a transition government. The Obama administration has stated that Egypt should begin its process of transitioning peacefully to a new government. However, Mubarak’s vow to not flee from Egypt and his failure to resign immediately are not sitting well with the Egyptian protesters. While his “transition” government has tried to make compromises and half-hearted attempts at dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood, they have still failed to meet the protesters’ demand of Mubarak’s resignation. The events have turned violent, with pro-Mubarak agitators assaulting the protesters. However, with the sheer number of demonstrators (estimates place the crowds around 2 million people), this is not an issue that will go away quickly or quietly.

For decades, Egypt under Mubarak has been an ally of the United States and a critical component of its Middle East foreign policy. The United States is now forced to re-evaluate its standing in the region, and in light of these developments, there are several questions as to what the Egyptian movement means for the future of Egypt and the Middle East. In understanding popular uprisings that ousted a dictator, several news media outlets and government officials are looking towards Iran as an example. Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton was especially provocative in drawing connections between the Egyptian uprisings, Iran, and U.S. interests. Being the Yosemite Sam of International Relations, Bolton stated in an interview with Sean Hannity of FOX News that “ouster of embattled Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak would speed the timetable for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.” Bolton has always been an “Iran hawk,” but these comments reveal a particularly interesting discussion regarding the Egyptian protests and their connection to 1979 and 2009 Iran.

With the anniversary of the 1979 revolution coming on February 11^th, the Islamic Regime has not wasted any time in attempting to spin the protests as a new, “Islamic” revolutions inspired by the 1979 Iranian revolution. Mir Hossein Mousavi and members of the Green Movement have instead countered such claims with their own that their 2009 protests are the inspiration for the Egyptian movement today. However, the Iranian regime’s severe crackdown on the Green Movement clearly reveals its own hypocrisy, reflected in the regime’s loss of soft power among Arab populations in the region.

With everyone in the United States scrambling to figure out which of the Iranian case studies is the best indicator for Egypt’s future, people forget that the Iranian and Egyptian case studies are completely different. Iran in 1979 had a series of very strong, well-known revolutionary leaders that were able to mobilize people over several years into what exploded in 1979 and forced Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi out of power for good. Of these revolutionary figures, Ayatollah Rouhollah Khomeini emerged as the strongest and seized power, creating Iran’s theocratic republic of today. Unlike the Iranian example, there are no clear leaders in the Egyptian protests. While the Muslim Brotherhood is being incorporated at some level in talks with Mubarak’s regime, the Egyptian demonstrations were never about the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Arabian Fights
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

In 2009, while Mousavi, despite being prime minister throughout the 1980s under Khomeini and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, emerged as the leader of the Green Movement, the regime’s brutal crackdown and retention of military, Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, police, and Basiji militia support left the movement fractured and weakened. This is not to say that the regime does not feel threatened – the human rights situation in Iran has drastically declined since 2009 and in one month’s time (December 19, 2010, and January 19, 2011), Iran executed 97 prisoners alone. It also executes more people per capita than any other country in the world. Clearly, the regime does feel threatened, but until the Green Movement can garner support of the country’s different armed forces, it will not see results like Egypt’s. The Green Movement also had several different leaders, each with their own ideas. The result is a lack of unity and unclear goals. The Egyptian movement on the other hand is unified behind one strong resolution – Mubarak’s immediate resignation.

Egyptians have a new opportunity before them. With the continued pressure of protesters, the military, and the Obama administration that Mubarak faces calling for his immediate resignation, the Egyptians have the chance to peacefully and single-handedly remove a cruel dictator from power and replace his government with one that better reflects their own aspirations and visions for their country. While Iran and Egypt are very different, both the Iranian stories of 1979 and 2009 offer lessons for Egypt. In 1979, Iranians were successful in overthrowing a dictator. However, the complete destruction of the previous government’s institutions and allowing the movement to be dominated by clerical elements created a situation today where Iranians of all backgrounds lack significant social and political freedoms. In 2009, Iranians attempted to rise up to challenge the direction in which the hardliners were taking the country. However, the lack of unity in and failure to clearly articulate demands resulted in the movement succumbing to brutal crackdown after brutal crackdown and the protesters were unsuccessful. Egypt has the chance to avoid a takeover by radicals of any persuasion. They have the chance to be successful where the Iranians were to date unable. The Egyptians’ success to date is already an inspiration to the world. If the Egyptian movement is able to successfully gain the ouster of Mubarak and transition to a system of government that better reflects the wishes of the Egyptian people, it could be powerful enough to lead to a re-invigoration of pro-democracy movements throughout the Middle East.

History 101 - Lessons of the Past

Boys and Girls, today in History 101 we are going to begin with the basics of how to understand historical mistakes and how not to repeat them. Due to recently escalating events in the Middle East, understanding the past mistakes is crucial to resolve conflicts in this region. Our case study for today is Iran. Let's begin with the historical events and then move to their implications in the modern day.

In March of 1951, Mohammad Mossadegh was democratically elected within the political structure of Iran and became prime minister. He enforced the Oil Nationalization Act, which involved the expropriation of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), a British company that monopolized Iran’s oil. Britain feared that Mossadegh was becoming too closely allied with Iran’s communist party, Tudeh, and that Soviet influence could spread to Iran. In 1952, British officials met with officials from the CIA and expressed Britain’s interest in a participating in a coup in Iran with the United States. In March of the following year, the CIA began to draft a plan called Operation AJAX that would overthrow Mossadegh and his administration through a covert action and establish a government that would cater to the United States and would remain open to British interests. Retired Iranian general Fazlolah Zahedi was chosen to be the replacement prime minister. In May of 1953, CIA officials in Tehran began a propaganda campaign against Mossadegh. On July 1, Churchill approved the final draft of the plan for the coup, and ten days later, U.S. President Eisenhower gave his approval. On August 15, the coup is begun but failed because Mossadegh had advanced warnings of a plot. Zahedi went into hiding and Shah Reza Pahlavi fled to Baghdad. On August 19, Zahedi led the coup while American CIA agents in Tehran created a riot against Tudeh and Mossadegh. The next day, Zahedi became Prime Minister, the Shah reassumed power, and members of Mossadegh’s government were in prison or in hiding. In 1954, the AIOC resumed its operations in Iran. Mossadegh was tried for treason, served three years in prison, and then placed under house arrest until his death on March 5, 1967.

The impact of the 1953 coup in Iran is extremely significant in assessing today’s strained relations with Iran. After the coup, Shah Reza Pahlavi regained power and became a puppet of the United States. Due to Iranians’ contempt for Pahlavi, a revolution broke out in 1979 that placed Ayatollah Khomeini in power. On November 4, 1979, militant students occupied the American embassy in Tehran and held 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. The United States ended diplomatic relations with Iran on April 7, 1980. The Islamic Revolution in 1979 established the system of government Iran has today as well as gave way to the fundamentalist and conservative ideas embodied by the current Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran’s statements to the United States in regard to its nuclear program are clearly a reaction to the history of American and western manipulation in Iran as well as in the rest of the Middle East. As a result of American Cold War policy, Iran has a government the United States deems undemocratic and the country is impoverished due to control and manipulation of its economy and natural resources by the United States and its greatest ally, Britain. As Madeline Albright stated in March of 2000, “The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons. But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran’s political development and it is easy to see why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America,” (Risen, How a Plot Convulsed in Iran in ’53 [and in ’79]).

With President Bush and Ahmadinejad’s hostility towards one another and Bush’s current regime change policies as exhibited by the invasion of Iraq, an American-led regime change in Iran appears more likely to occur, given that the tensions between each nation are similar to what they were in 1953. Such action would create further instability in the region as well as destroy any hope of improving relations and resolving conflicts diplomatically. Currently, Ahmadinejad has angered the United States and other nations such as the United Kingdom with its developing nuclear program. The United States wants Iran to abandon its program while Iran insists that the program is simply for peaceful energy uses. However, with the capture of an Iranian diplomat on February 4, 2007 by uniformed gunmen in Baghdad, his accusations of torture, as well as the capture and release of fifteen British sailors recently, tensions continue to escalate and, due to historical policies, Ahmadinejad is not willing to efficiently compromise and Bush is refusing to pursue any diplomacy with Iran.

This tension is especially significant given the foreign policy of the Bush administration. Diplomacy between the United States and Iran is gravely needed in order to establish trust, improve relations, and to reach a compromise. "JustForeignPolicy.org" says it best:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJRcOF7rEfQ


Now go tell Mommy and Daddy what you learned in school today.


************************

Works Cited/Consulted

Ahmadinejad’s ‘Gift’ to Britain. The WEEK. Volume 7, Issue 305. April 13, 2007. Page 4.

Barth, Linda. Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers, 2003. Pages 37 – 42.

Buncombe, Andrew. Freed Iranian Diplomat Claims He was Tortured by the CIA in Iraq. April 9, 2007. The Independent. April 10, 2007.

Gasiorowski, Mark J. Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 2004. Pages 227 – 246.

Iran. October 2006. U.S. Department of State. April 11, 2007.

Iraq: Should the War Have an End Date?. The WEEK. Volume 7, Issue 305. April 13, 2007. Page 6.

Oren, Michael B. Power, Faith, and Fantasy: America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present. New York: Sike, Inc., 2007. Pages 479-483, 544-549.

Risen, James. How a Plot Convulsed in Iran in ’53 (and in ’79). 2000. The New York Times. April 10, 2007.

Secrets of History: The CIA in Iran. 2000. The New York Times. April 10, 2007.

Zabih, Sepehr. The Mossadegh Era: Roots of the Iranian Revolution. Chicago: Lake View Press, 1982. Pages 20 – 32.