Washington Faces the Arab Revolts: Sacrificing Dictators to Save the State

James Petras
The James Petras Website

Introduction

To understand the Obama regime’s policy toward Egypt, the Mubarak dictatorship and the popular uprising it is essential to locate it in an historical context.

The essential point is that Washington, after several decades of being deeply embedded in the state structures of the Arab dictatorships, from Tunisia through Morocco, Egypt, Yemen, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority, is attempting to re-orient its policies to incorporate and/or graft liberal-electoral politicians onto the existing power configurations.

While most commentators and journalists spill tons of ink about the “dilemmas” of US power , the novelty of the Egyptian events and Washington’s day to day policy pronouncements, there are ample historical precedents which are essential to understand the strategic direction of Obama’s policies.

Historical Background

US foreign policy has a long history of installing, financing, arming and backing dictatorial regimes which back its imperial policies and interests as long as they retain control over their people.

In the past, Republican and Democratic presidents worked closely for over 30 years with the Trujillo dictatorship in the Dominican Republic; installed the autocratic Diem regime in pre-revolutionary Vietnam in the 1950’s; collaborated with two generations of Somoza family terror regimes in Nicaragua; financed and promoted the military coup in Cuba 1952, Brazil 1964, Chile in 1973, and in Argentina in 1976 and the subsequent repressive regimes. When popular upheavals challenged these US backed dictatorships, and a social as well as political revolution appeared likely to succeed, Washington responded with a three track policy: publicly criticizing the human rights violations and advocating democratic reforms; privately signaling continued support to the ruler; and thirdly, seeking an elite alternative which could substitute for the incumbent and preserve the state apparatus, the economic system and support US strategic imperial interests.


Grassroots Support for Aristide's Return

Stephen Lendman

Two recent articles discussed his eagerness to return, accessed through these links here and here.

He explained he's "ready....today, tomorrow, at any time. The purpose is very clear: To contribute to serving my Haitian sisters and brothers as a simple citizen in the field of education."

After six eye surgeries in the past six years, it's also vital for health reasons. He experiences extreme winter pain and risks complications causing blindness. In addition, Haitians want him badly, mainly for his powerful inspirational presence. It's why so far Washington denied him, wanting no one interfering with its imperial agenda.

Grassroots activism, however backs him. On January 28, 2011, the Global Women Strike.net site posted Selma James' letter to the UK Guardian, accessed through this link. It headlined, "US blocking Aristide return to Haiti," saying:

"WikiLeaks confirms what grassroots people have been saying," what most Western media suppress, including the Guardian's Rory Carroll. However, on January 21, Haiti Liberté's Kim Ives' Guardian article headlined, "WikiLeaks points to US meddling in Haiti," saying:

Cables from 2005 and 2006 "revealed Washington's well-known obsession to keep exiled former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide out of Haiti and Haitian affairs." Very likely, today's view hasn't changed, State Department spokesman PJ Crowley saying "Haiti does not need, at this point, any more burdens," when asked about Aristide's return.

James, however, expressed support, saying "If Haitians are to rebuild their country and their democracy, Washington, not Aristide, must be kept out."


People Power v. Duplicity in Egypt and Washington

Stephen Lendman

Inspired by Tunisia's uprising, Egyptians chose January 25 (the National Police Day holiday) to begin street demonstrations, rallies and marches, demanding regime change, no ifs, ands or buts if they stay resolute.

Initially, small numbers in front of Egypt's Supreme Court became crowds chanting "Mubarak must go!" So far, they remain in massive numbers, defying curfew orders, sleeping in streets, persisting against formidable odds in full view of world audiences, thanks mainly to Al Jazeera's heroic coverage.

Anyone anywhere, including in America where it's mostly blocked, can view its live online stream at aljazeera.net. It's become a vital alternative to Western managed news, heavily censored to suppress important truths and thus worthless.

On February 8, day 15, Al Jazeera reported that:

Hundreds of thousands of protesters in Egypt's capital and across the country remain resilient. They continue "mass demonstrations, with a new wave of optimism reaching the pro-democracy camp following" Wael Ghonim's release, Google's Middle East/North Africa head of marketing.

They also reject so-called government concessions, one protester, Sherif Aein, saying "it's just a tablet of aspirin, nothing else." Another, Salma El-Tarzi, expressed anger about negotiations saying:

"The political parties can do whatever they please because they don't represent us. This is not a revolution made by the parties. (They've) been there for 30 years and done nothing. This is the people's revolution."


George Bush: Preliminary Indictment for Torture

Stephen Lendman

A previous article addressed torture as official US policy under Bush, accessed through this link.

It remains so under Obama, authorized at the highest levels of government as part of America's bogus war on terror to instill fear and target suspected political opponents globally, including at home. No matter that it violates US and international law that prohibits torture at all times under all circumstances with no allowed exceptions.

Nonetheless, on September 17, 2001, Bush issued a 12 page "memorandum of notification" directive to CIA's director and National Security Council members, authorizing CIA to capture suspected terrorists and Al Qaeda members, then hold and interrogate them in offshore detention facilities. It launched his torture program by vesting CIA operatives with unprecedented lawless power. It gave them carte blanche authority to function extra-judicially by whatever methods it chose.

Numerous subsequent Bush administration memos, Executive Orders, National and Homeland Security Presidential Directives, findings, and other documents explicitly or implicitly authorized torture, including one on August 2, 2002, written by John Yoo, then White House counsel Alberto Gonzales, Jay Bybee (now a federal judge), and David Addington. It argued for letting interrogators use harsh measures amounting to torture. It said federal and international laws don't apply when dealing with Al Qaeda because of presidential authorization during wartime. It "legalized" anything in the war on terror, as well as authorizing supreme presidential power.


Health topic page on womens health Womens health our team of physicians Womens health breast cancer lumps heart disease Womens health information covers breast Cancer heart pregnancy womens cosmetic concerns Sexual health and mature women related conditions Facts on womens health female anatomy Womens general health and wellness The female reproductive system female hormones Diseases more common in women The mature woman post menopause Womens health dedicated to the best healthcare
buy viagra online