IMPORTANT UPDATE: Egypt Army Says They Won’t Fire on Their Own People

The Egyptian army has reportedly issued a statement declaring they will not fire on the hundreds of thousands of protesters occupying Tahrir Square.

This occurs as the protesters, led by the April 6 movement, issue a call for a general strike and a “million man march” to finally topple the US-backed regime.

I think we can say, with near certainty, that Mubarak is finished.

Here is a more comprehensive report on the statement, which reads in part:

“The presence of the army in the streets is for your sake and to ensure your safety and wellbeing. The armed forces will not resort to use of force against our great people.

“Your armed forces, who are aware of the legitimacy of your demands and are keen to assume their responsibility in protecting the nation and the citizens, affirms that freedom of expression through peaceful means is guaranteed to everybody.”

And There It Is: Neocons Test Idea of US Intervention in Egypt

Just now on MSNBC, neocon Dan Senor, former Iraq occupation spokesman, raised the possibility of intervention in Egypt.

Host Chris Jansing asked Senor, more or less, why Americans should care about what’s going on in Egypt. What are the implications for our country and economy?

Senor, as he is trained to do, conjured a dangerous false dichotomy that continues to embroil the US in pointless, expensive, deadly conflicts decade after decade.

“There are two directions it could go. If the Egyptian government — and other governments for that matter — is replaced by moderate secular, pro-American governments that actually want to truly partner with us in fighting terror and fostering some modicum of liberal democracy, progressive government, representative government throughout the region, that’s important for the United States’ security. If things go the other direction, and those governments are replaced by Islamist governments, you could have regimes there that actually incubate terrorists– that directly affect the West, the geopolitical and economic implications are enormous.

“Oil prices could really start spiraling… commodity price inflation… so this could really hit us at home economically — there’s a lot at stake right now. American forces are deployed in Afgfhanistan and Iraq today. If we have a failed state in the Middle East — a total collapse of a government with no real infrastructure that we can work with to actually succeed whatever government it replaces — we will have to deploy American resources at a time that we are pretty stretched thinly right now.”

Two options, says Senor. Egypt can only have a Renfield government that obsessively seeks to please its master to curry its continued favor, or it must descend into a benighted Islamic nutocracy and probably also somehow devolve into an undeveloped facsimile of Afghanistan. The “liberal, progressive, representative” bit is odd since Mubarak and many others like him including the recently deposed Ben Ali of Tunisia are staunch and valued allies of Washington — none embody any of those qualities.

But never mind that. IF Egypt, or the other states who are without doubt in the same line of teetering dominoes, falls, Senor raises the non-negotiable need to “deploy resources” — that’s code for invasion. In case any doubt remains, though, the mention of America’s strained “resources” makes it crystal clear. He’s testing the waters for a US attack on the most populous Arab country.

Egyptians — right now very angry with the US — are not likely to sit back, after ousting a powerful dictator, and allow this to happen. And frankly, the US doesn’t have the ability or resources to take it on, anyhow, as its utter failures in Iraq and Afghanistan prove, not to mention its perpetually botched foreign policy that consists entirely of threats and bribes everywhere else.

America’s foreign policy is still informed by the disproven — by reality, mind you — philosophy of the neoconservatives. Only the debt-fueled collapse of our own system, the Military-Industrial Complex, will end the madness. Since more elections clearly can’t.

Monday Iran Talking Points

from LobeLog: News and Views Relevant to U.S.-Iran relations for January 31st, 2011:

Council on Foreign Relations: Elliott Abrams blogs on the jailed American hikers and USAID contractor in Iran and concludes that it is time for the Obama administration to ratchet up demands for their release. He asks rhetorically, “I hope we have conveyed to the regime that if a hair on their heads is injured, there will be hell to pay—immediately. Should we go further right now, and tell the ayatollahs to let them go by a date certain or suffer some sanction? Bluffing would be counterproductive, so if we make that statement we must follow through with a blow to some Iranian asset.” Abrams acknowledges that making demands for the prisoners’ release might backfire, but reminds his readers that American prestige is on the line. “[W]e are paying a price by acting as if we were Belgium or Costa Rica, unable to do more than wring our hands and plead. We are reducing respect for the United States in a capital where the level of respect matters, Tehran,” he writes. “We are allowing two fellow citizens to be used as human sacrifices by an odious regime that puts no value on human life, and pays little price for doing so.”

The Washington Post: Jennifer Rubin, writing on her Right Turn blog, attacks the Obama administration’s unwillingness to publicly denounce Hosni Mubarak or immediately cut aid to Egypt. She ends her post with a brief swipe at the administration’s hesitancy to take a harder line with Iran, writing, “[L]et’s not forget the most egregious mistake: failing to recognize the nature of the Iranian regime and confront the aggression of its proxies in the region.” She concludes, “Is it any wonder the Obama team is now struggling to keep up with events in Egypt?”

Tablet Magazine: The Hudson Institute’s Lee Smith examines the U.S.’s relationship to Egyptian protestors and the test of “George W. Bush’s Freedom Agenda.” He writes, “If Egypt moves out of the American fold, it might well align itself with Iran,” or worse yet, “…it would challenge the Iranians, in the way regional competition has worked since 1948—by seeing who can pose the greatest threat to Israel.” Smith takes issue with the media’s portrayal of Mohamed ElBaredei as a leader of the democracy movement. Attacking his record at the IAEA, Smith writes, “[T]his so-called reformer distorted his inspectors’ reports on Iran and effectively paved the way for the Islamic Republic’s march toward a nuclear bomb.” Smith concludes that liberal democracy in Egypt will fail because young Arabs have an irrational hatred of Israel and because “…the United States will not come to the aid of its liberal allies, or strengthen the moderate Muslims against the extremists… the Freedom Agenda is not going to work, at least not right now.” He continues, “The underlying reason then is Arab political culture, where real democrats and genuine liberals do not stand a chance against the men with guns.”

The Wall Street Journal: Former George W. Bush National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley writes about the possible outcomes of pro-democracy protests in Egypt. In one scenario, Mubarak rides out the crisis and calls for elections later in the year. Hadley compares this option to the government following Pakistani elections in 2008. “[I]t is a democratic government, and by its coming to power we avoided the kind of Islamist regime that followed the fall of the Shah of Iran and that has provoked three decades of serious confrontation with the U.S. and totalitarian oppression of the Iranian people,” writes Hadley, implying a surprisingly good human rights situation under the Shah’s rule.

Harmonic Convergence

God help me, I agree with neocon bigwig, Danielle Pletka, of the American Enterprise Institute, who said in today’s Washington Post:

“The president himself needs to stand up and unequivocally make clear America’s position: in favor of the people over their oppressors. Suspend aid to the Egyptian government. Initiate an immediate review of all programs in the Middle East. Get the word out to our diplomats. Now.”

ElBaradei Arrives

Via Al Jazeera:

A coalition of opposition groups has agreed on a provisional government led by former UN nuclear agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei. In fifteen minutes or so, he will arrive in Liberation Square to address the people. Developing …

“Change is coming in the next few days,” ElBaradei told the crowd, according to news reports.

“You have taken back your rights and what we have begun cannot go back… We have one main demand – the end of the regime and the beginning of a new stage, a new Egypt.”

“I bow to the people of Egypt in respect. I ask of you patience.”