Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Legal Nightmare in Egypt after Mubarak & What the White House isn’t Saying

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 06:08 PM
Original message
The Legal Nightmare in Egypt after Mubarak & What the White House isn’t Saying
Carl Bernstein on the Egyptian succession, and what the White House isn’t saying

February 5, 2011 · Posted in International news, News and Current Affairs

According to reporter Carl Bernstein, the Obama administration is maneuvering to leave Hosni Mubarak in place for a time, but render him powerless, and to prevent an even worse guy from taking his place.

From today’s Daily Beast/Newsweek thingamabob:

For the past week, a series of realities unstated by the White House or the State Department has driven American diplomacy dealing with the momentous events in Egypt, according to high-level sources familiar with the process.

First and foremost, The United States—in concert increasingly with other governments—is seeking an immediate transition to democratic pluralism and procedures that, simultaneously, will prevent the Muslim Brotherhood from overwhelming or co-opting the process to become the dominant political force in Egypt’s post-Mubarak future.

To accomplish this, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while sympathetic to the desire of Egyptian democratic forces that want Mubarak step down immediately, in fact have been working toward a solution that would permit him to stay for a brief period as a powerless, defacto head of state. He would remain as such until new mechanisms, and perhaps a new Egyptian constitution, are in place for a stable transition that would also prevent authoritarian and corrupt Mubarak apparatchiks from controlling the process of succession.
This is particularly true in terms of the speaker of the Egyptian parliament, Fathi Surur, who has been speaker of the People’s Assembly since 1990, described by someone familiar with his record as “a corrupt, venal man,” who under the existing constitution would become president of the country if Mubarak should abruptly resign or be removed from office.

Thus, Obama and Clinton, with help from other world leaders, including figures in the Arab world, have been trying to achieve a consensus among prominent Egyptian politicians, academics, bankers, cultural leaders, and representatives of the fledging democracy movement personified by young people in Tahrir Square, that Mubarak should be effectively stripped of his power and convinced to cede his presidential powers while briefly retaining the title of president. Ideally under ths scenario, Mubarak would leave the presidential palace in the next few days, but retain the presidency as a means of keeping it from passing—under the existing constitution—to the Parliamentary speaker, Surur. State Department officials and anti-Mubarak forces in Egypt consider Surur inimical to the interests of both the United States and advocates of democracy in Egypt, as well as other Arab leaders who fear that further chaos there could feed radical Islamic influence in their own countries
. …


http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/02/carl-bernstein-on-the-egyptian-succession-and-what-the-white-house-isnt-saying/


Obama administration contemplates legal nightmare in Egypt after Mubarak
Posted By Josh Rogin Friday, February 4, 2011 - 9:40 PM Share

-snip-
Behind the scenes, administration officials are in fact getting into the details of the process. "Officials from both governments are continuing talks about a plan in which Mr. Suleiman, backed by Lt. Gen. Sami Enan, chief of the Egyptian armed forces, and Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the defense minister, would immediately begin a process of constitutional reform," the New York Times reported.
The details of that constitutional reform are crucial because they will determine the transition of power and whether or not the coming presidential elections are free and fair. Also, the process of constitutional reform will be the first test of whether the regime led by President Hosni Mubarak is actually allowing opposition groups to participate in a substantive manner.

The Obama administration, which has placed itself somewhere between the positions of the Egyptian government and the protesters by calling for a transition of government now but not calling for Mubarak's immediate departure, is well aware of these realities, according to experts close to top officials.
"The White House recognizes that there's a legal nightmare looming and that the establishment in Egypt is putting its bet on the fact that its fortunes rise the longer those knots remain tied,"
said the New America Foundation's Steve Clemons.

He said that the White House would like to see the immediate establishment of a governing council -- made up of a cross section of groups representing various Egyptian political entities -- that would take temporary stewardship of the government and be caretakers as the path forward is determined.
"You either do government and legal reform in one massive fell swoop, which none of the parties will agree to, or you basically say that the current system is so broken, you must give super powers to an anointed group of rivals and co-task them with the responsibility of getting from here to there,"
Clemons said.

But it will be a Herculean task untangling the Egyptian constitution and legal framework, seeing as so much is weighted toward the regime. For example, Article 5 would need to be amended to allow religiously based political parties to participate. Article 76 must be amended if independent candidates are to be allowed. Law No. 40 for 1977 needs to be changed to ensure that the committee that vets political parties is independent and not filled with government ministers. Law No. 174 for 2005 would have to be amended to allow monitors at election stations.
Voter registration in Egypt is also plagued with problems. The emergency law in place since 1981 significantly constrains political activity that could impact any future elections. Laws and regulations on campaign finance have to be enforced. And the list goes on and on.


The Brookings Institution's Robert Kagan said that basing the next round of elections on exiting Egyptian law is a recipe for disaster. "You wouldn't expect to have elections in Russia after communism based on Soviet laws, would you?" he said in an interview with The Cable.
The Egyptian government can't be left to its own devices to decide what those changes might be, Kagan said.
"This is a transition, there's going to have to be some agreement on the rules of the road. Maybe some of it can be based on Egyptian law," he said. "There's going to have to be agreement from the government, the military and the opposition on how to move forward."


How much of a role the U.S. can play in that process is not yet determined, but in order to support democratic values as well as to try and promote an outcome that protects U.S. interests of regional stability, the Obama administration has to at least try, said Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
"What's most important is for us to have a set of principles for an Egyptian government to support," Satloff said. "The U.S. has a possibility to help Egypt build a new system that is democratic and stable. Those things are not mutually exclusive and the U.S. should help them build it."

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/02/04/obama_administration_contemplates_legal_nightmare_in_egypt_after_mubarak
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Let the opposition leaders take over.
That is the only acceptable result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Do you understand the legal complications? There is a current government framework that has to be
gotten rid of first. We aren't starting from a blank slate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. There are no legal complications. A popular revolution or insurrection can sweep those away.
Edited on Sat Feb-05-11 07:41 PM by Better Believe It
It's happened numerous times in world history, including our own!

The legal framework was created by the dictatorship, and is not recognized or accepted by the people and can simply be declared null and void.

That could be done by some form of national constituent or constitutional assembly organized by all organizations opposing the dictatorship.

And that's what European rulers, the Obama administration and the Egyptian ruling elite fear .... a new democratic form of government with full civil liberties and human rights formed by the people, or as they prefer to call them .... "the extremists".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yep. This is a "When in the course of human events" moment....
If ever there was one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #4
20. exactly. what's the problem? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Do You Have any Particular Opposition Leaders in Mind?
The demonstrators say they have no leaders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Under their constitution that won't be the result of Mubarak's resignation.
Better for the people to put into place a new constitution first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Drunken Irishman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. It doesn't work that way.
They, like most nations, have a set of rules. It's not dissimilar to America. When Nixon resigned, the opposition party didn't take over power. Maybe that should have been the result - but legally, the job transfered its power to his Vice President, Gerald Ford.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
al bupp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. Interesting analysis, worth the read, thanks, EOM
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
6. I wouldn't trust any opinion expressed by the head of WINEP
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Washington_Institute_for_Near_East_Policy

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) is one of a handful of influential U.S. policy institutions—sometimes referred to as the “Israel Lobby”—whose central aim is to push an Israel-centric Middle East agenda. Many of WINEP’s current and former scholars have been closely associated with neoconservatism, and the organization has been supportive of many of the same “war on terror” policies pushed by groups like the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). . . .

Robert Satloff is WINEP's executive director; Patrick Clawson is deputy director for research. WINEP adjunct scholars include Joshua Muravchik, Daniel Pipes, Harvey Sicherman (of the Foreign Policy Research Institute), and Raymond Tanter.

WINEP's Board of Advisers includes: Warren Christopher, Lawrence S. Eagleburger, Alexander Haig, Max M. Kampelman, Samuel W. Lewis, Edward Luttwak, Michael Mandelbaum, Robert McFarlane, Martin Peretz, Richard Perle, James Roche, George P. Shultz, Paul Wolfowitz, James Woolsey, and Mortimer Zuckerman. Wolfowitz and Roche resigned from the board when they entered the Bush administration in 2001, although WINEP still proudly lists them.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Historic NY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
7. As I understand the constitution and all else would just end....
there would no longer be a government to run. There is only one political party recognized under the present constitution. I believe the step to putting in a vice-president was meant to be a remedy but now even that is in doubt. They have a problem thats looking for solutions. There is no continunity of government it just ends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Do all laws just end? I know our laws don't have a "in case of Revolution, all laws are then null
and void". I'm sure they don't want every law just gone - basic criminal laws both property and personal offenses.

I don't know that there is a set way to deal with a situation like this.

They need to write a new constitution. Who does it? How are they picked? If the protesters through force ran the entire current government out of the Country then I can see how all the previous laws are gone. However, we are negotiating with the existing government to get them to leave.

We want to keep the military regulated and not disbanded. It is the only thing maintaining some amount of stability.

We are in a weird in-between land of Revolution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stranger81 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
12. Unbelievable that we still think we can run this shit.
This country has no business deciding when Mubarak goes or who replaces him. We just never fucking learn, do we.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. We are supposed to be simultaneously fixing it and staying out of it.
Obama, Do Something! USA, Butt Out!

That's hard to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. A smart man can do it.
It's really fairly simple.

We send over a billion in military aid every year to Egypt. STOP sending them military aid. Look at that, we did something and stayed out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. stop wasting our money on Israel too.
At least Egypt never blew US seamen out of the water deliberately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. I totally agree. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #13
22. we don't have to stay out. we have to do the right thing.
sometimes taking sides is the right thing. u.s. imperialism is ALL TALK when it comes to democracy. THAT is why there is a "diplomatic problem". it is not within the nature of u.s. imperialism to support democracy, but they have to LOOK like they are supporting democracy. THAT is the problem, plain and simple. the egyptian people have u.s. imperialism over a diplomatic barrel. the contradictions are obvious to anyone who knows anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marsala Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. We're not running, just helping
If we were actually in charge, Mubarak would already be gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. If we were in charge, Obama in his
presidential wisdom, would find a way to prop Mubarak up. He doesn't want to piss off Israel, nor can he afford end rendition to Egypt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
17. Bug out, USA n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-11 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
21. the real legal problem may be altogether different.
when "the people" rule egypt, the records of all the shady political deals may be out in the open, in particular, the details of rendition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC