Theodore Roosevelt (Library of Congress Image)

“It turns out societal fault lines, interpersonal rivalries, and long suppressed power centers do not move at Internet speeds,” Sarwar Kashmeri observes in a new article in the Huffington Post commemorating the first anniversary of Egypt’s uprisings. Americans and local revolutionaries must be patient about the revolution’s transition to governance in Egypt. In fact, Kashmeri implores, Egyptians must follow President Theodore Roosevelt’s advice, delivered almost exactly 100 years ago in Cairo at a similar moment of radical transition. The former president warned that it takes generations for a nation to successfully self-govern. Americans should also head these words, when impatience about the pace and nature of reforms influences decisions on aid and diplomacy, Kashmeri advises.

Read “In Egypt Follow the Advice of President Theodore Roosevelt,” here.

A new report from the Africa Center for Strategic Studies (ACSS), Africa and the Arab Spring: A New Era of Democratic Expectations, the first volume of the Africa Center’s new Special Report series, uses the Arab Spring as a lens through which to view African politics. I think it is a bit too overdetermined to look at the Arab Spring and to look at ongoing crises in African politics and think that the one will fuel changes in the other. But the report is soundly done and certainly raises a number of important ideas and questions.

Deposed African National Congress Youth League leader Julius Malema believes he is finished in South African political life and plans to become a cattle farmer. Just remember, a phoenix has to fall before he can rise again. Don’t for one minute think that Malema’s turn in public life is complete.

Gbenga Sesan, the executive director of Paradigm Initiative Nigeria, has written a public letter to Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan. In it he asks some pretty pointed questions, including this one: “If the president can throw his wife a party in Australia and senators earn millions of dollars a year, why does the president keep asking us, the people, to make sacrifices?”

Recent revelations of obesity in South Africa raise the question: “Has Freedom Made Us Fat?” My guess would be that affluence more than freedom is the source of obesity in the richest country on the continent. Yes, tens of millions of South Africans do not share in the country’s wealth, but the country’s middle classes are doing quite well, and there has always been a link between weight and wealth on a continent where the former can actually serve as a status symbol indicating the latter.

According to Jeffrey Gettleman of The New York Times, “…the African Union force in Somalia has hardened into a war-fighting machine — and it seems to be winning the war.” Progress has clearly been excruciatingly slow but these advances coupled with more aggressive action from Kenyan troops reveals that the region’s leaders are not resigned to Somalia being a failed state forever.

I am late in getting my Year in Review post up for 2011, but for the time being, here is the Mail & Guardian’s slideshow of South Africa’s most memorable moments of the year.

Of the 53 countries assessed (South Sudan had not yet gained autonomy and Western Sahara has not yet been recognized as an independent nation state) here are the top ten:

1. Mauritius  2. Cape Verde  3. Botswana  4. Seychelles  5. South Africa  6. Namibia  7. Ghana  8. Lesotho  9. Tunisia  10. Egypt

Clearly Southern Africa does well, with four representatives in the top ten, as do islands, with three.

The bottom ten (from the very worst to the merely awful):

53. Somalia  52. Chad  51. Zimbabwe  50. Democratic Republic of Congo  49. Central African Republic  48. Sudan  47. Eritrea  46. Côte d’Ivoire  45. Equitorial Guinea  44. Guinea-Bissau

Obviously the instability in the Horn and in Central Africa explains a great deal of the composition of the bottom feeders. And parts of West Africa continue to be wracked with instability though that region seems to have some of the continent’s greatest variance with a number of success stories (Ghana, Benin at 11, Senegal at 15) to go with those on the other end of the spectrum.

All of this brings us to the Tipping Curve. If servers expect a generous gratuity, there is a strong economic incentive for them to do superior work. And if they expect nothing at all, good service is taken completely out of the economic context and becomes a matter of custom. But when countries try to split the difference or if they introduce confusing rules into the system, their servers are more likely to leave customers dissatisfied.

Three African countries are included in Silver’s analysis, South Africa (which did quite well at 8th, one spot behind the United States), Morocco (a respectable 11th), and Egypt (a not-so-strong 21st). I was pleasantly surprised by South Africa, which I think has always had a reputation for providing indifferent service that I have always found both inaccurate and unfair.

The Bush Administration lobbied for political reform in Egypt in a very public manner. Unfortunately, its lofty rhetoric produced unrealistic expectations among Egyptians that only highlighted the Bush Administration’s eventual failures. It also alienated the Mubarak regime. Notably, the political dissident Ayman Nour was released only after President Bush left office. That was no coincidence, as President Mubarak became only more intransigent on the reform front as Bush continued to vilify him in public.

The Washington Post, therefore, may want to rethink criticism over the Obama Administration rejecting conditions on military funding. Conditioning military aid will harm the military relationship and make the Mubarak regime dig in its heals against reform. But they are right to lament an accompanying reduction in democracy funding. The best way to support long-term liberalization in Egypt is to support civil organizations quietly from below and pressure the government privately from the top. Let’s hope that President Obama does so, privately and forcefully, when President Mubarak visits Washington at the end of this month.

Gates set out three goals for his meetings in Egypt: (1) encourage stronger diplomatic ties with Iraq, (2) offer assurances that Washinton’s policy shift to engage Iran will not come at the expense of the region’s security, and (3) discuss progress and joint US-Egypt efforts on interdicting weapons smuggling into Gaza. These three topics are primarily political, even the Gaza border, which ultimately comes down to a political solution that solves the “demand” side of the problem. Gates will no doubt assure Mubarak that the Obama Administration will stand firm on its determination for a two-state solution, and if necessary, exert poliitcal pressure on PM Netanyahu to make it happen. Regarding Iraq, Secretary Gates brought the same message to Cairo when he last visited in April 2007. President Mubarak responded with some increased bilateral activity, including minister visits. [Of course, Egypt is always happy to host multinational conferences in Sharm el Sheikh. It's an easy play.] I expect that President Mubarak may provide assurances that he will support efforts in Iraq, and perhaps express some surprise that Maliki is still around. Iran will be a more difficult conversation. The Government of Egypt is seriously concerned over Iran’s growing influence in the region, and would like to see the United States continue its negative pressure. Tensions boiled over in recent weeks as Egypt prosecuted an alleged Hezballah cell in Egypt and blamed Iran for meddling.

What’s conspicuously absent from this visit by the US Secretary of Defense, however, is conversation about defense. Threats have largely cooled in Congress to reduce $100 million of Egpt’s $1.3 billion in annual military aid. That’s good news for the bilateral relationship. But there are still major differences between the American and Egyptian militaries over how Egypt spends that money, over the weapons that the US provides to the Gulf countries but denies to Egypt, and over the diverging missions of the militaries themselves. As American forces gird up for unconventional warfare, Egypt remains decidedly conventional. But Egypt has some serious defense threats to contend with, including bandits kidnapping tourists in its southern borders and pirates hijacking ships bound for the Suez Canal.

For a truly useful trip that goes beyond the banalities of strengthening the relationship, Secretary Gates, President Mubarak, and Defense Minister Tantawi may want to have a real discussion about defense.

Residents of Garbage City clashed with police sent there yesterday to prevent pig farmers from smuggling out their livestock before the government could come in and slaughter it. According to the independent newspaper Al-Dustour, the protesters threw rocks at police and initially pushed them back, blocking a main road and attempting to demolish cars and street signs until reinforcements were sent and arrested fourteen people. Twelve were injured, including seven policemen.

The government has promised to reimburse the pig farmers, and apparently some of them have already received their payment.

A suspected Egyptian case of the flu turned out to be negative while the Egyptian government seems to be taking intensive precautionary measures to prevent the spread of H1N1 in the country. According to the Daily News Egypt,

Minister of Health Hatem El-Gabaly announced that the ministry is coordinating with the airports authority, deploying physicians to accompany flights coming from infected areas. There are plans to equip airports with thermal detection devices as well.

The government’s measures against the flu should be welcomed, but while thermal detection devices will certainly be useful, there are many other steps the government could take to better protect its citizens, against the flu and in general. Though government officials have said that they fear the poor living conditions in Garbage City could enhance the virus’s ability to spread, the area has historically been largely ignored by the government. Its residents live literally in garbage, and it is the site of a landslide that killed upwards of 90 people in September 2008. It took hours for government emergency services to arrive on the scene.

In addition, Egyptian Chronicles reports that the Minister of Health has accused “elements within the Parliament,” i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood (there are “independent” government MPs with ties to the Brotherhood), of taking advantage of the epidemic in a supposed attempt to rid Egypt of swine, the eating of which is prohibited in Islam. There is certainly a religious element at play here, whether by coincidence or not. Tensions between Muslims and Copts fluctuate in Egypt, and most recently the country has seen a spate of revenge killings between the two groups.

The Egyptian Minister of Agriculture was quoted as saying that “After culling all the existing pigs, we plan to take veterinary procedures to sanitize existing farms and reestablish them according to international health and environmental standards.”

Maybe H1NI will be a blessing in disguise for the people of Manshiyat Nasser as the government will be forced to pay more attention to the terrible living conditions there.

Salaama is a respected, widely-read, and thus influential Egyptian commentator. It wouldn’t be far off to say that his opinion has influenced and/or is representative of a large part of Egyptian popular opinion. I have aimed in this translation to keep Salaama’s tone and employ the specific expressions he uses, which do not always translate perfectly to the English speaker’s ear. The article in its original Arabic can be found here.

Barren American Policies
Salaama Ahmed Salaama
March 16, 2009

After fifty days in the White House, American opinion polls have shown that President Obama has lost a portion of his popularity, and that he has softened some of his campaign promises as he is faced with a political power that has long branded American policy, especially in regards to the Middle East. This is whereas many in the Arab states had cheered him believing that he would pursue a more moderate and balanced course regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict in comparison with his predecessor, Bush.

The first battle that Obama lost in the face of the overarching power of the Zionist lobby was when he was forced to abandon his choice of Ambassador Charles Freeman for the chairmanship of the National Intelligence Council, a choice that was based on Freeman’s vast experience in the Middle East where he served as ambassador to Saudi Arabia and in security and intelligence fields. This took place under pressure from certain leaks that described Freeman as a controversial figure because of his criticism of the Zionist lobby’s influence on American policy and its rejection of any criticism of Israeli officials.

However, what deserves more attention in this regard, is that despite evidence that indicates that the region is about to begin dealing with a racist government in which the foreign ministerial-ship is held by a person such as Lieberman, the leader of “Israel Beytanu,” which does not recognize a two-state solution and which does not negotiate with the Palestinians, Washington has nonetheless proceeded with enthusiasm with the implementation of the American-Israeli memorandum of understanding which Livni and Rice signed just hours before the end of Bush’s rule. It focused on what they called the prevention of “smuggling” of weapons and military equipment to the terrorists in Gaza, that is, to Hamas and to the Palestinian resistance organizations! Washington then commenced rallying a number of its partners in NATO to oversee and prevent the smuggling of weapons across the Mediterranean Sea, the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, and East Africa, despite the opposition and reservation Egypt displayed regarding this agreement, which is considered a course of action that is outside the scope of international law. Not to mention the memorandum’s complete lack of comprehensive goals in keeping with the peace efforts, or an account of the extent of Israel’s commitment to the Quartet’s conditions regarding the cessation of aggression and settlement activity.

The meeting was attended by Israeli envoys in London. But Egypt, which certain parties would have had play a role in the tightening of the siege of Gaza, refused to attend the conference. Observers from the Palestinian National Authority did not attend the conference either.

There is no doubt that these initiatives come at a time of profound sensitivity vis-a-vis Egypt’s enormous efforts towards reconciliation between the Palestinians. Such moves have been a stab in the back of the endeavors to solve the controversial issues between the factions in regard to progress towards peace, by way of striving to come up with policies that will permit the Palestinian Authority to continue efforts towards a peaceful settlement, yet without aborting the Palestinian people’s right to resistance, especially in light of the latest brutal Israeli attacks on Gaza.

Among the contradictions that mark these devious Western policies is the influx we are seeing of Western parliamentary and political delegations and personalities that are holding meetings with Hamas representatives to convince them to recognize Israel, to accept the Quartet’s conditions in exchange for recognition as a political party in negotiations, and to commit to abandoning violence. This at the time when Israel has unveiled its right-wing extremist face being led by a government that acknowledges not one of the Quartet’s principles thanks to the vague and unjust policies Washington is adopting and which countries like France, Germany, and Britain go along with, even though they claim to be acting for the sake of peace and stability.

Despite everything, Obama is taking a chance in trying to solve the issue in Afghanistan by pursuing secret communications with Mullah Omar through Saudi mediation. But American policy also remains, despite everything, hostage to the Zionist pressures from which it is incapable of breaking free.

The same is likely true in the Middle East, and Obama, fortunately, seems to be taking advantage. He is tackling the regions most difficult problems head-on with a fleet of respected special envoys – Mitchell for Palestine/Iraq; Holbrooke for Afghanistan/Pakistan; Gration for Sudan.

Although prospects for a resolution in Israel/Palestine seem dim I am recently optimistic. First, the issue has presidential engagement and a respected envoy who speaks on his behalf. This should settle disagreements among senior foreign policymakers in Obama’s Administration and reassure Middle East leaders that when they’re speaking to George Mitchell they’re speaking to the President. Second, Obama seems to be standing tough on his dedication to a two-state solution in the face of Israeli disagreement, which is not inconsequential. Third, a hardliner has come to power in Israel. Though Netanyahu has said he sees dim possibilities for a two-state solution, hardliners are likely the only leaders capable of bringing Israel’s factious politicians in line for a difficult agreement, as Begin did by making peace with Sadat thirty years ago. And again, American presidential engagement is key. Fourth, Arab leaders would like to resolve the conflict. Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the two Gulf leaders most active in regional diplomacy, are ready and have supported feasible proposals in the past. Egypt, as Michelle Dunne points out here, has a two-year window of elections where it will seek US political support. Jordan is always in, and negotiations with Syria are not out of the realm of possibility. Remember, Netanyahu initiated them quietly during his last premiership in 1998. The Palestinians are in crisis and divided but eager for peace with security. Now is the time.

The movement had been hoping to stage numerous protests and demonstrations in the wake of last year’s April 6 strike, which led to the death of three Egyptians, the wounding of dozens, and hundreds of arrests.

As there have already been a number of reports about today’s events I am simply going to highlight a few interesting points. Sarah Carr’s report in the Daily News Egypt and this article from the Middle East Times are useful sources of background information.

1. Use of the media

April 6 boasts a flourishing online media campaign. It has a network of bloggers and “Twitters,” a number of Facebook pages, and uses fancy graphics and banners. This is clearly a youth driven movement, and they know how to use the internet. We have already witnessed the Egyptian opposition’s use of the internet to publicize the detention of various bloggers and activists and to spread the news of the Hussein bombing.

Here is a link to the official April 6 blog, and here is their statement of purpose in English.

2. April 6’s strength and the Egyptian political opposition

While a Facebook group boasting tens of thousands of members may be able to reach a wide audience, there remains the challenge of translating this “online power” into “street power.” Tens of thousands of people were not protesting on the streets of Cairo today. In addition, many of Egypt’s main opposition groups and personalities, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, Ayman Nour and the Ghad Party, as well as a number of trade unions, gave only their vocal support to April 6.

Here are some quotes from the Daily News Egypt:

“As for April 6, 2009, we share in the anger but not in the strike. We share in the anger on the basis that we feel anger at the deterioration of conditions in Egypt. We express it in several ways; all political forces have their method of expression and all will commemorate April 6 in their own way.” – Ayman Nour

“The Youth Movement has done a good job of using the media to spread the protest message but it’s still too early to talk about a national industrial strike when the workers’ movement faces the obstacle of the state’s oppressive security apparatus.”- Saber Barakat, member of the Workers and Trade Union Freedoms Coordinating Committee

“Before we take a position on April 6 we have to answer a fundamental question: are opposition forces currently capable of organizing a successful general strike?” – Tadamon

3. Why was April 6 not more successful?

Arrests in the past couple of days of everyone from Brotherhood figures to university students handing out flyers have certainly put pressure on the movement. In addition, there was an immense police presence, especially downtown and at the sites where the protests were scheduled to take place. Last year’s deaths, injuries, and arrests may also have contributed to people’s apprehension about coming out and taking the risk. In addition, for some Egyptians, the loss of a day’s wages might be enough to deter them from taking part in a strike that they see as unlikely to effect real change.

Here is a telling quote from the Egyptian opposition group Tadamon from the Daily News Egypt:

“We believe that the answer is no. April 6 will not be a general strike however much it is hoped that it would be. … It is not expected that many workers and popular movements will adopt the call for the strike. In our opinion what will most likely happen is a smaller version of April 6, 2008, that is April 6, 2009 will take place without Mahalla — stripping it of much of its weight.”

The strength of last year’s strike was in large part due to protests against low wages and rising inflation. Evidently, workers did not participate as they did last year.

Yesterday, a number of Egypt’s opposition groups announced the formation of the Egyptian Coalition for Change (ECC). Prominent Egyptian writers Sonallah Ibrahim, Alaa Al-Aswany, Kefaya leader Abdel Halim Qandeel, and representatives from the Journalists’ Syndicate have all joined. The group has released a “manifesto” calling for the NDP to step down, the formation of a coalition government, an end to emergency rule, an expansion of democratic freedoms, and an annulment of the Camp David treaty with Israel. The Muslim Brotherhood has yet to officially join the coalition.

Although it supports April 6, it seems that the Egyptian political opposition is taking a more cautious and calculated approach, which may have weakened April 6’s ability to mobilize. The opposition’s hesitation to participate in the protests may be a result of its experience dealing with the intricacies and the hidden red lines of the Egyptian political system.

Furthermore, media coverage in general certainly benefits both the newly formed ECC and April 6. However, the Egyptian government has an uncanny ability to just simply disregard this internal domestic pressure by arresting a few hundred people and pretending (despite sending out thousands of armed state security officers) that nothing has happened. Of course, there was little to no mention of April 6 in any of the state-sponsored papers.  Opposition and  independent papers such as Al-Masri Al-Youm, Al-Dustour, and Al-Shurouq gave the ECC and April 6 significant coverage.

And what are the implications of all of this for the Obama administration and the promotion of democracy in the region? Will President Obama respond to the April 6 movement and the continued detention of bloggers and political activists?

If you’d like to see a play by play of the past couple of days’ events and a variety of Egyptian sources including bloggers and various news sources, I will once again direct you to the Egyptian Chronicles blog which has a very detailed account of what has been going on.

From the Daily News Egypt:

NAMRU-3, which was established in 1946, works closely with Egypt’s Ministry of Health, conducting research and surveillance to support military personnel deployed to Africa, the Middle East, and Southwest Asia, according to its official website.”

“Since 2006, AUC has had a contract with the US Naval Medical Research Unit in Egypt (NAMRU – 3) to recruit and provide scientific staff in support of infectious disease research throughout the region, specifically relating to Avian Flu. The total value of this contract since 2006 is $1,964,035, i.e. $600,000 per year for the basic award, plus an additional $164,035 for travel expenses in the 2008 renewal,” the statement explained.

Here’s a piece from an AUC journalism professor bashing Al-Masri Al-Youm for shoddy journalism:

…like any lazy student, the newspaper didn’t do its homework.

For instance, though the story ran across the top of its front page, the newspaper did not actually report the story itself. Instead, it published what it received from America in Arabic, an ethnic newswire in Washington, DC.

What that newswire did to discover this contract was what anyone with an internet connection could have done: it visited www.usaspending.gov, the website where the US government publishes records of its non-classified spending — so much for a “secret” deal.

Al-Masry Al-Youm would have known all of this, had they done any reporting on their own, such as possibly calling AUC and the US embassy in Cairo to find out what the funding was for, or actually sending a reporter to AUC to check out NAMRU’s work here.

But its editors chose not to, as it has been explained to me, because they wanted to publish what they had.

Despite AUC’s response to the article, the (most likely minor) damage has probably already been done. Egypt has an obsession with conspiracy theories and many Egyptians resent their government’s dealings with the US,  especially in light of what they see as its unwillingness to stand up to US involvement in the region, particularly when it comes to Israel.

And it’s really no surprise that the Navy is doing research in Egypt; the two countries have a longstanding relationship on both the economic and military fronts. The US will provide Egypt with $1.3 billion in military aid this year.

Egypt could really benefit from the research being done on Avian Flu at NAMRU-3 these days, especially as Egyptians unfortunately continue to contract the disease. In addition, the popular Egyptian blog “Egyptian Chronicles” has reported that an Egyptian MP has accused the US and, no surprise here, Israel, of actually spreading Avian Flu through the NAMRU-3 lab.