Mr. Burns urged both sides to take steps to reconcile. “The government itself has said it wants inclusion of all political streams,” he said. “We have called on the military to avoid any politically motivated arrests. And we have also called upon those who differ with the government to adhere to their absolute obligation to participate peacefully.”
He did not repeat American calls for the generals to release Mr. Morsi. Mr. Burns never mentioned the ousted president, nor the Islamist movement behind him, the Muslim Brotherhood. When an Egyptian journalist asked how the new government responded to American calls for Mr. Morsi’s release, Mr. Burns said only, “We have made our views clear on that issue.”
Seemingly all sides rebuffed Mr. Burns. The young organizers of the petition drive that preceded Mr. Morsi’s ouster, the ultraconservative Islamist party Al Nour and officials of the Muslim Brotherhood all said they would not meet with Mr. Burns. And state news media reported anonymous military officials saying that Mr. Burns was more determined than his Egyptian counterparts to ensure the continued flow of American military aid.It's clear that the U.S. government wants some sort of plausible cosmetic democratic transition, a process capped by a showy, credible election. The United States specializes in elections (never mind Bush v. Gore). The American democratic ideal is to give the people a pageant, an electoral Olympics, every four years. It makes the people feel as if they're participating in the greatest system of the greatest country on earth. Then after the acceptance speech has been delivered behind the shield of bulletproof glass and the last balloon has been dropped, elites get down to governing according to the accepted global neoliberal norms.
But it is not apparent that Egypt is going to credible elections anytime soon. Street battles raged overnight in Cairo. The realization is dawning on everyone, not just Islamists, that the military is going to criminalize the Muslim Brotherhood. So we're at that point when the Muslim Brotherhood is going to take up arms.
David Kirkpatrick has an excellent frontpage story, "Egyptian Liberals Embrace the Military, Brooking No Dissent," about how Egyptian Liberals and Leftists are vocal defenders of the military coup and the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood -- even if it benefits the supporters of Hosni Mubarak, the overthrow of whom has been the crowning achievement of the Arab Spring thus far:
Hossam Bahgat, founder of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, said the liberals’ goal — an Egypt governed by an inclusive civilian democracy — appeared to be further away than when Mr. Mubarak fell. Now, he said, the old institutions and elites from the Mubarak era are emboldened to push for a full return of the old order. “There is a powerful and well-resourced player now trying to push Egypt back to 2010,” he said.Kirkpatrick's story repeats many of the points made in a piece by Joseph Massad that appeared on the Counterpunch web site this past weekend. Entitled "The Struggle for Egypt," it's the best thing I've read on the coup to date. Massad frames the military's ouster of Mohamed Morsi as a battle that pits Mubarakist neoliberals and the Supreme Council of Armed Forces against Muslim Brotherhood neoliberals. Leftists, at this point, are naively hitching their wagon to the SCAF. But at the end of the day, neoliberalism will still hold sway, and the people will be on the path of even greater immiseration. It doesn't look good for the Arab Spring.
