Democracy Inaction in Middle East – US Policy Appears to Support or Ignore Student Protests Depending Upon Which Way the Wind Blows

The Muslim Brotherhood Protests in Egypt - Photo: Isreallycool

In 2009, Iranian Students took to the streets in protest of an oppressive, theocracy, one where elections meant the outcome was predetermined. The Islamic State of Iran saw massive protests, first by students, who were later joined by the general populace, violently shut down by the “duly elected” Ahmadinejad. As the protestors were beaten back by hired mercenaries of the regime, the U.S., in general, paid little attention to what was, in fact, a call for true democracy and freedom in Iraq. The protests began approximately on June 15th of 2009 , while bloggers, working from twitter, and YouTube videos, attempted for days on end to get information out to the general public, as the U.S. media took a different approach. President Barak Obama, finally, on the the 23rd of June, officially “condemned” the violence against the protestors. To understand the extent of the violence against its people, and the brutal way in which this totalitarian “democracy” handles protests, visit and the support the work of Iran Human Rights. As to the U.S. response, a blind eye was turned in favor of the Iranian Regime.


Photo from the 2nd day of protests in Iran in 2009 - peaceful demonstrators beaten, no word from U.S. - image: Gaurdian UK

Egypt is another story entirely, and although understanding that these are two entirely different types of governments, with Egypts elections pending in September of this year, both the U.S. Media and the Obama administration appear to be formally behind these protests. Obama has taken an active role in offering support to the protestors, and booting the current President, Mubarak,to the proverbial curb. The protestors, some of which are students, are not content to wait for elections, rather are attempting to force President Mubarak to resign and leave the country.

Who is in the middle of this push to remove Mubarak - The Muslim Brotherhood. They are an organization based on Jihad, which had been banned in Egypt for multiple terrorist acts, including the assassination of former President, Sadat.

Further, in June of 2009 President Obama invited the Muslim Brotherhood to attend a speech he gave in Cairo. (An excellent treatment of that visit here at www.examiner.com/foreign-policy-in-national//muslim-brotherhood-pm-invited-by-obama-to-attend-speech-cairo.)

The Muslim Brotherhood, it should be noted, has ties to Iran, and the Iranians are now making their judgments on the protests in Egypt and elsewhere : Ahmadinejad is supportive of these particular protestors, and looks for the overthrow of the current President, in order to spread this type of “revolution” across the Middle East. Of course, cast in their usual role as evil infidels: The U.S. and Israel. In addition, Ahmadinejad is fairly confident (given the aid these protestors in Egypt are getting from, of all places, the United States), is again,calling for the usual to remove Israel from the Middle East, and not reserving kind words for the U.S. Those protestors in Egypt, students and the Muslim Brotherhood, are apparently fine with both Ahmadinejad and, it appears, the U.S. under the guidance of one Barrack, James Earl Carter, Obama.

One has to ask: has the world gone mad? When legitimate peaceful protests took place in Iran, the brutality of the regime was ignored by the press, condemned halfheartedly and late by the administration. The resultant outcome of those Iranians brave enough to protest an election (which, may or may not have been legitimate, and asking only for freedom and democracy) death or imprisonment. The protestors were peaceful, the regime was insanely brutal. In Egypt on the other hand, the regime does not have a stellar human rights record, however, in this wise, students and an Obama approved Islamic Jihadist organization have every right to oust a President before his term is up. From this point of view, it is all or nothing, it is black and white, it is as plain as the nose on ones face: peaceful student protests in Iran, were given short-shrift by the U.S., while violent demonstrations in Egypt, where, should Egypt become an Islamic state (and that outcome aided by Obama’s legitimization of the Muslim Brotherhood (must like Carter vis a vis, the Ayatollah in 1978), are given the full attention of both the Media and the President. Understanding that journalists were targeted by the Egyptian regime, who were embedded in the middle of the protests, (putting themselves in harm’s way), perhaps giving more reason for the U.S.Press to side with the President over the regime. However, the fact remains that Mubarak had controlled the spread of the cult of radical Islam in Egypt, thereby stabilizing in part the Middle East. Now as a result of the interference, the entire Middle East may be lost to the stone ages. (Again refer to the documentation provided by Iran Human Rights.). What is imperative to keep in mind, the only true democracy in the Middle East is the State of Israel, an ally to the United States, and one which, always is made to be the pariah, regardless of their attempts at peace, and their national right to exist peacefully in a region beset by the insanity of Iran and now, with Obama’s aid and comfort,quite possibly Egypt and other states that are being aided by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Party Like its 1979 – Muslim Brotherhood History in the Middle East – In Brief Carter – Obama and Comparative Ideology

Political Cartoon Carter and the Ayatollah from the Press Courier Dec 2, 1979


In an article from the Sarasota Heraldwritten by Jack Anderson in 1979, one finds that the Iranian Crisis was blamed on a Lack of U.S. Intelligence. The root of the uprising involved a group known as the Muslim Brotherhood, and the article points to a growing problem in Egypt where the Brotherhood was forming an alliance with “leftwing” dissidents, just like it did “in Iran”. The end result was a warning to the Carter Administration that Egyptian President Answer Sadat was in trouble. (Sarasota Herald).

Sadat was later assassinated.

The group, the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928, with the following motto: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. As a political organization they began to fall apart in recent years, however recently have begun to “represent themselves as mainstream, even as they continue to embrace the Brotherhood's radical views and maintain links to terrorists.”(meforoum.org)

What may be most disturbing and enlightening for those following the unrest in Egypt is that:

An important aspect of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology is the sanctioning of Jihad such as the 2004 fatwa issued by Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi making it a religious obligation of Muslims to abduct and kill U.S. citizens in Iraq.

An excellent treatment of the history and specifically the development of this radical movement can be found here www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

The ties between the Group and Iran’s Supreme Leader are treated here: www.borglobe.com.
Fast forward 2011 – from Politico: “For Barack Obama, Egypt a balancing act”

“The White House tiptoed gingerly toward solidarity with the protesters thronging Egyptian streets on a day of escalating rhetoric that culminated Friday evening with President Barack Obama making a televised appeal to the nation’s leader, Hosni Mubarak, to halt his crackdown and reform the government.
“This moment of volatility has to be turned into a moment of promise,” Obama said, while calling on Mubarak “to refrain from any violence against peaceful protestors.”

(Politico)

History repeats itself:

In the year leading up to the Iranian Revolution, which installed the anti-U.S. Muslim Dictator, Ayatollah Khomeini, the Shah was constantly “pressured” by the Carter Administration to relax his hold on the reigns of the government and release political prisoners.

Of course, the result was the expulsion of the Shah, the return of the radical cleric and the detainment of U.S. hostages up until Ronald Reagan took the Office of the Presidency in 1980.

The U.S. is constantly accused of “propping up” dictators, in nations around the world, nations who otherwise might end up in a position similar to Iran. Although, in an ideal word, democracy (or a republic) would be the preferred government as viewed by most American’s, who enjoy a particularly unique brand. The U.S. model separates the powers of church and state, and the rank and file of the electorate are educated, although there are political differences, they remain somewhat secular in nature. When one views the Middle East, however, one must take into account the differences between the nations, and the level of commitment to religion versus the secular model. It goes without saying that those Middle Eastern nations where commerce and diplomatic ties with the U.S. and Europe are in place for decades, and where Islamic Radicals, such as the Muslim Brotherhood are in place, presents a precarious fine line for U.S. relations.

Under Carter, Sadat lost his life over the peace accord (arranged by Carter) with Israel. The assassin tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. Under Carter, Iran, a former ally of the U.S., saw the return of the Ayatollah (at Carters urging) and the loss of an ally (again at Carters urging), which resulted in an anti-American sentiment, which, the intent and the outcome, of course, were not as Carter had planned. He just lacked the general experience and possibly the ideological fortitude that would have seen him back the Shah, over those “jailed dissidents” of the regime.
Now, as the Muslim Brotherhood has a foothold in every Middle East Nation where the U.S. enjoyed a bit of breathing room with an ally, the Obama administration apparently is following the Carter Model.