Egypt in the course of recent weeks has been found in the social eye of the storm. Thousands upon thousands of pages have been written about it. Our friend Eduardo Vargas send us two documents translated into our language about events in the valley of the Nile These materials will provide more lights to the controversy over the socialist movement in Peru on the events on the shores of the Mediterranean.
Tacna, March 3, 2011 EBM
Movements in Egypt: The United States realigns
By Samir Amin [From the Wordpress Blog: The Workers'Dreadnought (workers without fear or do not fear nothing)] Translation Eduardo Vargas (This item is before the fall of Mubarak)
Egypt is a cornerstone of the U.S. plan to control the planet. Washington will not tolerate any attempt to leave Egypt for total submission, also required by Israel with To continue the colonization of what remains of Palestine. This is for the sole purpose of Washington's "involvement" in the organization of a "smooth transition". In this respect, the U.S. may consider that, Hosni Mubarak, should resign. The newly appointed vice-president, Omar Suleiman, head of military intelligence, would be in charge. The army took care not to associate with repression, protecting your image.
And here comes Mohamed ElBaradei. He is still best known outside than in Egypt, but that it could be corrected quickly. He is a "liberal", having no other concept in the management of the economy than the one that is ongoing, and can not understand that this is precisely the origin of the social devastation. He is a Democrat in the sense that he wants "genuine elections" and the rule of law (stop the arrests and torture), but nothing more.
is not impossible that he could be a partner in the transition. However, the army and the intelligence of the country will not abandon their dominant position in the government of society. "El Baradei will accept?
In the case of "success" and "elections", the Muslim Brotherhood (MB, an acronym in English) will become the major parliamentary force. U.S. welcomes this and the MB has described as "moderate", ie, docile and accepting the submission to the U.S. strategy, Israel, leaving you free to continue their occupation of Palestine.
The MB is totally in favor of the system of "market" course, totally dependent on the outside. They are also, in fact, members of the ruling class "shopper." They took a stand against the strikes of the working class and peasants, and strive to maintain the land.
The U.S. plan Egypt is very similar to the model of Pakistan, a combination of 'political Islam' and military intelligence. The adaptation can compensate MB to this policy, precisely because it "does not moderate" in their behavior toward the Copts. Can that system to receive a certificate of "democracy"?
Movement is the urban youth, especially unemployed diploma holders, and with the support of sectors of the educated middle classes and Democrats. The new regime could perhaps make some concessions - increased hiring in the state apparatus, for example - but hardly more.
Of course, things could change if the working class and peasant movements come to carve. But this does not seem to be on the agenda. Of course, if the economic system is managed According to the rules of "Game of Globalization ', none of the problems that led to the protest movement that can actually solve.
****************** **************************************************
** Interview with Samir Amin
after the fall of Mubarak
SAMIR AMIN ON THE EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION
economist Samir Amin is a Franco-Egyptian member of the World Social Forum International and President of the World Forum for Alternatives. Samir Amin discusses the political and economic crisis in Egypt. This interview was conducted for the World Social Forum in Dakar by Rosa Moussaoui, special correspondent journalist L'Humanité. Original interview published in French M'PEP: Samir Amin sur la révolution Egyptienne. This interview was translated into English by Siv O'Neall, Axis of Logic columnist. The English translation is Eduardo Vargas
Question - Are the events that shook Tunisia and Egypt only "popular uprising" or are a sign of the entry of these countries in the revolutionary process?
Samir Amin - These are social unrest which could potentially lead to a crystallization of alternatives, which, eventually may become part of a socialist perspective. That is why the capitalist system, capital monopolies worldwide, can not tolerate the development of these movements. These mobilize all possible means of destabilization, economic and financial pressures, reaching as far as military threats.
they support, as they see fit, whether fascist or fascist false choices, or the establishment of military dictatorships. Do not believe a word I say Obama. Obama is Bush, but with a different language. There is a constant duplicity. In fact, in the case of Egypt, the United States supported the regime. Over time it may be more useful to sacrifice the person of Mubarak.
But they will not give up the essentials: the military and police. They may consider strengthening the military and police systems through an alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). In fact, what the U.S. leaders have in mind is the model of Pakistan, which is not a democratic model, but a combination of power, which can be called Islamic and military dictatorship. However, in the case of Egypt, a large part of the popular forces that have moved are very aware of these designs. The Egyptian people are very politically aware. The history of Egypt is a country that tries to emerge from obscurity from the early nineteenth century, which was defeated by his own shortcomings, but mainly by repeated external aggression.
Question - These surveys are the result mainly of unemployed youth and college graduates who were unable to find work. How do you explain Ud.esto?
Samir Amin - The Egypt of Nasser had an economic and social system that could be criticized, but it was consistent. Nasser industrialization bet to make the country's international specialization of the colonial system in the country bordering on the export of cotton. This system was successful in maintaining a good distribution of income in favor of the middle classes, and without a reduction in living standards for the poorer classes. But all that changed in response to military aggression in 1956 and 1967, organized by Israel. Sadat and Mubarak worked more in the dismantling of the productive system of Egypt, which was replaced by a totally incoherent, based entirely on the search for yield. The supposedly high growth rates of Egypt, proclaimed and praised in the past thirty years by the World Bank, have no meaning. It is smoke and mirrors [Refers to the tricks of magicians, E Vargas]. The growth in Egypt is very vulnerable, dependent on foreign markets and capital flow oil rich Gulf countries. With the global economic crisis, this vulnerability is manifested by a sudden loss of strength. This slowdown was accompanied by a tremendous increase in inequality and unemployment, which has affected the majority of young people. The situation was explosive and an explosion occurred. What is now beginning, beyond the original demands to end the regime in power and the establishment of democratic freedoms, is a political battle.
Question - Why is it that the Muslim Brotherhood are trying to present themselves as "moderate"?
Samir Amin - Due to them being asked to play this game. The Muslim Brothers have never been moderate. There is a religious movement but a political movement that uses religion. Since its founding in 1920 by the British and the monarchy, the movement has played an active role as an anti-agent, anti-liberal, anti-democratic. This is the reason for the Muslim Brotherhood and that they make this claim clearly. They say openly: if they win the election, this will be the last, because the electoral system, would be an imported western that would go against the nature of Islam. In this sense they have not changed definitely nothing. In fact, political Islam has always been supported by the United States. They presented to the Taliban in the war against the Soviet Union, like the heroes of liberty. When the Taliban closed girls schools had been established by the Communists, there were women's movements in the United States, which saw fit to explain the need to respect the "traditions" of Afghanistan. The United States is playing a double game.
one hand, support. On the other hand, using natural fundamentalist excesses, to fuel racism, the rejection of immigrants and thus to justify military aggression. According to this strategy, the Mubarak regime has not fought against political Islam. Instead, it has been incorporated into the system.
Question - Mubarak has subcontracted the Egyptian society to the Muslim Brotherhood?
Samir Amin - Of course. He has given three basic institutions: justice, education and television. But the military regime wants to keep management (government, EV) by themselves, the management that is claimed by the Muslim Brotherhood. The United States uses this minor difference in the alliance between the army and Islamist militants to ensure the docility of both. The essential point is that everyone accepts capitalism as it is. The Muslim Brotherhood has never seriously considered changing things. For that reason, the major workers 'strikes' of 2007-2008, its members voted with the government against the strikers. Faced with the struggles of farmers evicted from their land by large landowners, the Muslim Brotherhood was the opposite side of the peasant movement. For them, private property, free enterprise and profits are sacred.
Question - What are your long term plans for the entire Middle East?
Samir Amin - all are very docile. The military and the Muslim Brotherhood accept United States hegemony in the region and peace with Israel as it is. All of them are showing the kind of complacency that allows Israel to continue the colonization of what remains of Palestine. TacnaComunitaria
0 comments:
Post a Comment