Egyptian President Morsi Ousted in Coup

While the pace of events makes it hard to determine if this qualifies as a classical "military coup", today Egypt's Islamist President Morsi was ousted from power after the Egyptian military announced the suspension of the (increasingly Islamist) Constitution. The chief justice of the constitutional court will take on former President Morsi's powers as the interim head of state. 

These developments follow weeks of intense popular protests by tens of millions of Egyptians, and flashes of violence across Egypt. With an economy in free fall, Egyptians simply had enough.

The significane of this moment cannot be understated. The Muslim Brotherhood, as a global political and religious force present in numerous countries (but headquartered in Egypt), has just been dealt a massive setback. The removal of Morsi will have ramifications across the Middle East.

The Western world's reaction to the ouster of Morsi, particularly after his democratic election last year, will also be intriguing to watch. Already, reports in the Canadian and American media have discussed the potential suspension of aid to Egypt, in the wake of what is quickly being deemed an upheaval of the people's democratic will. I'm not convinced that this is the case. 

Morsi made a number of rash, Islamist-motivated political decisions that quickly backfired, as millions of liberal and secular Egyptians simply rejected these backward moves. Most notably, Morsi forced through a highly controversial Islamist Constitution that did not reflect the will of the people. In response, the people reacted with massive, peaceful protests. 

The secular opposition rose up. The people have spoken; the Army has responded. What happens next is up to the Egyptian people, once again. - R.O. 

Other headlines:

• Washington Post: Egyptian military ousts Morsi, suspends constitution
• New York Times: Army Ousts Egypt’s President; Morsi Decries ‘Complete Military Coup’

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army ousts Egypt's President Morsi - BBC News
3 July 2013 - 4:57pm

Pro-Morsi supporters. (JPost.com)

The head of Egypt's army has given a TV address, announcing that President Mohammed Morsi is no longer in office.

Gen Abdul Fattah al-Sisi said the constitution had been suspended and the chief justice of the constitutional court would take on Mr Morsi's powers.

Flanked by religious and opposition leaders, Gen Sisi said Mr Morsi had "failed to meet the demands of the Egyptian people".

Anti-Morsi protesters in Cairo gave a huge cheer in response to the speech.

The army's move to depose the president follows four days of mass street demonstrations against Mr Morsi, and an ultimatum issued by the military which expired on Wednesday afternoon.

TV stations belonging to Mr Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood went off air at the end of the speech and state news agency Mena said managers at the movement's Misr25 channel had been arrested.

Minutes later, a notice went up on Mr Morsi's Facebook page denouncing the army move as a "military coup".

The statement asked Egyptian citizens - both civilians and military - to "abide by the constitution and the law and not to respond to this coup".

The ousted leader's current whereabouts are unclear. However, earlier reports said security forces had imposed a travel ban on both him and other leading figures in the Muslim Brotherhood.

'Roadmap' for the future
General Sisi said on state TV that the armed forces could not stay silent and blind to the call of the Egyptian masses.

He spoke of a new roadmap for the future, and said that the chief justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court, Adli Mansour, would be given the task of "running the country's affairs during the transitional period until the election of a new president".

After Gen Sisi's address, both Pope Tawadros II - the head of the Coptic Church - and leading opposition figure Mohammed ElBaradei made short televised speeches about the new roadmap for Egypt's future which they had agreed with the army.

Mr ElBaradei said the roadmap aimed for national reconciliation and represented a fresh start to the January 2011 revolution.

"This roadmap has been drafted by honourable people who seek the interests, first and foremost, of the country," added Pope Tawadros.

Fireworks

The army is currently involved in a show of force, fanning out across Cairo and taking control of the capital, BBC correspondent Quentin Sommerville reports.

He described seeing eight armoured personnel carriers heading for Cairo University in Giza, where one of the main pro-Morsi demonstrations was being held.

The tens of thousands of anti-Morsi protesters on the streets of Cairo are now celebrating, with fireworks lighting up the night sky and car drivers honking their horns in excitement.

But Morsi supporters elsewhere in the city are reported to have shouted: "No to military rule.''

Morsi, army ready for showdown in 'final hours' in Egypt

This has bad news written all over it. Take a read of just a few select quotes:

Egypt's army commander and Islamist President Mohamed Morsi each pledged his life to defy the other as the hour approached on Wednesday that will trigger a military takeover that was prompted by mass demonstrations.

...Morsi refused to give up his elected office. Morsi said, "The price ... is my life." 

...Liberal opposition leaders, who have vowed not to negotiate with Morsi since the ultimatum was issued, immediately denounced his refusal to go as a declaration of "civil war".

Egypt is entering very tenuous times. Is the world ready for two civil wars on Israel's border? - R.O.
----------------------------------------------------

Morsi, army ready for showdown in 'final hours' - JPost

By REUTERS
07/03/2013 07:23

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi defies army, US pressure to bow to protests as clock ticks on army ultimatum for his resignation; army commander issues bellicose statement, says he is ready to die.


A girl with the colours of the Egyptian flag and the word "leave" painted on her face Photo: REUTERS

CAIRO - Egypt's army commander and Islamist President Mohamed Morsi each pledged his life to defy the other as the hour approached on Wednesday that will trigger a military takeover that was prompted by mass demonstrations.

The military chiefs issued a call to battle in a statement headlined "The Final Hours". They said they were willing to shed blood against "terrorists and fools" after Morsi refused to give up his elected office. Morsi said, "The price ... is my life."

As a mass of revelers on Cairo's Tahrir Square feted the army for saving the revolutionary democracy won there two years ago, supporters of the president's Muslim Brotherhood denounced a "military coup". Some clashed with security forces at Cairo University, where 16 people died and about 200 were wounded.

Military sources told Reuters the army had drafted a plan to sideline Morsi and suspend the constitution after a 5 p.m. (1500 GMT) deadline passes. Coordinated with political leaders, an interim council would rule pending new elections. The sources would not say what was planned for an uncooperative president.

Facing the expiry of a 48-hour ultimatum set by the head of the armed forces that he should agree a power-sharing deal with his rivals, Morsi broadcast a defiant, if somewhat rambling, address to the nation to defend his "legitimacy" - a word he used repeatedly in the course of 45 minutes.

Liberal opposition leaders, who have vowed not to negotiate with Morsi since the ultimatum was issued, immediately denounced his refusal to go as a declaration of "civil war". The youth movement that organized the mass protests urged the Republican Guard to arrest Morsi immediately and present him for trial.

Three hours after his midnight television appearance, the military high command responded with a post on its Facebook page. The post said they, too, were willing to lay down their lives to defend their position - one which they described as defending the Egyptian people from "terrorists, radicals and fools".

A military source said the message came from General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the armed forces commander appointed by Morsi last year, who issued the ultimatum to politicians on Monday.

It was posted on the official Facebook page of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, or SCAF. It entered history books as Egypt's ruling institution after the army pushed aside Hosni Mubarak in the Arab Spring uprising of early 2011.

"It is an honor for us to die rather than that anyone should terrorise or threaten the Egyptian people," it said. "We swear to God, we will sacrifice even our blood for Egypt and its people to defend them against any terrorist, radical or fool.

"Long live Egypt and its people."

PROTESTS

The army has taken its cue from the millions who rallied on Sunday to call for Morsi's resignation as he completed a year in office. It appears to have only enhanced the high regard in which the military is held by most Egyptians by its action.

But as well as listening to the voice of protesters, the army also appears to have had its own concerns about the way Morsi was leading the country - notably about his alliances with more radical Islamist groups and recent association with sectarian calls to holy war in Syria.

The opposition say offers by Morsi to include them have been made in bad faith by a leader beholden to a religious movement intent on entrenching its power and Islamic ideas forever. The Brotherhood calls them bad losers who do not grasp democracy.

Sisi, a 2006 graduate of the US Army War College, has insisted he is not seeking power in the long term. Many believe the armed forces - with their extensive economic interests and generous funding - when they say they have no political ambition.

The United States has urged compromise. It has funded the army for decades, since long before the fall of Mubarak in 2011, as a key part of helping secure Washington's ally Israel. Morsi aides have said they believe a coup would need US support.

Washington has also defended the legitimacy of Morsi's election to lead the biggest Arab nation, as part of a strategy of promoting democracy in the Middle East since the Arab Spring.

President Barack Obama told Morsi by telephone that talks with opponents were needed. Morsi said on Twitter that he would not be "dictated to internally or internationally".

A senior European diplomat said world powers would have no choice but to condemn the military removal of an elected head of state, even if the generals have support on the streets.

In his television address, Morsi warned that any deviation from the democratic order approved in a series of votes last year would lead Egypt down a dangerous path.

It was unclear who fired at whom or who started the violence at Cairo University. Muslim Brotherhood supporters angrily held up rifle and shotgun cartridges after scenes of mayhem, shrouded in teargas. State television quoted a health ministry official as saying 16 people died and about 200 were hurt.

That made it by some way the bloodiest incident in several weeks of street fighting. Eight people were killed the previous day during a siege of the Brotherhood's national headquarters and the movement has said it is under attack from hired "thugs" left over from the days of Mubarak's secret police.

MURSI DEFIANT
"The price of preserving legitimacy is my life," Morsi said in an impassioned, repetitive address to the camera. "Legitimacy is the only guarantee to preserve the country."

In a warning aimed as much at his own militant supporters as at the army, he said: "We do not declare jihad (holy war) against each other. We only wage jihad on our enemies."

Urging Egyptians not to heed the siren calls of what he called remnants of the former authoritarian government, the "deep state" and the corrupt, he said: "Don't be fooled. Don't fall into the trap. Don't let them steal your revolution."

Condemning a coup against their first freely elected leader, tens of thousands of Muslim Brotherhood supporters took to the streets, clashing with opponents in several towns.

But they were dwarfed by anti-government protesters who turned out in the hundreds of thousands across the nation.

"Morsi - Game Over - Out", proclaimed a laser display beamed over Tahrir Square, where people danced with joy, recalling the euphoria and the slogans that greeted the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak. The light show counted the hours to 5 p.m.

Despite his fighting talk, time appears to have all but run out for Morsi. Ministers have resigned and aides abandoned him.

Military sources told Reuters that, assuming the politicians fail to end a year of deadlock before the deadline, the generals have their own draft program ready - although it could be fine-tuned in consultation with willing political parties.

Under the road map, the military would install an interim council, composed mainly of civilians from different political groups and experienced technocrats, to run the country until an amended constitution was drafted within months.

That would be followed by a new presidential election, but parliamentary polls would be delayed until strict conditions for selecting candidates were in force, the sources said.

They would not say how the military intended to deal with Morsi if he refused to go quietly. Some of his Islamist supporters have vowed to defend what they see as the legitimate, democratic order, even if it means dying as martyrs. Some have a history of armed struggle against the state.

TROOPS

Troops intervened to break up factional clashes in the city of Alexandria. They were also out on the streets of Suez and Port Said, at either end of the Suez Canal. The waterway is vital to world trade and to Egypt's struggling economy.

Beyond it, the Sinai peninsula has seen militant groups thrive since Mubarak fell, worrying neighboring Israel.

The Brotherhood's political wing called for mass counter- demonstrations to "defend constitutional legitimacy and express their refusal of any coup", raising fears of violence. But the biggest pro-Mursi rally in a Cairo suburb appeared to attract around 100,000 supporters, Reuters journalists said.

Senior Brotherhood leader Mohamed El-Beltagy told the crowd: "We give our lives in sacrifice for this great legitimacy. ... We swear by almighty God to protect the will of these people and to not let it go, even if in doing this we sacrifice our souls."

But the Brotherhood long avoided direct confrontation with the security forces despite its oppression under Mubarak.

For many Egyptians, fixing the economy is key. Unrest since Mubarak fell has decimated tourism and investment and state finances are in poor shape, drained by extensive subsidies for food and fuel and struggling to provide regular supplies.

The Cairo bourse, reopening after a holiday, shot up nearly 5 percent after the army's move.

This week has made Sisi a household name in Egypt, but he remains a man of some mystique. Steve Gerras, a retired colonel in the US Army who was Sisi's faculty adviser at the Army War College, described him to Reuters as a serious student.

Calling him "pious, kind, thoughtful", the behavioral science professor said: "He was a serious guy. He is not a guy who would go to a stand-up comedy show. But at the same time ... his eyes were always very warm. His tone was very warm.

"He was passionate about the future of Egypt."

We Ignore Islamism at Our Own Peril

For any avid foreign affairs reader, the distinction between Islam and Islamism is critical to properly understanding the drama of the Middle East. Moreover a full appreciation of what it is that defines these concepts will facilitate a much broader understanding of the threat facing Western and Arab powers alike. As we watch the violence unfolding in Syria, and the protests rising in Egypt, read the following article and carefully assess the distinction. - R.O.

Headlines to watch:
- Egyptian President's Defiant, Confrontational Speech
- Syria loads chemical weapons into bombs; military awaits Assad's order
- Islamic Fighters in Northern Syria Not United
- Assad faces life or death choice
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Islamology 101: What's the difference between Islam and Islamism?
By: Clifford D. May - Dec. 6, 2012 - National Review Online

White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan

Google “Islamist” and you’ll get more than 24 million hits. Google “jihadist” and you’ll get millions more. Yet I bet the average American could not tell you what it is that Islamists and jihadists believe. And those at the highest levels of the U.S. government refuse to do so.

Why? John Brennan, the top counterterrorism adviser in the White House, argues that it is “counterproductive” to describe America’s “enemy as ‘jihadists’ or ‘Islamists’ because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community, and there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children.” To describe terrorists using “religious terms,” he adds, would “play into the false perception” that the “murderers” waging unconventional war against the West are doing so in the name of a “holy cause.”

I get it. I understand why it would be useful to convince as many of the world’s more than a billion Muslims as possible that Americans are only attempting to defend themselves against “violent extremists.” By now, however, it should be obvious that this spin — one can hardly call it analysis — has spun out. The unpleasant fact is that there is an ideology called Islamism and, as Yale professor Charles Hill recently noted, it “has been on the rise for generations.”

So we need to understand it. We need to understand how Islamism has unfolded from Islam, and how it differs from traditional Islam as practiced in places as far-flung and diverse as Kuala Lumpur, Erbil, and Timbuktu. This is what Bassam Tibi attempts in his most recent book, published this year, Islamism and Islam. It has received nowhere near the attention it deserves.

A Koret Foundation Senior Fellow at Stanford University, Tibi describes himself as an “Arab-Muslim pro-democracy theorist and practitioner.” Raised in Damascus, he has “studied Islam and its civilization for four decades, working in the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia, and Africa.” His research has led him to this simple and stark conclusion: “Islamism is a totalitarian ideology.” And just as there cannot be “democratic totalitarianism,” so there cannot be “democratic Islamism.”

Brennan and other American and European officials are wrong, Tibi says, to fear that “fighting Islamism is tantamount to declaring all of Islam a violent enemy.” As for the Obama administration’s insistence that “the enemy is specifically, and only, al-Qaeda,” that, Tibi writes, “is far too reductive.”

Tibi also faults Noah Feldman, the young scholar who advised the Bush administration, and who insisted, despite abundant evidence to the contrary, that sharia, Islamic law, can be viewed as “Islamic constitutionalism.” Feldman failed to grasp the significance of the “Islamist claim to supremacy (siyadat al-Islam),” the conviction that Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists are inferior and that their inferiority should be reflected under the law and by government institutions.

Tibi makes this important distinction: All jihadists are Islamists, but not all Islamists are jihadists. In other words, not all Islamists are committed to violence, including terrorism, as the preferred means to achieve their goals. He asks: “Can we trust Islamists who forgo violence to participate in good faith within a pluralistic, democratic system?” He answers: “I believe we cannot.”

Chief among Islamist goals, Tibi writes, is al-hall al Islami, “the Islamic solution, a kind of magic answer for all of the problems — global and local, socio-economic or value-related — in the crisis-ridden world of Islam.” Islamists ignore the fact that such governance has been implemented, for example, in Iran for over more than 30 years, in Afghanistan under the Taliban, in Gaza under Hamas, and in Sudan. It has never delivered development, freedom, human rights, or democracy. As for Turkey, Tibi sees it as “not yet an Islamist state” but heading in that direction.

Tibi makes some arguments with which I’d quarrel. For example, he views Saudi religious/political doctrines as a “variety of Salafism (orthodox, traditional Islam) not Islamism.” I would counter that Salafism is a variant of Islamism, albeit one based not on the writings of Hassan al-Banna, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928, but on nostalgia for the glory days of the seventh century.

Nevertheless, the debate Tibi is attempting to initiate is necessary — and long overdue. During the Cold War there was a field of study known as Sovietology. It was taught in our most elite universities with strong U.S. government support.

Why isn’t Islamology — not Islamic theology, or “Muslim-Christian understanding,” or “Islamic thought” — a discipline today? For one, Tibi observes, because to “protect themselves against criticism, Islamists have invented the formula of ‘Islamophobia’ to defame their critics.” (How did Stalin not come up with Sovietophobia or Russophobia?) And of course if such slander fails to intimidate, there are other ways to shut people up: Tibi has “survived attempts on my life by jihadists.”

A second reason for the absence of Islamology: The U.S. government cannot back the study of an ideology it stubbornly insists does not exist. Finally, those who do fund anything to do with Islam on campus — for example, the Gulf petro-princes who have given tens of millions of dollars to Georgetown and Harvard — have a different agenda, one that does not include free and serious inquiry. We ignore what they are doing — and what Tibi is telling us — at great peril.

— Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on national security.

Gaza Missiles a Bigger Threat Than Syria

Gaza Missiles a Bigger Threat Than Syria
By: Jonathan S. Tobin

Over the weekend, provocations on two of Israel’s borders presented the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with new challenges. In the Golan Heights, what was described in reports as “erratic mortar fire” from Syrian army positions brought a sharp, though limited, response from the Israel Defense Forces. In the south, Hamas launched a rocket offensive aimed at Israeli civilian targets. But while the Syrian incident made headlines in the international press since it threatened to drag Israel into the Syrian civil war, it was the situation in Gaza that was the more troubling.

As troubling as the possibility that Israel could be dragged into the ongoing chaos of Syria is, the country’s Gaza dilemma is far more worrisome. Rockets continued to fall on Israel Monday as the Hamas rulers of Gaza continued their own attempt to provoke Israel into an offensive. While both Israel and neighboring Egypt have little to gain from either a repeat of the 2008 Operation Cast Lead, in which Israel knocked out terrorist positions inside Gaza, or a more far-reaching offensive, in which the Islamist terrorist group would actually be deposed, the possibility that at some point Netanyahu will have to do something to stop the rain of fire on his country is very real.

Israelis don’t know for sure whether, as some observers seem to think, the fire from Syria was an attempt by the faltering Assad regime to portray its struggle as one against Israel rather than its own people. Given that such a ploy is a tried and true standby for Arab dictators, it seems logical to think that a desperate Bashar Assad thinks involving Israel in the fighting will bolster support for his embattled government. Yet it is just as likely that the fire into the Golan was unintentional spillover from that war. Certainly it was nothing comparable to the deliberate attacks from the regime on the Turkish border, which is actually a transit and supply route for the rebels who have the support of Ankara.

While Israel has no love for Assad and would be happy to see Iran’s ally fall, it must also ponder whether his replacement by a weak rebel regime would lead to more conflict in the future. Israel is likely to do just about anything to stay out of that mess, and it will take more than a few stray mortar shells to drag it into that war.

But Netanyahu’s choices with regards to Gaza are not so easy. Though Israel’s main strategic focus in the last year has understandably been on the Iranian nuclear threat, Hamas’ ability to make the lives of Israelis living in the south a living hell is a reminder that the enemies on the Jewish state’s border can’t be ignored. Since Saturday, more than 160 rockets have fallen on the region bordering Gaza. Their motives for this offensive are complex.

The impetus for the escalation may stem in part from a desire to remind the world that the Palestinian Authority is merely one of two groups competing for control of a future Palestinian state. The surge in violence doesn’t help PA leader Mahmoud Abbas’s efforts to get the United Nations to unilaterally recognize Palestinian independence without first making peace with Israel, and that suits Hamas’s purposes.

The Hamas fire may also have a tactical purpose. Last Thursday, the Israel Defense Forces discovered a tunnel along the border with Gaza, the intent of which was obviously to facilitate a cross-border terror raid along the lines of the one that resulted in Gilad Shalit’s kidnapping as well as the murder of two other soldiers. Israel has sought to establish a 300-meter no-go zone on the Gaza side of the border in order to prevent such attacks, but Hamas uses rocket fire to defend its freedom of action.

Whether thinking tactically or strategically, Hamas continues to hold approximately one million Israelis living in the south hostage. Anti-missile defense systems like Iron Dome help limit the damage, but they can’t stop all or even most of the rockets, as the last two days showed. Hamas seems to be assuming that an Israeli counter-offensive into Gaza to silence the fire would be too bloody and too unpopular abroad to be worth it for Netanyahu. Another option would be to return to targeted killings of Hamas leaders, but that is likely to lead to more rockets fired at Israeli civilians rather than to stop the attacks.

The bottom line is that Israel has no good choices open to it with regard to Gaza. But with elections looming in January, Netanyahu can’t afford to let the people of the south sit in shelters indefinitely. If their Muslim Brotherhood friends in Egypt — who also worry about the spillover from a new war — can’t persuade Hamas to stand down soon, the prime minister may have to consider raising the ante with the Islamist terrorist movement. While the world is more interested in the violence in Syria, Gaza remains the more difficult dilemma facing the Israelis.

Muslim Brotherhood Chief Calls for "Holy Jihad" Against Israel

Phewf! For a second there I thought the Muslim Brotherhood had the world fooled into believing they might actually be moderate. What a farce. Note the Brotherhood Chief's use of the terms "purify" and "cleanse" in reference to Palestine's liberation. We've heard this language before; things didn't end very well last time. - R.O.

Muslim Brotherhood Chief Calls for "Holy Jihad" Against Israel

by IPT News

The head of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood called for Muslims to "raise the flag of Jihad in the way of God" to liberate Jerusalem. In a statement issued Thursday in Egypt's Al-Ahram newspaper, Mohammed Badie said negotiations are pointless.

"Let Muslims know and let Believers be certain that the recovery of the holy sites and the safeguarding of goods and blood from the hands of the Jews will not be through the corridors of the United Nations, nor through negotiations," a translation of Badie's statement said. "The Zionists only know the method of force. They will not step back from transgression, unless they are forced to. This will only be by holy Jihad, and enormous sacrifices and all forms of resistance. One day they will be certain that we will choose this Way, and raise the flag of Jihad in the Way of God. We will go forth to the field of Jihad. This will curb their hands and prevent their tyranny."

Egypt's new President Mohamed Morsi, "grew up in the Muslim Brotherhood" and was the group's designated candidate for leadership. He has not disavowed similar threatening statements from Badie, his Brotherhood colleague. In a July sermon, after Morsi's election, Badie said Muslims have a duty "to purify it from the hands of usurpers and cleanse Palestine from the clutches of the Occupation - that is an individual duty on all Muslims. They must wage Jihad with their money and lives and free it, and free its prisoners, male and female … and enable all of the displaced to return to their homeland, their homes, and their possessions."

IPT News

Source: http://www.investigativeproject.org/3766/mb-chief-calls-for-holy-jihad-against-israel

Syria's slaughter is the real insult to Islam

A worthy read. McParland states that since it is Muslims killing Muslims in Syria, while the Arab world sits back and does nothing, this is the real insult to Islam - not some obscure video produced in the United States. - R.O.

Kelly McParland: Syria’s slaughter is the real insult to Islam

Kelly McParland, National Post
Friday, Sept. 28, 2012

The UN General Assembly is a talking shop, where calling for action takes the place of actual action, but sometimes the talk becomes so opaque that even sorting out what the words mean becomes a challenge.

Such is the case this week in New York, where the world’s leaders met for their annual opportunity to lecture one another. Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad wasn’t there, because he’s still at home directing the slaughter of his countrymen. But his spirit was on hand, as a British organization announced that 305 people has been killed in a single day if fighting, the bloodiest day so far, and the UN’s own High Commissioner for Refugees warned that 700,000 refugees may have fled the country by year-end.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the daily death count included only victims whose names had been documented. “If we count the unidentified bodies, the figure will be much higher,” said Rami Abdel Rahman, according to Reuters. The group said 199 of the dead were civilians.

By some counts, the monthly carnage in Syria has now surpassed the highest levels reached during the Iraq war. There is no similar international effort in the works to oust Assad, probably because the U.S. organized the last one, and isn’t about to blunder into that hornets nest again. President Barack Obama ran on the promise he’d get U.S. troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, not into new foreign adventures. And the U.S., for all the talk of its global influence having diminished, is still the only power that organizes these things.

That leaves the diplomats to demand action, without explaining what that might mean. Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, told the assembled worthies the Syrian revolt is “a regional calamity with global ramifications”.

“This is a serious and growing threat to international peace and security which requires security council action,” Ban said. “The international community should not look the other way as violence spirals out of control.”

He also called for those responsibility for atrocities in Syria to be held accountable, noting “there is no statute of limitations for such extreme violence”, and placing most of the blame on the Assad regime.

“Brutal human rights abuses continue to be committed, mainly by the government, but also by opposition groups. Such crimes must not go unpunished,” he said. “It is the duty of our generation to put an end to impunity for international crimes, in Syria and elsewhere. It is our duty to give tangible meaning to the responsibility to protect.”

In the world of diplomacy, these are unusually blunt words. But what exactly does Ban want? He didn’t say, exactly. He urged “the international community – especially the members of the Security Council and countries in the region – to solidly and concretely support the efforts” of a UN special envoy seeking to end the violence. “We must stop the violence and flow of arms to both sides and set in motion a Syrian-led transition as soon as possible.”

Well and good, but those efforts are going nowhere. Mr Ban’s predecessor, Kofi Annan, walked away from the job of special envoy, declaring it a hopeless task. His successor, Lakhdar Brahimi, lacks his stature and hasn’t made any headway. He says he’s working on a new plan, but won’t say when it might be ready.

Egypt’s new president, Mohamed Morsi, said the conflict is “the tragedy of the age,” and must be brought to an end. How? Again, he didn’t say, except that the West should keep its nose out of things and leave it to regional powers like Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

“I am against foreign intervention by force in what happens in Syria,” Morsi said. “I do not condone this and I think that it is a big mistake if it happens,” he added through an interpreter. “Egypt does not agree to this.”

Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, has blocked earlier UN peace efforts and also thinks the West should [external] mind its own business.

“We are not imposing – especially by force -what we believe in, but we want to stimulate the internal development,” said Putin. “We have warned that we must act with caution, without imposing by force in order not to cause chaos. And what do we see today? We see a chaotic condition.”

So, everyone wants action, but not by Western powers that have the military muscle to force a climax. The regional powers that demand jurisdiction have done nothing to stem the spiraling body count. They want it ended, but are either incapable or unwilling to end it themselves and don’t want anyone else stepping in to try. Despite the hollering of domestic critics, the U.S. president seems disinclined to defy them, and has the body of the murdered Ambassador to Libya as a evidence of how good intentions often go off the rails once military action is put into play.

The truth seems to be that, despite what Mr. Ban and Mr. Morsi have to say, intervention in Syria doesn’t suit anyone’s purpose just now. No enough to risk their own skins, or those of their countrymen, anyway. If the Turks and the Egyptians and the Saudis want a solution, no one is going to block them from formulating one. For all the outrage over insults to Islam that have played out over an amateurish film on the Prophet, it’s Muslim corpses that are piling up in Syria, Muslim refugees who are fleeing for the border, and Muslim countries that are standing by. If Mr. Ban is increasingly frustrated about it, let him talk to Mr. Morsi.

National Post

Egypt's New Leaders Must Accept Reality

The following article poses heavy duty, legitimate questions that must be answered by President Mohamed Morsi with respect to the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood's still emerging government in Egypt. Morsi's denial of facts is disturbing and destabilizing behaviour in a region that needs a foundation of truth moreso than ever before. This is a trend that watchful observers of the Middle East must pay due regard in the months ahead. - R.O.

Egypt’s new leaders must accept reality
By Dennis Ross, Published: August 19

Dennis Ross, a counselor at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, was a special assistant to President Obama on the Middle East and a senior director on the National Security Council staff from July 2009 to December 2011.

A new reality and an alternative reality are shaping up in Egypt. President Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood appear firmly in control. Morsi seized on the killing of 16 Egyptian soldiers in the Sinai early this month — an embarrassment for the military andparticularly the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces ( SCAF ) — to remove the most senior military leaders from office. He also unilaterally amended the March 2011 constitution declaration and gave his office executive and legislative powers. In short, with no hint of resistance from the military, Morsi has imposed civilian leadership on Egypt.

Many see Morsi’s move to control the SCAF — he sacked Field Marshal Mohammed Hussein Tantawi; military chief of staff Sami Anan; and the heads of Egypt’s army, navy and air force — as finally giving Egypt’s revolution the chance to remove key remnants of the Mubarak regime and fulfill its promise. Others, particularly non-Islamists, are more prone to see recent actions as the Muslim Brotherhood removing any checks on its power.

Given some of the other moves that Morsi and those around him have made, there is reason to be concerned. Morsi has appointed a new minister of information, Salah Abdul Maqsud; he, too, comes from the Muslim Brotherhood and actively supports the move to replace 50 leading editors and journalists. Charges have been filed against the editor of the independent opposition newspaper al-Dustour for insulting the president. It is probably no accident that the state media’s tone has changed markedly in the past week — and is far more favorable toward Morsi.

None of this means that Egypt’s path of change is foreordained. It does mean that the president, who has largely surrounded himself with members of the Muslim Brotherhood or sympathizers, dominates all of Egypt’s institutions of power. He and the Brotherhood will find it hard to escape responsibility for whatever happens in Egypt. The country faces daunting economic challenges; it will need significant outside assistance and private investment. Morsi and the Brotherhood are seeking outside support for their “renaissance plan” to revitalize the economy; after they resisted the conditions for an International Monetary Fund agreement when they were not in power, Morsi and the Brotherhood now appear eager to not only gain the loan but also to borrow more than the $3.2 billion that the IMF was prepared to offer conditionally.

In this respect, Morsi and the Brotherhood seem to recognize reality. But in another important regard, they appear determined to deny it. Consider that Morsi denied sending Israeli President Shimon Peres a response to a note that Peres had written him after news of the correspondence provoked a backlash in the Brotherhood over Morsi having any such contact with Israel. What makes this particularly noteworthy is that Peres’s office did not release Morsi’s letter publicly until after checking with the Egyptians to make sure it was okay to do so. The outrage among the Brotherhood led Egypt’s president to publicly deny a fact. Similarly, consider that the Brotherhood immediately blamed the Mossad, Israel’s intelligence organization, for the Sinai attack that killed the Egyptian soldiers — something that the Brotherhood knew to be untrue.

What conclusions should be drawn about an organization that cannot admit the truth? That insists on living in its own reality? If nothing else, it’s clear that the group the Brotherhood is wedded to its ideology and cannot admit anything that might call its basic philosophy into question. But the United States and others should not accommodate the Brotherhood’s alternative reality. This is not to say that we have to agree on everything. Policy differences are understandable — but it is not acceptable to deny reality and foster a narrative and policies based on untruths and fictions.

Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood should know this. Egypt’s president and people should also know that we are prepared to mobilize the international community, and global financial institutions, to help Egypt — but that we will only do so if Egypt’s government is prepared to play by a set of rules grounded in reality and key principles. They must respect the rights of minorities and women; they must accept political pluralism and the space for open political competition; and they must respect their international obligations, including the terms of Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel.

The record to date is not good: News reports suggest that more than 100,000 Coptic Christians have left Egypt ; there have been new efforts to intimidate the media, and Morsi has moved armored forces into the Sinai without first notifying the Israelis — a requirement of the peace treaty. The administration’s position needs to be clear: If this behavior continues, U.S. support, which will be essential for gaining international economic aid and fostering investment, will not be forthcoming. Softening or fuzzing our response at this point might be good for the Muslim Brotherhood, but it won’t be good for Egypt.

Egypt's New President Morsi: ”Our Capital Shall Be Jerusalem, Allah Willling”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zka-gk6vXo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Watch Egypt's newly elected Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi in his speech this past May, chanting that "Allah willing", "millions of martyrs will march on Jerusalem" as he declares that Egyptians are "all Hamas". Watch as eager crowds jump and scream and cheer this radical Islamist on, surely buoyed by delusions of heaven-bound suicide bombing madness.
The Islamist Morsi has since indicated that he will "revisit" Egypt's long-standing peace treaty with Israel. This was after he was elected. After!
Clearly, then, what the economically-broken, revolution-strained nation of Egypt needs is a devastating war with Israel, at a time when Syria is collapsing and negotiations with Iran are at an impasse. Not.
Morsi's rhetoric is despicable but unsurprising. If he starts a war with Israel, he can guarantee three things will come to an abrupt end: his Presidency; the Egyptian revolution; and any chance of a peaceful, democratic Egyptian state.
Is Morsi's hate-filled bile what the Arab Spring has wrought? Can we expect a similar Islamist whacko to take power in Syria should Assad fall?

If history has taught us anything, it's that Israel will not tolerate even a hint of warmongering from Morsi. This is an incredibly dangerous way to start your term, Mr. Morsi. Watch it.