US, EU Pose as Honest Brokers While Backing Egypt’s Military Assault on Democracy
Finian CUNNINGHAM – 20 July, 2013 – Strategic Culture Foundation

Egypt’s political turmoil took on surreal dimensions this week with the swearing in of the military-backed interim civilian government. The procedure was shown «live» on national television, as if to lend an image of «transparency» and «accountability».

The central figure in the cabinet photo-op, dressed in khaki military uniform, was the head of the Egyptian armed forces, General Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi. He was the man who led the military arrest of former president Mohamed Morsi on 3 July, and in turn, ushered in his replacement, Adli Mansour, the country’s top judge, who had served under the ancien regime of Hosni Mubarak.

Adding gravitas to the occasion were the visits to Cairo this week by senior US diplomat, deputy secretary of state, William Burns, and the head of the European Union’s foreign office, Lady Catherine Ashton. In separate meetings, Burns and Ashton met with interim president Mansour and the new caretaker prime minister, Hazem Al-Beblawi.

The rhetoric from Burns and Ashton could have been written by the same speechwriter, with both diplomats appearing to stress civic virtues of «inclusivity» and «non-violence».

The US State Department said that Burns would emphasize «an end to all violence and a transition leading to an inclusive, democratically elected civilian government».

For her part, Lady Ashton said she would «reinforce our message that there must be a fully inclusive political process, taking in all groups which support democracy».

However, stripping away the trite rhetoric, the core message in practice is that Washington and the EU are endorsing and legitimizing an unprecedented military intervention in Egypt’s supposedly new democratic era. This era was supposed to have arrived following the popular ouster of the Western-backed Mubarak dictatorship in February 2011, during the heyday of the Arab Spring.

Egypt’s transition to civilian government culminating in the June 2012 presidential election of Mohamed Morsi was far from perfect. Morsi’s tight association with the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood left him open to accusations of monopolizing power and not including other parties. During his year in office, street protests mounted into million-man marches that reached a crescendo on 30 June, the anniversary of his inauguration.

Nevertheless, the inescapable fact is that Morsi was legally elected. His deposition under orders from the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) can therefore be defined as a coup – albeit carried out initially with a semblance of popular support. Adding to the anomaly is that the Egyptian constitution has been suspended by the military and a cabinet of 35 unelected ministers, none of whom have a popular mandate. Like ignoring the proverbial elephant in the room, both Washington and Brussels have pointedly refrained from uttering the word «coup». To do so would put them in the invidious public position of openly supporting military coup, which is of course what they are doing in effect, but nevertheless trying to conceal with vacuous verbiage.

The man who led the military ouster of Morsi, defense minister Al-Sisi said at the time of Morsi’s arrest that the SCAF would take a backseat from the affairs of the interim government. The impression given was that the military was acting in a chivalrous manner to facilitate a new phase in civilian politics. But when the new cabinet was unveiled this week the salient position of Al Sisi in the government was underscored by his taking a second portfolio of deputy prime minister – in addition to defense. That is a clear sign that the Egyptian military establishment intends holding sway over the decision-making and policies of a nominally «civilian» administration. …more