The downfall of Morsi have been planned by months.

[B5C]

With the new report by al Jazeera stating that the US funded the coup. NYT has just reported that Egypt is improving just days after the coup. Evidence is mounting that this coup was planned for a while.


Sudden Improvements in Egypt Suggest a Campaign to Undermine Morsi

CAIRO — The streets seethe with protests and government ministers are on the run or in jail, but since the military ousted President Mohamed Morsi, life has somehow gotten better for many people across Egypt: Gas lines have disappeared, power cuts have stopped and the police have returned to the street.

The apparently miraculous end to the crippling energy shortages, and the re-emergence of the police, seems to show that the legions of personnel left in place after former President Hosni Mubarak was ousted in 2011 played a significant role — intentionally or not — in undermining the overall quality of life under the Islamist administration of Mr. Morsi.

And as the interim government struggles to unite a divided nation, the Muslim Brotherhood and Mr. Morsi’s supporters say the sudden turnaround proves that their opponents conspired to make Mr. Morsi fail. Not only did police officers seem to disappear, but the state agencies responsible for providing electricity and ensuring gas supplies failed so fundamentally that gas lines and rolling blackouts fed widespread anger and frustration.

“This was preparing for the coup,” said Naser el-Farash, who served as the spokesman for the Ministry of Supply and Internal Trade under Mr. Morsi. “Different circles in the state, from the storage facilities to the cars that transport petrol products to the gas stations, all participated in creating the crisis.”

Working behind the scenes, members of the old establishment, some of them close to Mr. Mubarak and the country’s top generals, also helped finance, advise and organize those determined to topple the Islamist leadership, including Naguib Sawiris, a billionaire and an outspoken foe of the Brotherhood; Tahani el-Gebali, a former judge on the Supreme Constitutional Court who is close to the ruling generals; and Shawki al-Sayed, a legal adviser to Ahmed Shafik, Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, who lost the presidential race to Mr. Morsi.

But it is the police returning to the streets that offers the most blatant sign that the institutions once loyal to Mr. Mubarak held back while Mr. Morsi was in power. Throughout his one-year tenure, Mr. Morsi struggled to appease the police, even alienating his own supporters rather than trying to overhaul the Interior Ministry. But as crime increased and traffic clogged roads — undermining not only the quality of life, but the economy — the police refused to deploy fully.

Until now.

White-clad officers have returned to Cairo’s streets, and security forces — widely despised before and after the revolution — intervened with tear gas and shotguns against Islamists during widespread street clashes last week, leading anti-Morsi rioters to laud them as heroes. Posters have gone up around town showing a police officer surrounded by smiling children over the words “Your security is our mission, your safety our goal.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/11/world/middleeast/improvements-in-egypt-suggest-a-campaign-that-undermined-morsi.html?hp&_r=1&

[Jimmie Higgins]

From what I understand, the military and old regime elite were still pretty insulated under Morsi - which is party why people are pissed off at him. But that isn't to say that these factions didn't also wish for his ouster.

Honestly I don't think a "coup" could ever be orchestrated if it involved millions of people taking to the streets. The real power was the mass protest and threat of strikes and a repeat of 2011 that might go further. The military might have used that as an opportunity to do what they already wanted to do (they may have even planned that in advance, thinking some level of protests could be justification), but really I think in the immediate sense they were trying to outflank the popular forces and regain stability.

The US and the Egyptian military eliete are all on the same page even if the US would prefer a civilian face in Egypt (or just thinks it would be more stable). That the NYTimes would argue explanations of these events that downplay the power of mass popular protests isn't that surprising.

[B5C]

From what I understand, the military and old regime elite were still pretty insulated under Morsi - which is party why people are pissed off at him. But that isn't to say that these factions didn't also wish for his ouster.

Honestly I don't think a "coup" could ever be orchestrated if it involved millions of people taking to the streets. The real power was the mass protest and threat of strikes and a repeat of 2011 that might go further. The military might have used that as an opportunity to do what they already wanted to do (they may have even planned that in advance, thinking some level of protests could be justification), but really I think in the immediate sense they were trying to outflank the popular forces and regain stability.

The US and the Egyptian military eliete are all on the same page even if the US would prefer a civilian face in Egypt (or just thinks it would be more stable). That the NYTimes would argue explanations of these events that downplay the power of mass popular protests isn't that surprising.


Did the CIA created mass protesting in Chile and Iran in those coups as well?

[ckaihatsu]

Also see updates and discussions at this thread....


Another coup is coming in Egypt:

http://www.revleft.com/vb/another-coup-coming-t181732/index.html

[Jimmie Higgins]

Did the CIA created mass protesting in Chile and Iran in those coups as well?I doubt even the US would be stupid enough to think that setting a precedent in a couple of years that mass protests can end any President they want. I don't think millions of people can be tricked into protests if there wasn't a deep level of anger. The military may have even hoped to use regular-sized protests as a pretext, but I don't think millions of people out on the street against a government is a kraken that any ruling class wants to release lightly.

[Red Commissar]

From what I understand, the military and old regime elite were still pretty insulated under Morsi - which is party why people are pissed off at him. But that isn't to say that these factions didn't also wish for his ouster.

They were at first but Morsi and the MB kept trying to run their own show. It didn't really take too long after he got elected for significant rifts to develop between the two. Plus abroad much of the elite's ties were being strained, besides the United States Saudi Arabia is pretty invested in Egypt and was none to pleased with Mubarak's departure. A lot of the oil and other petroleum supplies Egypt gets is through trade with Egypt, and much of that was reduced (or at least prices increased), particularly after Morsi's election.

The thing about the "elite" in Egypt is that a lot of them were going to different places. You had the MB obviously trying to pursue a very market friendly approach to Egypt's economy, but the lionshare of this would have been for backers of the MB, which many of the established elite were not a part of. One example of Khariat al-Shaiter, a very rich textile mogul and property owner, who himself was a MB member and was infact originally supposed to run for the president before he got disqualified. Morsi was more of a back up they pulled out as he didn't have a criminal record they could disqualify him for.

I should also note though that al Jazeera has been sympathetic to the Egyptian MB in its coverage, which reflects Qatar's own position in Egypt, one that is opposite of Saudi Arabia's in this case. So there's also the probably (very likely, in fact) that al Jazeera is also trying to cover its own ass.


I doubt even the US would be stupid enough to think that setting a precedent in a couple of years that mass protests can end any President they want. I don't think millions of people can be tricked into protests if there wasn't a deep level of anger. The military may have even hoped to use regular-sized protests as a pretext, but I don't think millions of people out on the street against a government is a kraken that any ruling class wants to release lightly.

I think what he was getting at is creating the conditions for dissent to arise in the first place which can be manipulated later. The US's own trade policies and aid is kind of like a stick and carrot in this sense. The US can't just make spontaneous street protests, but they can create conditions for them to be beneficial. In a case like Egypt, if these allegations are true, disrupting the oil supplies would do the trick. These are already subsidized by the government for the benefit of wheat and other agricultural projects (which in turn also feed into the subsidized bread system), as well as transportation of said products, and various other industrial interests, so it could easily put strains on the government's finances and get people angry, already on top of the MB's incompetence at trying to govern Egypt.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I doubt even the US would be stupid enough to think that setting a precedent in a couple of years that mass protests can end any President they want. I don't think millions of people can be tricked into protests if there wasn't a deep level of anger. The military may have even hoped to use regular-sized protests as a pretext, but I don't think millions of people out on the street against a government is a kraken that any ruling class wants to release lightly.

I agree with red commissar. The most effective strategy for any power trying to gain or maintain a foothold in a country is not to intervene directly, but find pre-existing conflicts and social contradictions and use those instead. Yes there was deep, legitimate anger but that's precisely the best context to intervene in. A power can do so with minimal effort and while managing to minimize their own involvement. They may even function as the straw which breaks the camel's back. Sometimes they are less indirect about exploiting a local rebellion, as in the case of Libya, but perhaps they were still willing to see Morsi go (for whatever reasons the US government may have)

That doesn't mean overthrowing Morsi was a bad decision, just that the US is obviously trying to get the better end of the deal out of the whole situation and will do whatever is in their power to obtain that end.

[blake 3:17]

I doubt even the US would be stupid enough to think that setting a precedent in a couple of years that mass protests can end any President they want. I don't think millions of people can be tricked into protests if there wasn't a deep level of anger. The military may have even hoped to use regular-sized protests as a pretext, but I don't think millions of people out on the street against a government is a kraken that any ruling class wants to release lightly.

Dude! Gimme a break. Over the past 30 odd years, the biggest recipients of US aid have been Egypt, Colombia, and Israel. The fact that the former didn't have elections is barely relevant.

A sharp article by Haroon Siddiqui:


Egyptian coup apologists offer lame rationalizations: Siddiqui
Egypt's Mohammed Morsi was incompetent and made grave mistakes, but the military coup is a far greater crime.



Two sets of unholy alliances are rationalizing the Egyptian military coup — one domestic, the other foreign.
The latter are led by Barack Obama. He has the quiet backing of Canada and the European Union, and the unapologetic support of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. The oil sheikhs have pledged $12 billion — a bigger package than what the International Monetary Fund had been dithering over for months with the now ousted Mohammed Morsi.
Obama, who for 18 months has acted helpless to stop the slaughter in Syria, has not lifted a finger at the Egyptian coup and the army’s slaughter of at least 55 protesters, 51 of them at close range Monday. His pretence has been that he’s not taking sides in an internal civil war. In fact, he is. He has been coordinating with the Gulf autocrats, funding anti-Morsi forces and he is continuing America’s annual $1.3-billion largesse to the Egyptian army.
The aid has been flowing since 1979 to safeguard the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel. But that treaty hasn’t been in danger in years. Even Morsi strongly backed it, indeed brokered a ceasefire in Gaza in November between Israel and Hamas. American dollars have only aided and abetted the Egyptian generals’ power and perks. The tear gas and the ammunition they have shot at the civilians may have been American.

Yet the White House is lobbying Congress to keep the cheques and military supplies coming, after Republican Senator John McCain, a powerful member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, demanded a cut-off “because the Egyptian military has overturned the vote of the people. We cannot repeat the same mistakes that we made in other times of our history by supporting removal of freely elected governments.”
The African Union, long infamous for standing by fellow leaders no matter how evil, has swiftly suspended Egypt, making it only the fourth country after Madagascar, the Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau and Mali to be so sanctioned.
Inside Egypt, the coup has been backed by disenchanted youth, discredited functionaries and crony capitalists of the despotic administration of Hosni Mubarak, the Coptic Church and the arch-conservative Islamists known as Salafists, belonging to the Al Nour party, a rival of Morsi’s moderate Muslim Brotherhood.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows but this takes the cake — secularists and fundamentalists, liberals and autocrats, pious and the corrupt, the Copts and their historic tormentors.
It is the Salafists who’ll likely benefit the most in the long run — just as did Hamas (initially encouraged by Israel), the Taliban (mollycoddled by Pakistan) and India’s Sikh militant separatists in the 1980s (encouraged by Indira Gandhi, whom they ended up assassinating).
Apologists for the Egyptian coup, including many Egyptian Canadians, are offering lame rationalizations:

The situation was chaotic and the economy in ruins — someone had to restore order. That’s the standard excuse for military coups. Besides, the army itself encouraged the undermining of Morsi by Mubarak-era courts, Mubarak-era police and Mubarak-era financiers who backed mass demonstrations. They created the upheavals that killed tourism and stifled the economy.

Morsi only controlled the parliament where his Muslim Brotherhood had nearly half the seats. But the assembly was dismissed by the courts, leaving him only his own elected legitimacy — and that was what was systematically destroyed.

Morsi was partisan and unilateral. He was — but far less so than, say, Stephen Harper and the Republicans in Congress. He appointed no more party loyalists and nincompoops than Harper has to the Senate or other public institutions.
Morsi had only a “narrow mandate,” at 52 per cent in a two-way race. But his was a bigger margin than Obama’s. And in multi-party elections, the Brotherhood proportionately won more seats than either Harper’s or David Cameron’s Conservatives.

Morsi was taking orders from the Muslim Brotherhood. He no doubt was but no more so than members of the Congress sing their key funders’ tunes.
He was advancing sharia or he may have been preparing to do so. In fact, he fought off Salafist demands for constitutional guarantees for Islamic law.

Ironies abound.

Many of those who accused him of being authoritarian were themselves beneficiaries of Mubarak’s authoritarian rule. The same people who skewered him for abrogating too much power through a temporary presidential decree last fall were mute when the courts dismissed the elected assembly. Those who called him undemocratic are applauding the coup. Those who blamed him for rushing the constitution through a parliamentary panel are now confronted with the army’s plan to hand-pick a panel that is to complete the constitutional amendments within the next 15 days.
The army is promising free and fair parliamentary elections in six months, followed by a presidential election. Yet it is keeping Morsi and hundreds of his party members in detention and has issued warrants for dozens more, including the Brotherhood’s top leader It has closed down the Brotherhood headquarters and silenced its media, while anti-Morsi forces have trashed dozens of Brotherhood offices across the country.

The idea is to either disallow the Brotherhood from running in the elections or discredit or destroy it so that it never wins again.

Morsi was incompetent and made grave mistakes. But the coup is a far greater crime. He and the Brotherhood would have self-destructed. By strangling that natural democratic evolution, Egypt is going down a dangerous alley — and with it those who are following its generals.
Haroon Siddiqui’s column appears on Thursday and Sunday. [email protected]

[Jimmie Higgins]

Dude! Gimme a break. Over the past 30 odd years, the biggest recipients of US aid have been Egypt, Colombia, and Israel. The fact that the former didn't have elections is barely relevant.

A sharp article by Haroon Siddiqui:The military eliete brought millions of people out to the streets? You're conflating the end result and the whole event. It's like arguing that Hurricane Katrina happened so that neoliberals could privatize the city. Condi Rice of the Bush admin. said that 9/11 was an "opportunity" they had been waiting for, but I also disagree with the consiracy theorists who said the 9/11 happened SO the US could do what it wanted.


I think what he was getting at is creating the conditions for dissent to arise in the first place which can be manipulated later. The US's own trade policies and aid is kind of like a stick and carrot in this sense. The US can't just make spontaneous street protests, but they can create conditions for them to be beneficial. In a case like Egypt, if these allegations are true, disrupting the oil supplies would do the trick. These are already subsidized by the government for the benefit of wheat and other agricultural projects (which in turn also feed into the subsidized bread system), as well as transportation of said products, and various other industrial interests, so it could easily put strains on the government's finances and get people angry, already on top of the MB's incompetence at trying to govern Egypt. The conditions for the dissent of 18 million people or whatnot, can't be that easily toyed at. The MB's popularity had declined sharply for a long time and they were continuing the same shit that happened under Mubarak and so if anything, conditions weren't "created" and conditions remaining the same or worse since 2011 provoked the massive outpouring of people.

Is the US going to use any development and try and bend it to it's interests? Are the military rulers and the MB ruling class factions jockeying for position? Yes. There's barely a story there - but it's burying the lead to call this event a "US orchestrated military coup" when the amazing thing is the continuation of a contested but powerful popular movement.

If millions of people protested against the government, let's say that half are illegitamate. Now, if the other 9 million or so people, had still gone out to protest against the govenment for lack of bread subsidies, the continuation of Mubarak-era shit, lack of jobs, etc and they say that they are going to continue until Morsi leaves and Morsi says, screw you, but doesn't have the ability to use police and workers are threatening to strike in the following week, what do you think would be the likely move by the military: coup and SCAF part 2.

The military wants to protect itself, it's economic interests, but it also wants stability in order to maintain all that. The US wants to manage any further unrest in North Africa and the middle east, and if something happens, the US also wants to then try and at least work it so that things land in their favor. This means that they are likely to continue things which have resulted in these uprisings in the first place - for at least as long as they can. The military will likely be fine with a liberal-headed neoliberal civilian government, and they will be fine stepping-in and pretending to be the people's defenders if the new civilian face provokes more mass protests. So this means to me that the wild card is the popular movement and if they are going to develop more independent formation(s), bounce between different groups of elites and technocrats passing the hot potato amongst themselves.

[GerrardWinstanley]

Did the CIA created mass protesting in Chile and Iran in those coups as well?
They did not manufacture a 22 million strong (http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/75244/Egypt/Politics-/Egypts-Rebel-campaign-gathered--mn-signatures,-say.aspx) (over 88% of the number of Egyptians eligible to vote compared to a mere 11% who voted for Morsi in the first round of last year's fraudulent elections) grassroots rebel movement demanding Mossadegh or Allende's removal, no.

[Geiseric]

I dont think it would be in the long term interest of the military to set a political, secular, and social precedent by orchestrating mass actions vs. their commander in chief, who is in the middle of saving the elites asses by instituting repressive policies against the now politically conscious working class masses.

For a historical precedent, look at Van Papen in Wiemar Germany, it is a tricky game they are playing and they just want to come out in the same position they were before Mubarak was ousted, with their guy in charge. But the idea that a conspiracy is behind the protests is insane in the membrane.

"The chronic lag of ideas and relations behind new objective conditions, right up to the moment when the latter crash over people in the form of a catastrophe, is what creates in a period of revolution that leaping movement of ideas and passions which seems in the police mind a mere result of the activities of 'demagogues.'" -trotsky

[Os Cangaceiros]

Sometimes I think some people will never be satisfied until every development in the middle east can be boiled down into a Cold War-esque CIA/Zionist plot.

It is obvious though that Morsi's downfall was due to the fact that the MB had some very powerful enemies within Egypt. The MB was never able to overcome this problem. It would be hard to overstate the level of animosity and distrust the Egyptian police in general has for the MB, for example.

[blake 3:17]

The military eliete brought millions of people out to the streets? You're conflating the end result and the whole event.

Of course I'm not saying the military brought millions of people out. People went out for whatever reasons they went out for.

I was initially thrilled by Morsi's ouster and been realizing the situation is a lot more complex. Should any government simply stand down because there are mass protests against it?

I don't think the protests in Egypt were on anywhere on the same level as Katrina or 9/11...

[blake 3:17]

The main opponent to Morsi was a Mubarak loyalist and air force leader.

[Os Cangaceiros]

There was also a left-ish "Nasserist" who placed third in the elections, and was very involved with the original January 2011 protests. Can't remember his name though. Probably isn't important anyway

[blake 3:17]

Hamdeen Sabahi

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

I dont think it would be in the long term interest of the military to set a political, secular, and social precedent by orchestrating mass actions vs. their commander in chief, who is in the middle of saving the elites asses by instituting repressive policies against the now politically conscious working class masses.


Except the conflict between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat is not the only socio-economic conflict which is relevant. Different factions of the bourgeoisie form around different economic interests and/or ideological positions. The Egyptian bourgeoisie seems to have multiple power centers, including both the Military and the more conservative businessmen in the Brotherhood.


For a historical precedent, look at Van Papen in Wiemar Germany, it is a tricky game they are playing and they just want to come out in the same position they were before Mubarak was ousted, with their guy in charge. But the idea that a conspiracy is behind the protests is insane in the membrane.
I agree that it would be nuts to say that the popular anger was instigated by NATO or the military. However, that doesn't mean that actions by countries in NATO or the military didn't work to destabilize Morsi's government even more. I don't think they minded Morsi being in power, but I don't think that they were too happy with the empowerment of a religiously conservative Sunni bourgeoisie in the Middle East (we see the same kind of issue unfolding in Turkey between a conservative, religious bourgeoisie and a more liberal minded bourgeoisie, with the workers and middle classes fighting in between ... except there, the religious conservatives are much more entrenched).


Sometimes I think some people will never be satisfied until every development in the middle east can be boiled down into a Cold War-esque CIA/Zionist plot.

It is obvious though that Morsi's downfall was due to the fact that the MB had some very powerful enemies within Egypt. The MB was never able to overcome this problem. It would be hard to overstate the level of animosity and distrust the Egyptian police in general has for the MB, for example.

This is true but I don't think the existence of a popular movement is mutually exclusive with foreign meddling.


There was also a left-ish "Nasserist" who placed third in the elections, and was very involved with the original January 2011 protests. Can't remember his name though. Probably isn't important anyway

Hamden Sabbahi was his name (I might be spelling that wrong) ... google it, i think his party was the "dignity party". He's much more popular than people like ElBaradei but apparently his daughter got caught up in some kind of Ponzi scheme which may be limiting his political influence until that blows over.

[Crux]

Hamden Sabbahi was his name (I might be spelling that wrong) ... google it, i think his party was the "dignity party". He's much more popular than people like ElBaradei but apparently his daughter got caught up in some kind of Ponzi scheme which may be limiting his political influence until that blows over.
Egypt: One of the biggest mass movements in history prompts military take-ove (http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/6398)r


Baradei, widely seen as detached from the masses, leads with Sabbahi, the National Salvation Front (NSF). The NSF was formed in 2012 by parties opposing the Muslim Brotherhood regime and stated its aim was to take a unified stand against Morsi. Sabbahi, a Nasserite who is now part of the army-driven ‘road map, has been widely discredited for conspiring with state forces against Morsi. Many leading activists, mainly youth, have left the ranks of the NSF following Sabbahi’s actions, which ran counter to his previous pledges to continue the revolution and to protect the historic interests of workers and peasants.