|
________________________________________________________________
FROM SINAI TO CAIRO: MORSY MAKES HIS MOVE
Bruce Maddy-Weitzman Jerusalem Report, September 1, 2012 Momentous developments have taken place in the ongoing struggle between the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government and the military establishment over the control of Egypt’s “deep state.” On August 12, President Mohamed Morsy dispatched Defense Minister and Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces (SCA F) Mohammed Tantawi and a number of other senior military leaders into retirement, and reclaimed the substantial powers which the SCAF had removed from his domain. If Morsy ’s move stands, it will mark a decisive moment in the post-Mubarak era. …Morsy’s dramatic action came amid a major security operation to re-establish the state’s control over the sensitive Sinai peninsula. Already an arena for Islamist terrorism, human and weapons trafficking and assorted other criminal activity during the last years of Mubarak’s rule, matters had significantly worsened in the 18 months since his fall, reaching a peak in August 2011 with a cross-border terrorist attack on Israeli targets that led to a fatal exchange of fire between Israeli and Egyptian forces. But this was “topped” by a brazen operation [this] August 5, when at least 35 masked gunmen attacked an Egyptian border police station. Sixteen border guards were killed and two armored personnel carriers were commandeered to launch a cross-border attack on Israel. IDF forces repelled the incursion, killing eight of the attackers, but for Israel, it further confirmed assessments that the Egyptian state was not in full control of its own territory. For Egypt, the matter was more complex. The state itself had been humiliated, and Israel’s warnings seemed to have been justified. The possibility that some of the attackers, or at least their ample weaponry, had come from Hamas-controlled Gaza was quickly raised by Egyptian critics of the Brotherhood. Morsy himself could not attend the military funerals for the victims, after his prime minister had beaten a hasty retreat from angry demonstrators. Not surprisingly, then, Brotherhood and Hamas officials both attacked Israel, the “sole beneficiary” of the attacks, as being behind them, in order to destabilize the country, damage Egyptian-Palestinian relations, and prove the need for closer Israeli-Egyptian security cooperation. Indeed, such cooperation was evident in the Egyptian military’s swift response to the attack. With Israel’s permission (required under the terms of the 1979 peace treaty), Egyptian air force units were deployed for the first time in Sinai since the October 1973 war, as part of highly publicized ongoing operations against the perpetrators of the attack and their base of support. But the efforts to pin the debacle on the Brotherhood backfired, goading Morsy into action. Identifying a historic opportunity to gain the upper hand in the struggle to dominate Egypt, he grabbed it. A first hint of intent was given on August 8, when he fired his intelligence chief, the governor of north Sinai and several others. Still, no one was prepared for his subsequent move, on August 12. Not only were Tantawi, Army Chief of Staff Sami Anan, and the heads of the air force, navy and military industries all retired or transferred to other posts, the controversial SCAF decree of June 17 – that had severely circumscribed the powers of the president and expanded those of the military – was annulled. Morsy also appointed a senior judge, Mohammed Mekki, as his vice president, presumably to strengthen his control over the judiciary. Caught by surprise, US officials kept a low profile while also expressing confidence in Tantawi’s replacement, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, with whom they had dealt as military intelligence chief. America’s recently redoubled efforts to strengthen Egypt’s security forces in Sinai against radical Islamic elements would remain a priority. Israel could only observe from the side, and hope that they would succeed. But the Muslim Brotherhood’s major leap forward in consolidating its domination of the Egyptian state can hardly bode well for the future of Egyptian-Israeli relations.(Top)
______________________________________________________
SINAI, THE NEW EGYPT, AND THE EGYPT-ISRAEL PEACE TREATY
Alan Baker Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, August 22, 2012 The peace relationship established in 1978-9 between Israel and Egypt constituted a significant and groundbreaking change in the entire mindset of the international community, in general, and in Middle East relationships, in particular. It was a revolutionary change in the entire concept of Middle East political, military, economic, and social relationships that laid the foundation for the ensuing Middle East peace process between Israel and its other neighbors. In Article III of the peace treaty, Egypt and Israel undertake: “to ensure that acts or threats of belligerency, hostility, or violence do not originate from and are not committed from within its territory, or by any forces subject to its control or by any other forces stationed on its territory.” Thus, both states are obligated to prevent the use of their territory for acts of terror against the other. In the context of the present situation in Sinai and the enhanced terror activity by such organizations as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and al-Qaeda, this means that Egypt has the full sovereign responsibility and obligation to act in order to prevent any such terror activity which could pose a threat to Israel…. The present challenge and threat to the integrity of the peace treaty posed by the evolving character of Sinai is a challenge that can and should be handled within the context of the peace treaty. It is perhaps the most serious test of the capability of Egypt to prove to the world that even in an era of extreme political change, its interest is in protecting and maintaining the integrity of the peace relationship with Israel.… For over thirty years, in a Middle East fraught with unceasing change, tension and surprise, there has nevertheless been one “island” of relative stability – the relationship between Egypt and Israel… The peace relationship established in 1978-9 was, in fact, far more than a theoretical termination of belligerency. It was a revolutionary change in the entire concept of Middle East political, military, economic, and social relationships that laid the foundation for the ensuing Middle East peace process between Israel and its other neighbors, principally the Palestinians….[The treaty’s] relative weight and authority holds a place of its own as the anchor for Middle East peace, which cannot be underestimated or minimized, whatever might be the practical or volatile state of the day-to-day relations…. The mutual recognition of the inviolability of the international boundary between them in Article II of the peace treaty includes the obligation to “respect the territorial integrity of the other.” In Article III they further undertake: “to ensure that acts or threats of belligerency, hostility, or violence do not originate from and are not committed from within its territory, or by any forces subject to its control or by any other forces stationed on its territory, against the population, citizens or property of the other Party. Each Party also undertakes to refrain from organizing, instigating, inciting, assisting or participating in acts or threats of belligerency, hostility, subversion or violence against the other Party, anywhere.”… In order to cope with just such eventualities, the treaty enables various mechanisms to handle situations that crop up on an ad-hoc basis within its day-to-day implementation. At the routine level, the treaty provides the framework for contacts between the military authorities of the parties within the “Liaison System” established in Article VII of the Security Annex, intended inter alia: “to provide an effective method to assess progress in the implementation of obligations under the present Annex and to resolve any problem that may arise in the course of implementation, and refer other unresolved matters to the higher military authorities of the two countries respectively for consideration.” Additionally, review or amendment of security arrangements is provided for in Article IV of the Security Annex, according to which: “The security arrangements provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article may at the request of either party be reviewed and amended by mutual agreement of the Parties.”… One may assume that the introduction by Egypt of ground and aerial forces into Sinai in order to cope with lawlessness and terror, following a recent attack on an Egyptian police post and the murder of Egyptian police officers by jihadi terrorists operating in Sinai, was duly coordinated between the military authorities of Egypt and Israel within the above frameworks. However, various news reports16 have suggested that Egypt has moved armored forces into Sinai without first notifying the Israelis. Clearly, any changes in the level of forces or weapons of the Egyptian army in Sinai without Israel’s agreement would constitute a violation of the treaty…. The present challenge and threat to the integrity of the [1979] peace treaty…is perhaps the most serious test of the strength of that treaty and of the capability of Egypt to prove to the world that even in an era of extreme political change, its interest is in protecting and maintaining the integrity of the peace relationship with Israel. [This articles has been slightly abridged in the interest of space. For the full article please see On Topic links below. – Ed.] (Top)
______________________________________________________
THE REGION: EGYPT KICKS SAND IN OBAMA’S FACE Brotherhood’s leading liberal ally defects; West still doesn’t get it. I could write a 300-page book on how the Obama administration’s Middle East policy has damaged Israel. I could write an 800-page book about how the Obama administration’s Middle East policy has damaged US interests. But why bother? This is all you need to know: The US government asked its good buddy Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy to inspect an Iranian ship suspected of carrying arms to Syria while it passed through the Suez Canal. Remember that to do so is arguably in Egypt’s own interest since Cairo is supporting the rebels while Tehran backs the regime. The Egyptian government, despite three decades of massive US aid, licensing to produce advanced American tanks and other equipment, strategic backing and an invitation to Washington to meet Obama – refused. Indeed, Morsy headed for Tehran to attend a “nonaligned” conference. Does this mean Egypt is going to ally with Iran? No, Egypt will fight Iran for influence tooth and nail. The two countries will kill each others’ surrogates. But it means Morsy feels no friendlier toward America than he does toward Iran. And Cairo will not lift a finger to help Washington against Tehran unless, perhaps, America is willing to put a Muslim Brotherhood government in place in Syria, which might well happen… Egypt, the Arab world’s most important country, has been turned from an ally of America – albeit an imperfect one, of course – in maintaining and trying to extend Arab-Israeli peace into a leading advocate of expanding the conflict and even potentially of going to war. Egypt, the Arab world’s most important country, has been turned from an ally of America in fighting international terrorism into an ally of most international terrorist groups (except those that occasionally target Egypt itself). But here’s one for the 600 rabbis who front for Obama: The destruction of the Egyptian natural gas pipeline and deal, as a result of the instability and revolution that the US government helped promote, has done as much economic damage as all the Arab and Islamic sabotage, boycotts and Western sanctions or disinvestment in Israel’s history. Egypt alone is a catastrophe, even without mentioning another dozen examples. How much longer is the obvious fact that Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood regime is anti-democratic, anti- American and anti-Semitic going to be denied? But wait, there’s more. Lots more. After meeting Egypt’s new president, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said, “I was convinced that President Morsy is his own man,” adding that the new president is committed to democratic reforms and to representing all Egyptians. How does Panetta know this? Simple: this is what Morsy told him. Of course, by endorsing Morsy before he actually does anything, the US government puts its seal of approval on the Muslim Brotherhood regime. Shouldn’t it have to prove itself before Obama gives up all that leverage? What’s next, the Nobel Peace Prize? After all, Morsy’s been in office for a few months. Note the phrase “his own man.” What does that mean? Why, that Morsy won’t follow the Brotherhood’s orders. He will even stand up to it – presumably to be more moderate – right? Except there is no reason to believe that this is true. Panetta added: “They agreed that they would cooperate in every way possible to ensure that extremists like al-Qaida are dealt with.” Of course, they are more likely to cooperate against al-Qaida – a group they don’t like. But will they cooperate against Egyptian Salafist terrorists, Hamas and lots of other terrorists? Of course not. Indeed, at the precise moment Panetta was meeting Morsy, the new president was releasing Islamist terrorists from Egyptian prisons. These include terrorists from Islamic Jihad, which is part of the al-Qaida coalition! How do you square that one, secretary Panetta? And finally, Morsy pointed out to Panetta that his own son was born in California, when the future Egyptian president was studying there. His son, Morsy pointed out, could be the president of the United States one day. I’ll leave it to you, dear readers, to ponder that statement. Of course, the Obama administration can claim one success in Egypt: the regime pulled its forces out of eastern Sinai in accord with the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. The problem is that it has been reported in the Egyptian media – a good source, though not confirmed – that the regime made a deal with the al- Qaida terrorists who attacked Israel: if they promised to stop fighting (for how long?) the Egyptian government would release all of their gunmen. Meanwhile, the most important (formerly) pro-Islamist moderate intellectual in the Arabic-speaking world has defected, an event of monumental importance that is being ignored in the West. The Egyptian sociologist Sa’ad Eddin Ibrahim hated the Mubarak regime so much that he joined with the Islamists as allies and insisted that they were really moderate. Now here are some tidbits from an interview he just gave (full interview can be watched on MEMRI TV): Interviewer: “You indicated that the Muslim Brotherhood are hijacking the country, not merely the top political posts. Is the Muslim Brotherhood indeed about to hijack the country?” Ibrahim: “Well, this is how it seems to me, as well as to other observers, some of whom are more knowledgeable than me about the Brotherhood,” a reference to long-time members who he said have helped him understand the Brotherhood’s “desire to hijack everything and to control everything.” Ibrahim was the most articulate advocate of a liberal-Islamist alliance. Now he’s scared – and that should warn all of us to change policies. Fast. (Top)
______________________________________________________
INTELLIGENCE DOCUMENT REVEALS MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD ROLE IN EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, August 16, 2012
The revolution in Egypt was seen by many as impelled by submerged democratic and liberal tendencies in Egyptian society that, inspired by the revolution in Tunisia, erupted against President Hosni Mubarak’s dictatorial regime. Much was attributed to the Egyptian youth, who were described as a driving force of the popular revolution, and great hopes were attached to them as the ones who would lead Egypt into an era of Western democracy. Facebook and Twitter were also credited with huge influence in motivating the masses to struggle for democracy, and indeed the phenomenon came to be known as the Facebook Revolution….
An official Egyptian intelligence document reveals what the regime knew during the first days of the revolution, and it turns out that the Muslim Brotherhood played a central role in planning, inciting, and steering it. The document was posted on a new website that offers documents taken from the offices of Egyptian intelligence that were attacked and looted by mobs during the revolution. The document originated in the Interrogations Department of Egyptian State Security and is dated January 28, 2011 – three days after the beginning of the revolution. The document sheds light on the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy, its translation into practice by senior officials of the organization including Mohamed Morsi, the new president of Egypt, and the security officials’ reaction to the thwarting of Muslim Brotherhood activity. The following is a (free) translation of the document’s relevant passage: “From information received it appears that a group of activists belonging to the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood have recently held a number of meetings under the aegis of the organization. After a check carried out by branches of the international Muslim Brotherhood, the leaders discussed a decision concerning the need to exploit the prevailing mood in the domestic arena [in Egypt] and the impact of the events in Tunis on different groups in [Egyptian] society by means of inciting the masses with their different sectors against the regime [of Mubarak], in an effort to sow anarchy in the country by organizing demonstrations and processions that would demand political, economic, and social reforms. The aim was to pressure the regime and achieve certain goals of the Muslim Brotherhood, particularly recognition of the legitimacy of the Muslim Brotherhood movement whose activity is prohibited [by law], and the granting of permission for it to establish a political party. The leadership of the [Muslim Brotherhood] movement began to implement this program with the onset of mass demonstrations in Tunis [December 18, 2010] by appointing the leader Mohamed Morsi al-Ayat [today the president of Egypt] as head of a committee to be called the “Liaison Committee with the Outside World.” Morsi instructed the committee members who fled the country to open channels of communication with foreign media, institutions, and forces, and persuade their representatives that the events in Tunis can also occur in Egypt, and that the Muslim Brotherhood will be able to control them [the events of the revolution] if it [the revolution] has the necessary support. These leaders [of the Muslim Brotherhood] began this activity of theirs when they exploited the call, raised by Facebook youth on the Internet, to organize peaceful demonstrations so that they could express their demands peacefully. They began to encourage the young activists of the Muslim Brotherhood to take part in these demonstrations and perform acts of mayhem and destruction. They also called to organize simultaneous demonstrations in different areas of the republic, thereby creating a state of anarchy and disorder in the security domain in the country.” The document notes that on the basis of this information, 34 senior Muslim Brotherhood members were arrested, their homes searched, and documents, portable computers, and digital media confiscated. The detainees included seven top-level figures of the Muslim Brotherhood, including Morsi, ten senior members of the second-level leadership, and seventeen directors of branches and task-specific committees. (Top)
|
_____________________________________________________
-
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,August 22, 2012
Alan Baker
Sinai, The New Egypt, And The Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty -
-
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,August 30, 2012
Jonathan D. Halevi
Hamas' Role in the Formation of Sinai Jihad Networks
-
Commentary, September 4, 2012
Max Boot
Aid to Morsi’s Egypt Is the Right Call
-
Ha’aretz, September 3, 2012
Maikel Nabil Sanad
The Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty is Dead
-
AL Monitor, Thursday, Aug 30, 2012
Barbara Slavin
Egypt’s Morsi Upsets Iran
-
MEMRI TV, July 31, 2012
Egyptian Sociologist Saadudin Ibrahim: - The Muslim Brotherhood Is Hijacking the Revolution
-
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,August 30, 2012
