Saturday, February 5, 2011

George Soros Weighs In on Egyptian Revolution

Some sort of an end plan must be getting into place when George Soros starts to squawk.

Here's part of George Soros' amusing Op-Ed in Washington Post on 2/3/2011 [my comments in brackets]:

Why Obama has to get Egypt right

[as if he carries any weight (pun intended)...]

Revolutions usually start with enthusiasm and end in tears. In the case of the Middle East, the tears could be avoided if President Obama stands firmly by the values that got him elected. Although American power and influence in the world have declined, our allies and their armies look to us for direction. These armies are strong enough to maintain law and order as long as they stay out of politics; thus the revolutions can remain peaceful. That is what the United States should insist on while encouraging corrupt and repressive rulers who are no longer tolerated by their people to step aside and allow new leaders to be elected in free and fair elections.

[After that, and a favorable assessment for "democratic" Tunisia, he has to bring up the fear of radical Islam..]

Egypt is more complex and, ultimately, more influential, which is why it is so important to get it right. The protesters are very diverse, including highly educated and common people, young and old, well-to-do and desperately poor. While the slogans and crowds in Tahrir Square are not advancing a theocratic agenda at all, the best-organized political opposition that managed to survive in that country's repressive environment is the Muslim Brotherhood. In free elections, the Brotherhood is bound to emerge as a major political force, though it is far from assured of a majority.

[But he, as a Jew, can also bring up the issue of Israel, without being accused of anti-Semitic..]

The main stumbling block is Israel. In reality, Israel has as much to gain from the spread of democracy in the Middle East as the United States has. But Israel is unlikely to recognize its own best interests because the change is too sudden and carries too many risks. And some U.S. supporters of Israel are more rigid and ideological than Israelis themselves. Fortunately, Obama is not beholden to the religious right, which has carried on a veritable vendetta against him. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is no longer monolithic or the sole representative of the Jewish community. The main danger is that the Obama administration will not adjust its policies quickly enough to the suddenly changed reality.

[Lastly, he says he's wary of revolutions in general - now that's funny, remember all those color-coded so-called "revolutions" supported (and probably orchestrated) by his foundations? - but he has high hopes for Egyptians, and he is readying his numerous foundations to contribute...]

I am, as a general rule, wary of revolutions. But in the case of Egypt, I see a good chance of success. As a committed advocate of democracy and open society, I cannot help but share in the enthusiasm that is sweeping across the Middle East. I hope President Obama will expeditiously support the people of Egypt. My foundations are prepared to contribute what they can. In practice, that means establishing resource centers for supporting the rule of law, constitutional reform, fighting corruption and strengthening democratic institutions in those countries that request help in establishing them, while staying out of those countries where such efforts are not welcome.

Egyptians, I'd suggest you say "Thank you but no thank you."


Post a Comment