The unmentionable secret: the organization of Barack Obama behind the uprising in Egypt

Obama is fighting the same battle of Bush. Same battle with other systems: the objective is always to export the democracy
Marcello Foa

How do we win the wars in the age of globalization? Moving the armies? At times yes, but the result is not always satisfying and often the price is greater than the advantages. It is something George Bush knows, who lashed out against Saddam in Iraq in 2001. We are in 2011 those wars last still today and the final victory is not guaranteed. If America have used other systems, probably would have saved thousands of people, mant billions of dollars and obtained a more concrete result.
It is the lesson Barack Obama learned, who is actually fighting the same war of Bush, in the sense that he shares the strategical aim. What did George Bush want? To export the democracy and, above all, to replace decadent regimes, ruled by unpopular leaders, with more respectable regimes and more reliable leaders in Middle East. Think it over: it is exactly what Obama intends in Egypt and Tunisia. The current tenant of the White House opt for soft power and for the methods used in Ukraine, Georgia and Serbia in the 2000s. Do you remember the protest of Belgrade students that made Milosevic taking flight? And the exciting Orange Revolution of Kiev? And the Rose one against Shevardnadze? At that time the media got excited exalting the popular revenge; today we know - using documents as proof - that those revolts were not unsolicited at all, but prepared with care and wisely incited by private companies of public relations, that acted on behalf of the State Department. Washington had understood that, acting with the due caution, the crowd could be used to their advantage.

The same thing is happening in Tunisia and in Egypt in this weeks. Do not limit yourselves to the statements, some ones are forced are part of the game of roles. Wonder instead... Who has decided the revolt before in Tunisi and now in Cairo? The army, that refused to shoot on the crowd, legitimizing  the claims of demonstrators. And who are related the Egyptian and Tunisian top brass to? Firmly to the U.S.A. Who are in charge in place of Ben Ali? The generals, democratic, in the purposes, but still generals. Tunisia, little country, moderate and devoid of natural strategical resources, was the test-bed. The test has been very good and so Washington decided to attempt with the bigger, but more dangerous, Egypt. Ours is not an insinuation, but a decuction, that is founded. In recent days the Daily Telegraph discovered, buried in the Wikileaks web site, one of the few interesting documents gone in the hands of the ambiguous Assange. Documents that reveals how in 2008 fall the State Department invited in Washington several bloggers and opposers of Mubarak, disposed to create a democratic alliance, which its objective was to cause a change of regime. When? In 2011, before presidential elections. A scoop minimized and contextualized by the U.S.A. government. 

But wonder: who has, politically, given the killing blow to Ben Ali? And who has gotten Mubarak cornered? As always Barack Obama, who can count on the army and the vice-president, another general, Suleiman; the real strong man. The analogy with Tunis is striking.

It all adds up. Today. Tomorrow; because the Islam Fundamentalist's influence is intangible in Tunisia, whereas the Brotherhood are very popular in Egypt and they have demonstrated that they can move the crowds in former times, using weapons in a pinch. This makes the ending more doubtful, but it does not change the overall analysis.

There is an obvious strategical continuity between Bush and Obama. And it is also executory. The meetings at the State Department took place in fall 2008, when Obama was still in political campaign. Therefore the democratic Obama has used an option that has been processed by his predecessor, the hawk George. But do not remind him of that, he could get angry.

Translated from: