A sober question - who after Mubarak?

[brooklynite]

To those calling for an immediate resignation by President Mubarak, what have you considered about what would happen if he actually stepped down? Presumably, VP Suleiman (who apparently doesn't have any constitutional authority to succeed the President), and the Speaker of the Egyptian Parliament (who does) wouldn't be considered an improvement, but who does that leave? I'm guessing most people would pick ElBaradei, but he doesn't appear to be seen by the protesters as either their leader or their spokesman. In fact, there doesn't appear to be any leadership to the opposition, other than to organize the current demonstrations. The Muslim Brotherhood doesn't represent a majority of Egyptians, and has said they don't propose to stand for election in the future. So who does that leave until elections can be organized?

[Horse with no Name]

1. Considering they were organized and passionate enough to remove a 30 year despot

I'm going to bet that they will figure that out pretty quickly.

[Democrats_win]

2. Does it matter? The elites will always run (ruin) this world.

As we saw in America, after we threw out the bankster-loving Bushinistas, we got the bankster-loving Obamocrats. Completely worthless for really helping the poor people. They always look after the interests of the rich. So don't be afraid of chaos in Egypt. It is better than the "change" we got in America.

[mix]

3. We don't know, but is that a reason not to call for his ouster?

And for the dismantlement of the institutions and laws that have kept Mubarak and his class in power? Should we distrust revolutions because we can't foretell events?

US ME policy and the Mubarak regime in particular have fueled Islamic radicalism and decimated secular liberals...that has been the price of propping up capital accumulating authoritarian regimes...short-term security for the US but long-term instability for Egypt and the ME due the resistance to political reform, poverty and the denial of basic human rights in every Arab/Islamic American client state. That is also why leadership within the opposition is still so ill-defined and unknown...but this could also be an advantage at this stage of removing the tyrant...a simple clear goal upon which Egyptians of most political and religious strips may agree.

American policy in Egypt, where military aid and training comes without conditions, is fundamentally anti-democratic and a source of the current repression and unrest. The protesters know this.

Events in the ME appear to be far out-pacing the administration's ability to deal with them. Maybe such events will force the US to rethink its disastrous current policies that produce violence, repression, and distrust of this country. They in fact make us less safe.

Sulieman is by no means a sound alternative and almost universally detested within Egypt because of his role within the nation's brutal and feared security forces.

[wisteria]

4. Thank you! It appears too many people are just wrapped up in the idea of revolution,

and see removing a President of 30 years as a win,to actually consider, that more important than President Mubarak leaving,is what kind of country and what type of leader do they want. Whey you ask that question here at DU, those caught up in the excitement and possibility of scoring big with the ouster of President Mubarak,they reply with nice sounding things like, that is up to the people of Egypt to decide, or the people will lead themselves. Or it doesn't matter, the Egyptian people will be free. This is what bothers me about these types of movements and protests. They are based on anger and the hear and now, they fail to see that if their is no plan for the future, they could end up going from bad to worse.

[mix]

5. Shouldn't ending 30 years of US sponsored state violence against Egyptian citizens

be an end in itself?

That is a revolution worth fighting for.

[Inuca]

8. Maybe for somebody who

does not have to live too closely with the consequences. Not saying it's the same thing, I know about all the differences, etc., but Iranians better off now than they were under the shah? An imperfect comaprison, I know, but that was a revolution that put an end to "state violence". Moreover, and I hate to sound as a Mubarak defender, because I most definitely am not one, I just do nto see things in black & white, as dictators go, Mubarak was/is definitely not among the worst. And yes, it does make a difference. Labels are too simplistic.

[mix]

10. Not among the worst?

The systematic use of violence and intimidation for 30 years to control citizens and eliminate dissidents, both secular and religious, and widespread poverty due to the regime's corruption and accumulation. That doesn't register as among the worst for you?

I can't think of a single human rights organization that has a fondness for Mubarak and his class.

Brutality has been the regime's MO since its inception.

There will be a power struggle, but the risks of revolution must be taken, as the massive numbers of Egyptians are expressing, so that they may give themselves a better life, socio-economically and politically. The US will attempt to stymie these goals at every step.

[Inuca]

13. No, not among the worst

Saddam? The nasties in Iran? much worse. ANd the list could go on.

Not among the worst does nto make him good, so I do not see why you mention human rights organiztions' lack of fondness.

Your description of Mubarak could for instance apply to most former Eastern block leaders. None was good, but some were definitely much worse than others. That's all I was saying.

[mix]

19. I am only talking about American client states, of which "Saddam" once was.

Mubarak is among the worst in that category.

[Kennah]

6. Good government is no substitute for self-government

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Quite brutally honest it is not up to us

but I think they will appoint Suleiman, who'd better NOT run.

Realize the leaders of the opposition are busy writing a new constitution... and El Baradei is emerging as a possible leader. So is the leader of the Arab League, who happens to be an Egyptian Citizen.

He is going doing... we are beyond the tipping point now.

[social_critic]

9. Amr Moussa, the Egyptian secretary-general of the Arab League

Amr Moussa, the Egyptian secretary-general of the Arab League, said Friday he was 'at the disposal' of his country.

[Jim__]

11. "What's next?" is always a good question.

The Russian people overthrew the tsar, but then the Bolsheviks overthrew the Russian people (the Mensheviks). I don't really understand how this revolt in Egypt started. But it seems like the goal of the people is to overthrow Mubarak; I'm not clear on whether or not they've thought much past that. I hope they have solid plans for how to establish a new government.

[blindpig]

12. A rich guy or a general.

Probably a rich guy. This will be a bourgeois revolution, with the workers doing all the heavy lifting as usual. Ya gotta start somewhere, this is round one. The next time the people will be ready and have a clearer idea who the enemy is.

[BOG PERSON]

17. they already had a bourgeois revolution with Nasserism

that sadly degenerated into what see today, Mubarakism. jesus christ, how many bourgeois revolutions do they need??

[blindpig]

18. Not so sure that 'Nasserism' could be characterized as such.

Not sure that there was much of a significant native bourgeoisie at that time. The Nasser period was more about anti-colonialism and nationalism.

[malaise]

14. What would happen if he dropped dead

He's 82

[WillyT]

15. Have You Seen This ???

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x348418

:hi:

[EFerrari]

16. Well, the oppositions groups do have leadership.

They have all been consulting with El Baradei. In fact, after one of their meetings Sunday, iirc, nine of them were arrested on their way home.

It's a mistake, imo, to believe the opposition is leaderless because our media doesn't name them. Also consider that those in leadership positions right now have little or no security and what that means at this time.