Carl Bernstein: What the White House Isn't Saying (secret plan for succession in Egypt)

[highplainsdem]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-02-05/egypt-revolt-the-white-houses-secret-plan-for-succession/full/

-snip-

First and foremost, The United States—in concert increasingly with other governments—is seeking an immediate transition to democratic pluralism and procedures that, simultaneously, will prevent the Muslim Brotherhood from overwhelming or co-opting the process to become the dominant political force in Egypt’s post-Mubarak future.

To accomplish this, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, while sympathetic to the desire of Egyptian democratic forces that want Mubarak step down immediately, in fact have been working toward a solution that would permit him to stay for a brief period as a powerless, defacto head of state. He would remain as such until new mechanisms, and perhaps a new Egyptian constitution, are in place for a stable transition that would also prevent authoritarian and corrupt Mubarak apparatchiks from controlling the process of succession.

This is particularly true in terms of the speaker of the Egyptian parliament, Fathi Surur, who has been speaker of the People's Assembly since 1990, described by someone familiar with his record as “a corrupt, venal man,” who under the existing constitution would become president of the country if Mubarak should abruptly resign or be removed from office.

Thus, Obama and Clinton, with help from other world leaders, including figures in the Arab world, have been trying to achieve a consensus among prominent Egyptian politicians, academics, bankers, cultural leaders, and representatives of the fledging democracy movement personified by young people in Tahrir Square, that Mubarak should be effectively stripped of his power and convinced to cede his presidential powers while briefly retaining the title of president. Ideally under ths scenario, Mubarak would leave the presidential palace in the next few days, but retain the presidency as a means of keeping it from passing—under the existing constitution—to the Parliamentary speaker, Surur. State Department officials and anti-Mubarak forces in Egypt consider Surur inimical to the interests of both the United States and advocates of democracy in Egypt, as well as other Arab leaders who fear that further chaos there could feed radical Islamic influence in their own countries.

-snip-

[highplainsdem]

1. kicking, after making the subject line clearer

[Pirate Smile]

2. It is important to understand the complications they are dealing with:

Obama administration contemplates legal nightmare in Egypt after Mubarak
Posted By Josh Rogin Friday, February 4, 2011 - 9:40 PM Share

-snip-
Behind the scenes, administration officials are in fact getting into the details of the process. "Officials from both governments are continuing talks about a plan in which Mr. Suleiman, backed by Lt. Gen. Sami Enan, chief of the Egyptian armed forces, and Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the defense minister, would immediately begin a process of constitutional reform," the New York Times reported.
The details of that constitutional reform are crucial because they will determine the transition of power and whether or not the coming presidential elections are free and fair. Also, the process of constitutional reform will be the first test of whether the regime led by President Hosni Mubarak is actually allowing opposition groups to participate in a substantive manner.

The Obama administration, which has placed itself somewhere between the positions of the Egyptian government and the protesters by calling for a transition of government now but not calling for Mubarak's immediate departure, is well aware of these realities, according to experts close to top officials.
"The White House recognizes that there's a legal nightmare looming and that the establishment in Egypt is putting its bet on the fact that its fortunes rise the longer those knots remain tied," said the New America Foundation's Steve Clemons.

He said that the White House would like to see the immediate establishment of a governing council -- made up of a cross section of groups representing various Egyptian political entities -- that would take temporary stewardship of the government and be caretakers as the path forward is determined.
"You either do government and legal reform in one massive fell swoop, which none of the parties will agree to, or you basically say that the current system is so broken, you must give super powers to an anointed group of rivals and co-task them with the responsibility of getting from here to there," Clemons said.

But it will be a Herculean task untangling the Egyptian constitution and legal framework, seeing as so much is weighted toward the regime. For example, Article 5 would need to be amended to allow religiously based political parties to participate. Article 76 must be amended if independent candidates are to be allowed. Law No. 40 for 1977 needs to be changed to ensure that the committee that vets political parties is independent and not filled with government ministers. Law No. 174 for 2005 would have to be amended to allow monitors at election stations.
Voter registration in Egypt is also plagued with problems. The emergency law in place since 1981 significantly constrains political activity that could impact any future elections. Laws and regulations on campaign finance have to be enforced. And the list goes on and on.

The Brookings Institution's Robert Kagan said that basing the next round of elections on exiting Egyptian law is a recipe for disaster. "You wouldn't expect to have elections in Russia after communism based on Soviet laws, would you?" he said in an interview with The Cable.
The Egyptian government can't be left to its own devices to decide what those changes might be, Kagan said.
"This is a transition, there's going to have to be some agreement on the rules of the road. Maybe some of it can be based on Egyptian law," he said. "There's going to have to be agreement from the government, the military and the opposition on how to move forward."

How much of a role the U.S. can play in that process is not yet determined, but in order to support democratic values as well as to try and promote an outcome that protects U.S. interests of regional stability, the Obama administration has to at least try, said Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
"What's most important is for us to have a set of principles for an Egyptian government to support," Satloff said. "The U.S. has a possibility to help Egypt build a new system that is democratic and stable. Those things are not mutually exclusive and the U.S. should help them build it."

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/02/04/obama_administration_contemplates_legal_nightmare_in_egypt_after_mubarak

[IDemo]

4. Sorry, but to borrow a phrase, that constitution sounds like a g*damned piece of paper

"untangling the Egyptian constitution and legal framework, seeing as so much is weighted toward the regime".

I don't believe what the opposition really has in mind is a game of governmental Twister, with the same players merely shifting positions in the name of change. Not to trivialize the issue, but Suleiman ain't change they can believe in.

[Pirate Smile]

8. Most Revolutions literally kill or run out of the Country those in the previous Government.

This is now a Revolution being negotiated.

[defendandprotect]

3. Like Carl Bernstein ... but is this article really telling us anything?

Maybe I read it too fast?

[chimpymustgo]

7. Most telling: the effort to impugn Surur - without any references to Suleiman's past.

That just reeks of AGENDA.

[Junkdrawer]

5. This is a "When in the course of human events" moment....

This isn't a "gradual reform" thing. Mubarak has made the later impossible.

[northernlights]

6. I fail to see how our installing a torturer puppet as interim government

will in any way meet the demands of the Egyptian people. :shrug: