Can I call them, or what?

A few days ago I wrote about the crisis in Egypt, emphasizing the links between Muslim extremists in that nation and many other threats to peace in the region. I warned that those Muslim extremists, if they were able to exploit the current crisis to take over Egypt, would seek to abrogate the Camp David peace accords.

Can I call them, or what?

Egypt's banned Muslim Brotherhood movement has unveiled its plans to scrap a peace treaty with Israel if it comes to power, a deputy leader said in an interview with NHK TV.

Rashad al-Bayoumi said the peace treaty with Israel will be abolished after a provisional government is formed by the movement and other Egypt's opposition parties.

"After President Mubarak steps down and a provisional government is formed, there is a need to dissolve the peace treaty with Israel," al-Bayoumi said.

. . .

The Muslim Brotherhood has recently come to light amid mass anti-government protests in Egypt. Some media voiced concerns that the banned Islamic movement could eventually take power in the riot-hit Arab country.

There's more at the link.

I heard some moonbat on National Public Radio bleating on and on about how terrible Mubarak's government was, how oppressive, repressive and generally evil, and so on, and so on, blah, blah, blah . . . Her whole point was that everyone, from the US government to Egypt's armed forces to Israel, had to accept that this was the 'will of the people' and we all had to get rid of Mubarak and let the people of Egypt have freedom, democracy and the local version of apple pie.

There was not one word from her about the danger to the entire region - not to mention the rest of the world - if Muslim fundamentalists, who are already exploiting popular dissatisfaction, are able to use it, as they did in Iran, to take over the State. Clearly, that doesn't matter to her at all. Nor did she have anything to say about how the people of Iran were dragooned into line by the Muslim fundamentalists who took over there . . . to the point where women and children are now stoned to death for violations of Islamic law. So much for freedom, democracy and the local version of apple pie.

I wonder if she'll feel the same if the fundamentalists succeed in taking over Egypt, and (shortly thereafter) the nuclear warheads begin to explode?

Furthermore, George Soros, that bastion of hard-Left-wing socialism, has just come out in support of the 'people' in Egypt. In practice, we all know what that means.

The main danger is that the Obama administration will not adjust its policies quickly enough to the suddenly changed reality.

. . .

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.

More at the link.

In general, if Mr. Soros is in favor of anything, you may be absolutely sure that it's inimical to the interests, freedoms and constitution of the United States. If the lady on NPR was a simple moonbat, Mr. Soros is a complex - and very dangerous - one.

Finally, Stratfor has produced many very insightful commentaries on the Egyptian crisis. Full coverage (for subscribers) is available at their Web site. This intelligence guidance for their analysts was distributed by e-mail.

Let’s use the Iranian rising of 1979 as a model. It had many elements involved, from Communists, to liberals to moderate Muslims, and of course the radicals. All of them were united in hating the Shah, but not in anything else.

The Western press did not understand the mixture and had its closest ties with the liberals, for the simple reason that they were the most Western and spoke English. For a very long time they thought these liberals were in control of the revolution.

For its part, the intelligence community did not have good sources among the revolutionaries but relied on SAVAK, the Shah’s security service, for intelligence. SAVAK neither understood what was happening, nor was it prepared to tell the CIA. The CIA suspected the major agent was the small Communist Party, because that was the great fear at that time — namely, that the Soviets were engineering a plot to seize Iran and control the Persian Gulf.

Meanwhile, Western human rights groups painted the Shah as a monster and saw this as a popular democratic rising. Western human rights and democracy groups, funded by the U.S. government and others, were standing by to teach people like Bani Sadr to create a representative democracy.

Bani Sadr was the first post-Shah president. He was a moderate Islamist and democrat; he also had no power whatsoever. The people who were controlling the revolution were those around Ayatollah Khomeini, who were used by the liberals as a screen to keep the United States quiet until the final moment came and they seized control.

It is important to understand that the demonstrations were seen as spontaneous, but were actually being carefully orchestrated. It is also important to understand that the real power behind the movement remained opaque to the media and the CIA, because they didn’t speak English and the crowds they organized didn’t speak English, and none of the reporters spoke Farsi (nor did a lot of the intelligence agency people). So when the demonstrations surged, the interviews were with the liberals who were already their sources, and who made themselves appear far more powerful than they were — and who were encouraged to do so by Khomeini’s people.

It was only at the end that Khomeini ran up the Jolly Roger to the West.

Nothing is identical to the past, but Iran taught me never to trust a revolutionary who spoke English; they will tend to be pro-Western. When the masses poured into the streets — and that hasn’t happened in Egypt yet — they were Khomeini supporters who spoke not a word of English. The media kept interviewing their English-speaking sources and the CIA kept up daily liaison meetings with SAVAK — until the day they all grabbed a plane and met up with their money in Europe and the United States. The liberals, those who weren’t executed, also wound up in the United States, teaching at Harvard or driving cabs.

Let’s be very careful on the taxonomy of this rising. The Western human rights groups will do what they can to emphasize its importance, and to build up their contacts with what they will claim are the real leaders of the revolution. The only language these groups share with the identified leaders is English, and the funding for these groups depends on producing these people. And these people really want to turn Egypt into Wisconsin. The one thing I can guarantee is that is not what is going on.

What we have to find out is who is behind this. It could be the military wanting to stage a coup to keep Gamal Mubarak out of power. They would be doing this to preserve the regime, not to overthrow it. They could be using the demonstrations to push their demands and perhaps pressure Hosni Mubarak to leave voluntarily.

The danger is that they would be playing with fire. The demonstrations open the door for the Muslim Brotherhood, which is stronger than others may believe. They might keep the demonstrations going after Hosni leaves, and radicalize the streets to force regime change. It could also be the Muslim Brotherhood organizing quietly. Whoever it is, they are lying low, trying to make themselves look weaker than they are — while letting the liberals undermine the regime, generate anti-Mubarak feeling in the West, and pave the way for whatever it is they are planning.

Our job now is to sort through all the claimants and wannabees of this revolution, and find out who the main powers are. These aren’t spontaneous risings and the ideology of the people in the streets has nothing to do with who will wind up in power. The one thing to be confident of is that liberal reformers are the stalking horse for something else, and that they are being used as always to take the heat and pave the way.

Now, figure out who is really behind the demonstrations and we have a game.

All very good points. Bold print is my emphasis. Stratfor is a very worthwhile private intelligence resource.

Watch Egypt carefully. I spoke earlier of the danger of World War III. Nothing's happened to make me change my mind about that.

Peter