on egypt....it's self-evident that the americans do not support the aspirations of the people who set this revolt into motion.
it appears that the americans support is a slightly nicer form of authoritarian rule, the mubarak system without mubarak because that suits the realpolitik interests---central among which is acquiescence to the obscenity of american policy toward palestine/israel and the big money traffick in weapons systems and training that the republican patronage system the rest of us call the mililtary-industrial system enjoys with egypt.
right now it looks like the americans have encouraged the military to impose an old-skool structural gambit on the opposition: agree to "negociations" but require as a condition of playing the game that the opposition transform its own organizational structure--become centralized----which in this case means become fragmented---because this was a bottom-up popular revolt and not a leninist-style operation. there's no central organization. there's no a priori agreement as to who "we" are that would enable the appointment of a small group of the same old fucks who would be able to go into a little room and meet with another small group of the same old fucks.
consequence 1: the suleiman regime which is the same as the mubarak regime without the person of mubarak at its head really is in a position to appear willing to talk and compromise. however
consequence 2: it is also in a position to say there's no-one to talk to.
consequence 3: it is able to start returning things to a semblance of normal and to benefit from the above 2 appearances in the doing.
the americans are going blah blah blah this is complicated we have to g.....o......s......l.....o.......w.........l.........y because if we dont all this democracy and freedom stuff could get out of hand.
the united states is here occupying a position not that far from that ned beatty's character occupied in "network" except with only bland speech and nothing close to tht fabulous tirade that begins "you are fucking with the forces of nature, mister beale, and you will atone...."
there's no reason why suleiman would have to organize elections. there's no reason he would have to stand down. it wouldn't suit american interests. those interests would be perfectly well served with mubarak lite. so that's what i think they're supporting.
if it came down to it the americans have demonstrated themselves willing to set the aspirations for self-determination of millions of people on fire if it suits the interests of the oligarchy that runs the show--the national security state, the energy combine----and they'll do it again. and they'll do it again with the american right supporting them, all the while nattering away about "freedom" and "self-determination" which are simple except that no-one on the right knows what they mean. they just like the way they sound.
i hope i'm wrong about egypt. i really do.
and i don't have any ideas about what the opposition could do to play around this gambit.
i think what they're doing is the only option---stay in tahrir square and organize another wave of actions, one that escalates from the previous wave.
but it'll be hard to do because there's the return to "normal" and vague statements about compromise etc etc.
so the opposition faces the prospect of having **its** revolt sold out while they watch and there's nothing they'll be able to do about it.
like i said, i hope i'm wrong. sometimes i like being wrong. this is one of those times.
this says it better and goes a lot further:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MB08Ak01.html