Calling Mubarak

Yes, its true. Yesterday, while protesters dressed in black, Bush called Mubarak to talk about democracy and free elections.

According to a Reuters report,

"I urged him [Mubarak] once again to have as free and fair elections as possible because it will be a great legacy for his country," Bush told reporters during a session with visiting South African President Thabo Mbeki.

Bush and Mubarak spoke by telephone for about 10 minutes and among the topics they covered was the start of the presidential election campaign in Egypt, and last week's referendum there and incidents of violence.

Bush said Mubarak assured him that he wants to have free and fair elections. "I will to the best of my ability continue to try to convince him that it's not only in Egypt's interest, but the world's interests, to see Egypt have free and fair elections," Bush said.

And a little further down the article:

Mubarak's "publicly stated he is for free and fair elections, and now is the time for him to show the world that his great country can set an example for others," Bush said.

He laid out what he called some reasonable standards for free and fair elections.

"People ought to be allowed to vote without being intimidated, people ought to be allowed to be on TV, and if the government owns the TV, they need to allow the opposition on TV, people ought to be allowed to carry signs and express their pleasure or displeasure. People ought to have very vote count," he said.

______

Call me a cynic, but it is going to take a little more than "about a 10-minute" conversation for "democratic" and non-violent presidential and parliamentary elections in the fall.

Besides, seeing that the amendment has been changed, the point is mute. The legal mechanism now heavily favors the Egyptian government rather than benefiting those looking to participate.

Bush is a little to late on the scene with his democratizing agenda.

To me, Bush's call yesterday is like waiting to contact the fire brigades after the house has burnt to the ground.

But then, again, what do I know...

Comments

[SP]

On the ten minute call: to be fair, heads of state rarely have more than ceremonial, short, hand-shaking meetings, it's the back-room diplomatic dealings in which the real communications and arguments take place.

But of course there are serious problems with Bush's remarks, much as I appreciate his taking notice of Mubarak's undemocratic activities. Notice that he calls for free and fair elections with people being allowed to express themselves, but is silent on the burning issue of how multiple candidates will qualify to run. Most newspapers too have reported the referendum as "Egyptians overwhelmingly approved reforms to allow multiple candidates" rather than focusing on the regime's tight, Iran-style control on who would be allowed to run. Then, Bush says nothing about how he expects the "free and fair elections" to be guaranteed - nothing about US commitments or threats to help the elections be free and fair. I hope there's diplomatic pressure being applied in the background and that these are not just nice words to assure public opinion that he is consistent in his democratisation talk.

[Daniel]

Well , Josh it´s not cynical to see what has been a pattern of Mubarak policy, for almost every election during his close to 24 years in power, and also to see that US policy has not changed substantually towards Egypt, in other ways than in rhetoric. The state department has yet to comment on art 76/192. And since February , there have not been a lot of talk , about the arrests of up to 2000 MBs, but then again the Bush administration don´t share their values. The Tsunami of Democracy in the region seems to be a two track policy. One for Iran and Syria(and Lebanon before the Syrian withdrawal - where you could voice your opinion on every detail of policy, and another (Egypt, Saudi, Jordan) where you´re perfectly happy with being able to showcase, the projected image of democratization , like the "multicandidates" issue, as a real democratic step, or as the first lady so nicely put it "bold and wise"

[yinshuisiyuan]

There's usually a tension in international relations between pushing for change and dictating the manner of the change - states will accept that others will seek to influence their actions but even 'client' states get prickly when others try to dictate how they should conduct their internal affairs. Bush, in public, is being about as forthright as he can be without pissing off Mubarak, which he doesn't really want to do for fear that Egypt will stop being so amenable on the Gaza withdrawal.

[Josh Stacher]

Whatever...Bush should of just sent flowers to Mubarak rather than call. It is really the same message after all.

[yinshuisiyuan]

I disagree. Yeah, it's pretty feeble, but it's rather like the situation with Israel - for all the money that the US pours in it has remarkably little say in how things go in the client state. I'm no fan of Bush, but I think the fact that he's telling Mubarak that the US is paying attention is more interventionist than saying nothing at all. There's already been a significant policy debate in the US the result of which was the realisation that if the US put its backing behind a movement in Egypt it would probably kill it (vid. the way the NDP keeps calling Nour 'ibn Madeleine') so my feeling is that this is as much pressure as the US feels able to put on Mubarak. So flowers - maybe, but with the thorns still on, is what I'm saying

[Prince]

Asking a dictator to leave after 24 years is asking him to go to Jail and lose all the money He, his family and his friend stole in the past, which is of course impossible!!
When The United State put pressure and at the same time knows that this will not happen, what does it mean, can someone please explain?
The Egyptian Government has taken no step to spread Democracy, all this is just a big scandal, and it’s a mockery, are we all stupid? How can someone compete when it is impossible to qualified citizens to submit their applications?
Beside who will supervise the election? The judges cannot have full control; the government wants the election to be done in one day in 54,000 different places.
The United States should insist to send supervisors and if the election is not fair, not to recognize it as the legitimate regime in Egypt.