If the Barack Obama administration intended, through its fluctuating stances on the Egyptian uprising, to gain the trust of demonstrators in Tahrir square, and those who are applauding them in Arab countries and on satellite television stations, it has certainly failed to achieve this objective. The young people of Egypt who are demonstrating truly believe in democracy, and are asking for an end to corruption and bad governance in their country. However, it is certain that those who applaud the demonstrators, and those who hold forth on “revolutionary” satellite stations, pay no heed to the slogans of defending democracy and freedoms, which the White House says are guiding its decisions and reform advice to the Egyptian government. Such people are least concerned with preserving democracy and freedoms, since they will be the first victims if these people are allowed to come to power in their countries. The biggest evidence of this is what these people are doing where they are now in power. It might be useful for the Obama administration to take a lesson from the way in which power is exercised in countries whose regimes are defending the Egyptian uprising, or the way in which the allies of these regimes reach power in the Arab world. They have done so by overturning and disregarding the results of the democratic process, which is what happened with the formation of the Iraqi government. We have also seen this recently in the “constitutional” overturning of the Lebanese government, which took place by overpowering the state, political parties, and government institutions. The important thing is for the White House to contemplate all of this so that it can benefit as it comes up with wiser policies vis-à-vis the current Egyptian crisis. It is naïve for the Obama administration to believe that its positive stance on the uprising in Egypt will help shore up its image in the Arab world. This is because those who observe the events in Egypt do not separate their consequences from the ongoing confrontation in the region. If the domestic dimension continues to predominate, up to now, in the Egyptian uprising, it is also true that exploiting the change to come in the regime's leadership will depend on the consequences of the confrontation in Egypt, between the regime and its opponents, and these consequences remain extremely vague at present. It is also naïve for the US administration to deal with the youth revolt in Egypt like George Bush dealt with the uprisings that did away with dictatorial regimes in Eastern Europe at the beginning of the 1990s. In other words, it considers what is taking place in Egypt as the beginning of the rise of a hoped-for democratic situation in the Arab region. There is no democratic alternative ready to take power in the countries of this region, while there are totalitarian alternatives, with a religious tint, or with a civilian character in military clothing, as events appear to be indicating in Egypt. Democratic culture is not the culture harbored by the countries of Eastern Europe. Thus, there is a very cavalier attitude toward the intelligence, and the memory, of the Arab street, when the Obama administration undertakes, with excessive selectivity and mendacity, to defend human rights in Arab states. This is taking place at a time when the White House protects the excessive violations of these rights that are taking place against the Palestinian people, while Washington declares its inability to safeguard the requirements of international legitimacy, and the resulting commitments to Israeli power, which occupies Palestinian territory. The cavalier attitude to the intelligence of the Arabs has also reached the White House's inability to resist the preservation of its “nuclear dialogue” with the Iranian regime, despite its achievements in suppressing opponents since last year's presidential elections. Washington's policy has also involved the attempt to woo other regimes by returning ambassadors to the capitals of these countries, although these regimes are not known for respecting the principles of human rights and freedoms. This double standard in US policy raises many questions about the motives behind this stance, which claims to protect the Egyptian youth uprising. The young people of Egypt have had no need of Washington's support. On the contrary, their leaders have tried to distance themselves from such support, because they consider it a political burden on them, with no goal other than to polish up Washington's track record with the Arab street. However, this support is only working to reveal the Obama administration's policy, which is fluctuating between naiveté and deception, and prompting America's friends in the region to exercise caution vis-à-vis the objectives and policies of the White House.
