General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThree Al Jazeera journalists sentenced to seven years in Egypt - where is the fugging outrage
from the Western Press.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/23/al-jazeera-journalists-jailed-seven-years-egypt
<snip>
Egypt's judiciary has dealt a shocking blow to the principle of free speech after three journalists for Al-Jazeera English were sentenced to between seven and 10 years in jail on charges of aiding terrorists and endangering national security.
The former BBC correspondent Peter Greste, from Australia, the ex-CNN journalist Mohamed Fahmy, and local producer Baher Mohamed were jailed for seven, seven and 10 years respectively. Four students and activists indicted in the case were sentenced to seven years.
The judge also handed 10-year sentences to the British journalists Sue Turton and Dominic Kane and the Dutch journalist Rena Netjes, who were not in Egypt but were tried in absentia.
The courtroom packed with journalists, diplomats and relatives erupted at the verdict which came despite what independent observers said was a complete lack of evidence.
cali
(114,904 posts)malaise
(267,846 posts)Obama is one of the less hawkish.
Bushco et al bombed the Al Jazeera HQ in Iraq. Journalists were slaughtered.
cali
(114,904 posts)malaise
(267,846 posts)I'm stating a fact
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)It is tragic and must be stopped.
malaise
(267,846 posts)The ones that sentenced hundreds to death with no due process?
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Do you think we would put up with this? Heck no. We would be out protesting. They have protested before...perhaps time to do it again until those in leadership listen.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)What they seem to be doing is trying to maintain a relationship and to push reforms. The problem is that - in spite of the billions in aid - we really have very little leverage there. The entire Middle East is a mess. Nothing the US has done (or not done) under Obama seems like it really would have worked much better - in Egypt or in the rest of the Middle East.
It does seem that the US supported the populist uprisings against the strong men. However, in Egypt, by the time the US backed them, they already had millions in the streets - including a large percent of the educated, privileged youth. Although some said the reason the military did not attack was the connections to the US, I would suspect that it was because the Generals' own children and their friends from exclusive schools were part of who was on the streets. I suspect they expected to retain control via elections- so Mubarak would be replaced by essentially a younger version of Mubarak - and were surprised by the MB. (Take this hypothesizing with a grain of salt as it comes just from knowing a couple 20 somethings who attended the British School in Cairo when their parents worked there in the late 1990s. Many in the Egyptian elite and expats had their kids there - and I heard some of those Egyptians were in favor of the rebellion.)
I think that among most Americans, for or against US policy, there is a tendency to think we have the ability to be more in control than we are. Unfortunately, the only time in the last two decades where we set the path was when Bush invaded Iraq. The consequences were unpredictable. The idiotic neocon idea that it could be a reset for the entire Middle East that would end up more manageable is like thinking that a non sorted pack of cards would end up neatly sorted after you tossed them into the air. You COULD correctly predict they would be in a changed position, but not that it would be better - and most likely it would be more of a mess.
Obama inherited a Middle East that was a powder keg. One question - of course - is whether the US, under Obama, simply refused to back tyrants oppressing their people OR if they sent signals of support (or more) to the people rebelling. If it was JUST not backing the tyrants, while it was true that keeping the tyrants under our influence was likely easier than keeping the goodwill of any replacements, IF the rebellion was so strong it was going to succeed anyway, US backing of the tyrants could poison future relationships. (Here the problem is that even if Obama changed the policy we HAD already supported them for decades.) Note this ignores any idea of values or morality. If, we had a role in fostering the rebellions, it may be that shaking up the regions via rebellions is just as likely to succeed as the neo con ideas.
In Egypt, it lead to a government that came to power in a coup against a democratically elected MB government. At this point, there was another "election" - in which the MB were not allowed to run - where the military won easily -- just as in any military dictatorship. We are back to Mubarak or worse. Both Obama and Kerry have pushed them verbally to be more inclusive and they expressed concern over the arrests. I suspect that they know - like we do- that it is really unlikely Sisi will listen. Meanwhile, we would like Egypt to play certain geopolitical roles. Because of that, they know we will not end the aid we give them over internal problems.
I honestly have no hope that there will be a way to tamp down the violence in the Middle East. It is very hard to stop a raging fire - especially when there are some pouring gasoline onto it. Defending basic civil rights within countries goes beyond that easier, though seemingly impossible, goal. The problem may be that Obama does not have the luxury of just throwing up his hands and saying the US will have nothing to do with the entire region! (Though I see no way to make things better, I hope that Obama, Kerry et al will see possibilities for doing so.)
cali
(114,904 posts)karynnj
(59,475 posts)The main objective of Kerry's visit there - and the other visits to Sunni countries is to persuade them to stop any funding of ISIS/ISIL. However, he did push them to make reforms and he did speak of the arrests. I assume the entire context of US foreign policy in the region at the moment is (and should be) focused on ISIS/ISIL.
However, when you are trying to get them to back you on something, you are the one asking a favor. This is NOT the time that you can use the leverage of saying you will cut off aid if they do not do other things you want. At this point, the US may need Egypt - at least not against us - in finding a diplomatic answer to ISIS.
It could be that Kerry will fail to get conditions that could give the summit a chance to succeed - as I said, I think it a very long shot. However, what are the alternatives? Ignoring ISIS/ISIL creating a country in parts of Iraq and Syria? The US bombing them to back the Shiites who marginalized the Sunnis? I notice that NO ONE - right or left - is saying what they should do - just what they should not do. Listen to Netanyahu, do nothing and magically push Iran to fight them? I suspect that reason, at this late date, that Obama is (through Kerry) pushing for a regional summit, is because the alternatives are so unacceptable.
If so, I imagine that NO US leverage will be used for anything other than this goal.
cali
(114,904 posts)karynnj
(59,475 posts)Here is Kerry's comment on the sentences:
SECRETARY KERRY: Well Andrea, thats very, very fair question, and its an appropriate one today. When I heard about that verdict today, I was so concerned about it and, frankly, disappointed in it that I immediately picked up the telephone and I talked to the foreign minister of Egypt and I registered our serious displeasure at this kind of verdict under the circumstances of where we find ourselves today. Now, todays conviction is obviously its a chilling and draconian sentence. And its deeply disturbing to see in the midst of Egypts transition. It simply cannot stand if Egypt is going to be able to move forward in the way that Egypt needs to move forward, in order to respond to the extraordinary aspirations of those young people who twice came in to Tahrir Square in order to demand a responsive government.
So the success of Egypt going forward will depend on the protection of universal human rights, and it will depend on a real commitment to embracing the hopes of the people there that theyre going to see a judicial system that is responsive and modern and not one trapped in ideology or in this kind of extreme decision.
So todays verdict flies in the face of the essential ingredients of a civil society and a free press and rule of law. And the president President al-Sisi and I discussed this yesterday. We discussed these very cases, and I think it is going to be critical in terms of the objectives of his presidency for him to move quickly to try to address the international concerns that exist with respect to this kind of a decision.
From the press availability today - http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/06/228327.htm
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Sheesh.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)giftedgirl77
(4,713 posts)There could be tons of things being worked out behind closed doors, not to mention what their home country is. The article mentions that 3 British journalists have also been sentenced, if these journalists are GB, Canada, or any of our other allies then this is their fight not ours.
joelz
(185 posts)Mr. Kerry said that the U.S. had recently released $575 million in assistance for Egypt's military and that he was confident 10 Apache helicopters would be delivered to Egypt soon.
"I am confident that we will be able to ultimately get the full amount of aid," Mr. Kerry said in his first stop on a regional tour focused largely on responding to the crisis in Iraq. "I am confident
that the Apaches will come and that they will come very, very soon."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=5138456
karynnj
(59,475 posts)You also ignore what his objective is in Egypt and that he DID push for US goals of inclusivity.
At this point, Kerry is asking every Sunni nation to STOP giving aid to ISIS/ISIL - even if indirectly. He also needs their support for the regional summit that Obama assigned him to make happen.
I guess you have a better idea of how to deal with the most pressing problem that Obama/Kerry have? I assume that you realize that when asking for a favor, threatening rarely works.
Liberal_Dog
(11,075 posts)So, no outrage.
But, if Iran or Syria did this, then ...
karynnj
(59,475 posts)Other than demanding their release, what can we do? Iran is holding Americans - and the US has pursued it. In a Congressional hearing, the SoS mentioned that they were using back channels on trying to get them released - but very pointedly said when asked why it was not a condition in the interim nuclear agreement that they were not going to trade off anything on the treaty for the release ... "and you would not want us to".
We have very few real levers to use and, at the moment, we need to use them judiciously. (In fact, consider why Kerry was even speaking of the aid and airplanes. In a sense, we approved them JUST to have some leverage when we need it -- and we need it now. )
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)I don't know, but I have already seen the apologists on the job.