Egypt -- Will Freedom Ring?

I've been watching the events unfolding in Egypt with a great deal of concern and hope.  Egypt has been a stalwart US ally and "friend of Israel."  This reality has led American American governments to turn a blind eye from the autocratic nature of this regime.  We've stood by allowing Hosni Mubarak to rule without many questions because of the fear of Islamist takeover.  Unfortunately, our willingness to abide secular autocrats has only further alienated the Arab populace and given Islamists the high ground. 

After the people of Tunis rose up and pushed out the dictatorial regime there, the populace in Egypt has risen up.  Mubarak has, so far, refused to give up power, though he has fired his cabinet.  Of course, this fools no one.  The problem isn't with the cabinet, but with the one who appoints the cabinet.  Mubarak also is 82 and wanting to pass on power to his son -- but the people and perhaps even the Army isn't happy with this idea.  And so the nation has revolted.  The Army has been called out, but there is a sense that the military is weighing its options. 

So what will happen?  The US seems sidelined -- supporting democracy but fearful of chaos in Egypt.  Israel has placed its bets on Mubarak and so is hoping for autocratic rule to continue.  Other Arab countries are also looking at what is happening in Egypt with great concern, because like Egypt these are states ruled by autocratic rulers who allow little freedom to the people.  And, like Egypt the vast majority of their own populace is under the age of 30, and restive.  Islamists have, in the past, exploited this restiveness, for they alone have carried the moral authority to oppose these leaders.  What is interesting in Tunis and in Egypt is that by and large this is not an Islamist driven revolt.  But, if there is a crackdown, it is likely that it will be the Islamists who are able to exploit it.

My hope is that Mubarak steps down and democratic steps are taken.  Egypt is a fairly modern country, that has some diversity -- Predominantly Muslim, but with a significant Christian (Coptic) minority.  I don't know where this will go, but I remain hopeful that freedom will ring for this nation.  Let us not support autocracy out of fear of Islamist take over.  Such fears only feed resentments toward the west.  If we stand for freedom, let us also support it in real ways that honor the aspirations of the Arab people for a better life.  What was it that Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence -- the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 

Ground Zero: Exaggerating the Jihadist Threat

It does seem as if this is a story that won't quit. It doesn't matter that much of the rhetoric is either misplaced or politically expedient. As Romesh Ratnesar writes in a Time Magazine online piece entitled Ground Zero: Exaggerating the Jihadist Threat, the "jihadist threat" that everyone is so worried about is actually fading away. Yes, the militants are still doing their thing -- largely in Muslim countries and rarely in the West --but their support in Muslim countries is dissipating fast.

What I find unfathomable is the idea that a mosque sponsored by a moderate group of Sufi Muslims would constitute a victory for radical Islam. I simply don't get it. What would constitute a victory in my mind would be the ongoing fear mongering that grips our nation. The goal of terrorism is to terrorize people -- make them afraid. I think, from all the rhetoric, that these militants have done just that. The American people have been cowed, which makes the susceptible to demagogues such as Newt Gingrich. As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg suggests:

"We would betray our values and play into our enemies' hands if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else," Bloomberg said on Governors Island, the Statue of Liberty behind him in the distance.

In the long run this is an "debate" that will go nowhere.  The group seeking to build the center have the right, according to the Constitution, to build at the site.  No court in the land would disallow this and its not the government's business to decide between religions.  The Constitution's guarantees don't simply apply to Congregationalists in New England and Anglicans in Virginia, or Presbyterians in the middle states.  We've outgrown the question of which Protestant church will dominate. 

But perhaps even more importantly this "debate" maybe focusing on an threat that no longer really exists.  Remember it's 9 years since 9-11.  We've been in Afghanistan for much of this period, with no end in sight, largely because we put Afghanistan on the back burner to engage another phantom threat in Iraq (where we've been at war now for seven years). 

But, whether the threat is receding or not, I can't stop reiterating the fact that principles of American identity are at stake in this debate -- the principles of religious freedom.  And if Muslims and other minority religions are denied their Constitutional rights, then our nation will have betrayed its founding principles.  I know the President has taken a lot of heat for his position -- David Gergen, whom I normally regard highly, made a statement last night that stunned me -- that in this President Obama demonstrated a lack of understanding of the feelings on the part of the American people.  I'm sorry, but standing up for what is right when religious freedom is under threat for political reasons (even among Democrats) is astounding.