Point of no return

We can’t go. We’ve lost a lot of people and we’ve lost them for a cause. The cause is that we wanted Mubarak to be out. We can’t just… We owe it to them to stick it to the end. We have many injured people too, it’d be very hard to move them and we know, everyone in this crowd know that if we decided to give in now they will hunt us one by one. We’ve been through this, we know it.

Det finns med andra ord bara två möjliga resultat av de nuvarande protesterna; Mubarak måste stiga ner eller det blir fruktansvärda repressalier mot de som vågat trotsa regimen. De som är skyldiga till denna upptrappning är helt klart regimen med Mubarak i spetsen:

After the failure of Mr Mubarak’s regular police to stanch the protests, and the refusal of his army to do the job, the president’s men appear to have resorted to a hired mob, bolstered by trained police thugs, to make a last try. In one episode of a battle that lasted from the early afternoon into the evening, a dozen horse and camel riders made the mistake of charging into the anti Mubarak crowd. It turned out they had been hired by a member of Mr Mubarak’s party representing the district near the Giza pyramids.

While many had anticipated a move to clear Tahrir Square by the security forces, the use of mob violence, orchestrated by the regime, had not been foreseen.
Pitched battles turned the area into a war zone as anti-Mubarak protesters tried desperately to hold on to the square where hundreds of thousands of opponents of the regime gathered peacefully yesterday.
[…]
The pro-Mubarak protesters, numbering tens of thousands, at first said they had no intention of initiating a confrontation. Some of them admitted that they had been brought in by bus in from the countryside and some had swapped sides in recent days, saying Mubarak had given enough concessions and he should have time to usher through political change.
They came in cars and on foot from across the city, some riding camels and horses, some wielding whips.
During the first scuffles that broke out, some on the pro-Mubarak side intervened to rescue those opponents who were being beaten, but that quickly ceased.
By late afternoon, groups of men were visible on roofs in Chapillion, a few hundred metres from the square where they hurled missiles down on those beneath them. Paving stones were broken up to be uses as weapons and, soon after six o’clock, shots from automatic weapons were heard.
[…]
Among those attacking the square were groups of armed men who appeared to be plainclothes police officers. Credible reports spoke of some of those involved in the assault in Tahrir Square having been paid by the regime.

Men åtminstone delvis måste skulden läggas på omvärlden och då framför allt väst:

Västvärlden har ett komplicerat förhållande till arabvärlden. Det är uppenbart för alla oss som följer rapporteringen om demokratirörelsen i Egypten. Varför är det så förtvivlat svårt för vår statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt att fullt ut stödja människor som kämpar för demokrati? Och varför vägrar regeringen att kräva diktatorn Mubaraks avgång?
Utrikesminister Carl Bildt envisas med att beskriva händelserna i Egypten som en kris. ”Ju längre denna kris pågår ju svårare kommer Egyptens ekonomiska och sociala situation att bli” skriver han på sin blogg. Men det här är ingen kris, utan en demokratisk revolution.
Tidigare i veckan beskrev Carl Bildt Egypten som ett samhälle ”som trots uppenbara begränsningar är långt öppnare än åtskilliga andra i regionen”.
Ord som är lika oroande och farliga som USA:s uttalade syn på Egypten som ”en viktig allierad och stabil nation i arabvärlden”.

I stället för att stödja demokratikampen i Egypten fyller Reinfeldt, Bildt och andra ledare från Väst sina kommentarer med reservationer. Risken med demokrati är att folket väljer fel och röstar fram islamistiska Muslimska brödraskapet till makten. Då kommer kvinnors och HBT-personers ställning i det egyptiska samhället att försämras. Därför, verkar man mena, är det kanske ändå bättre om Egypten förblir en diktatur. Det här resonemanget visar på ett förakt för allt vad demokrati är. Själva innebörden av demokrati är ju att medborgarna själv väljer – även om de väljer ”fel”.

The democracy protests that swept Tunisian President Zine el Abedine Ben Ali from power are going viral, but sadly President Obama and other Western leaders seem immune.
Indeed, it is quite likely that the president and his colleagues in Europe are as frightened of the potential explosion of people power across the Middle East and North Africa as are the sclerotic autocratic leaders of the region against whom the protests are being directed.
The question is, why?
Why would Obama, who worked so hard to reach out to the Muslim world with his famous 2009 speech in Cairo, be standing back quietly while young people across the region finally take their fate into their own hands and push for real democracy?
[…]
The answer, as is increasingly the case, comes from the ever-growing cache of leaked documents from WikiLeaks and other sources that are providing inside evidence of America’s true interests and intentions in the Middle East.
[…]
What is clear, then, is that Obama not only prefers the status quo, but the United States will actively subvert democracy in order to ensure that governments that will follow its policies remain in power.
[…]
There is no one in the intelligence community who does not know this, and as the numerous diplomatic cables brought to light by WikiLeaks have revealed, our diplomats across the region are equally aware of the corrosive effects of rampant government corruption, violence and authoritarianism on their societies as well.
[…]
In his State of the Union speech, the President did not mention Egypt at all. He did mention Tunisia, declaring ”we saw the desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.
”That is a nice sentiment, but it’s both a ”day late,” since the revolution has already succeeded, and glaring in its omission of Egypt, whose capitol was burning as he made the speech. Indeed, earlier in the day Secretary of State Clinton declared, ”Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people.” If this is Obama’s official policy, then the intifada in Egypt risks becoming a revolution against the US as much as against Mubarak, with far reaching consequences across the Muslim world.

Den väldigt försiktiga tystnaden och bristen på öppen kritik mot Mubarak från väst är tyvärr väldigt talande.

Egypten är en väldigt viktig nation i Arabvärlden och USA anser därför givetvis att de måste ha en viss kontroll på Egypten eftersom det automatiskt ger ett stort inflytande på hela Arabregionen, men frågan är om denna taktik inte redan är dödsdömd. I och med att protesterna i Tunisien varit framgångsrika är förmodligen Mubaraks och regimens dagar räknade hade det troligen varit smartare att helt enkelt stödja demokratirörelsen.

Oavsett hur det går så kommer USA och väst bli ihågkomna som de som svek det Egyptiska folket och som vägrade lyfta ett finger för att rädda liv. Oavsett hur det går i Egypten så ser vi en enorm förändring av den politiska kartan som jag bloggade om för ganska exakt ett år sen. Vi ser frukten av den politiska IT-revolutionen där den traditionella herrklubben inte längre kan styra världen som de vill utan konsekvenser.

Välkommen till revolutionen. Den pågår i Egypten, på nätet och på ditt köksbord.

Läs även vad Anna skriver på SvD och på sin blog.