The US administration is still placing its bets on the Muslim Brotherhood, which it has chosen as its ally in Egypt. The new American Secretary of State John Kerry came to Egypt with a bunch of tricks in his hat to support these new allies who have so far been embarrassing Americans in one way or another ever since they seized power in Egypt. They have done this by doing their best to be in full control regardless of the resulting crises and their impact on national security. What is more important is that this exclusionist policy adopted by the Muslim Brotherhood serves to unravel the big American lie of supporting democracy and summons up incidents from modern American history that confirm this lie. For example, Saddam Hussein was not a democratic ruler in the 1980s when he was supported by the United States and did not suddenly become a dictator afterwards when the United States turned against him. The same applies to all countries supported by the United States, which primarily cares about its interests rather than democratic principles or the will of the people. That is why the United States supported the transformation in Egypt from day one and Americans tried several times to rescue their allies from the damage they are causing. However, the current Egyptian regime remains the ally of the US and the Americans will never abandon it unless it become an unbearable burden or unless another alternative is made available. Until this happens, it is wrong to count on the role of the United States in any desired change in Egypt. Kerry's recent controversial visit is, therefore, another lifebuoy that the Americans are offering to their allies to save them from their own deeds. They are not asking for a lot in return, but are merely calling for an embellishment of the reality they want to impose, which has resulted in the use of expressions like “middle ground,” “the democratic option,” and “ballot transparency.” Even when Obama talked to Morsi, he asked him to guarantee fair representation in the upcoming elections and they both overlooked all the events that has preceded those elections. Before Kerry came to Egypt, he secretly sent one of his aides to meet with the different parties involved and according to information I obtained, several parties actually tried to meet this messenger who knows nothing about Egypt more than the fact that he got a good profit from buying a share in one of the private banks which he later sold and who seems to have been one of Kerry's supporters in the presidential elections. A man who knows nothing about Egypt came, therefore, to pave the way for Kerry's visit. This raises a question about the logic behind the choice of this man. Kerry tried to use the economic situation to put pressure on the Egyptian opposition and people, which was obvious in statements made by an American official who was described as “high ranking” and who said that Kerry would urge that an agreement be reached between all political factions about drastic economic changes required for obtaining an IMF loan. The US official said that Kerry would stress that an agreement between Cairo and the IMF has to be endorsed by all political factions in Egypt and that Egypt's approval of the 4.8 billion dollar loan, that would open the door for the flow of money from the United States, the European Union, and Arab countries, would not be possible without a national dialogue. This might sound acceptable if viewed from an abstract perspective, but on a practical level it would mean putting pressure on the opposition to accept what is unacceptable. If all political factions in Egypt agree to the required economic changes as this official says, then the opposition, which now rejects engaging in a dialogue under the Muslim Brotherhood's terms and American supervision, would be held accountable for the subsequent suffering of the Egyptian people. It is obvious that the US administration is also trying through its secretary of state of talk the opposition into reversing its decision to boycott the elections. Regardless of any remarks about the performance of the National Salvation Front, Kerry's decision to refuse to deal with it as an entity and to deal, instead, with a few of its leaders individually, proves that the United States is biased toward the Muslim Brotherhood and does not want to upset its ally. The United States is doing its best to support its ally by pushing for the establishment of a dialogue between the regime and the opposition but in accordance with the regime's own concept of a “middle ground” on which it insists despite the will of the Egyptian people. The United States is driven by its interests which now lie with the current regime and which will continue to do so until the regime is no longer useful. Only then will the US administration work on replacing or destroying the regime as it did with Saddam Hussein and others. And the professed reason remains the same: supporting democracy.
— Abdel Latif El-Menawy is an author, columnist and multimedia journalist who has covered conflicts around the world. He can be found on Twitter @ALMenawy
