The U.S. Has Abandoned Reformists In The Middle East

Director of the Washington Institute for Near East Studies Robert Satloff gave an interview to Egyptian independent daily al Masry al youm in which he said that the West will never allow Iran to possess Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs).” If the US fails to prevent the Iranian leaders from pursuiting their nuclear program, it [US] will resort to war”, he said.

Satloff defended the decision to invade Iraq, but admitted that the US has made a lot of mistakes in this war and that it failed to achieve reform in the Middle East “The US also has left Mideastern reformists vulnerable to governments’ suppression and crackdowns”, he said, adding that if the US wants to quell terrorism, it has to back the moderate liberals in Arab countries.

Asked if the war against Iran could cost the US more than the invasion of Iraq; Satloff said that nothing will dissuade the US from attacking Iran if it persists with its nuclear program, fearing that other countries in the region will follow its steps “and the region will witness a serious nuclear race leading to a catastrophe” he added.

The New Middle East, where to?

Commenting on whether Syria, Iran and Hizbullah could form an anti American alliance in the region to counter that envisaged by the US, Satloff Said that it is too early to talk of a new Middle East now, citing the failure of the US to find the launching point for its new Middle East scheme after the recent war in Lebanon. However, he warned of the new Middle East model proposed by Syrian president Bashar el Assad, rejecting the Syrian or Iranian regimes as a model to be followed by other Middle East countries.

US veto against ceasefire in Lebanon

Al Masry al Youm daily questioned the wisdom of US backing Israel in its destructive attacks on Lebanon. Satloff replied that the US administration considered it as a war in proxy against Iran,” to protect Israel from being vulnerable to Iranian, or Iran- sponsored attacks” he countered.

Satloff rejects double standard democracy and inheritance of power

On the failure of the U.S. to adopt a tougher stand to stop violations perpetrated by governments against moderate political forces, Satloff criticized the US weak stand toward this issue by arguing that ” While it is logical that these governments adopt tough stances against Islamist radicals, it is unacceptable for these governments to adopt the same position toward the moderate liberals”, lamenting the US administration for ignoring Ayman Nour’s case and reminding it of its once tough stance toward the case of Director of Ibn Khaldoun Centre Dr. Saad el Din Ibrahim when the US insisted that the Egyptian government release him and that the case be shelved. However, he affirmed that the US will continue to back the incumbent regimes under the pretext that this reinforces a democratic civil society. Asked if this means that the US backs inheritance of power in Egypt, Satloff that “It will be stupid of us to back a potential candidate, and this is not the proper way to enhance democracy in a country of Egypt’s weight” 

Ikhwanweb comment:

Although Dr. Satloff was right in some points, he used the same American rhetoric justifying the war on Iraq, ignoring the daily massacres committed against Iraqi civilians. As a prominent think tank, he knows well that the CIA reports of Iraqi WMDs turned out to be false and, according to ensuing American reports, Saddam had nothing to do with Qaeda or bin Laden; they were only fabricated reports to win support of the Western peoples. On the Iranian nuclear file and the US insistence to bring it to an end by all means, Mr. Satloff ignored the Israeli nuclear program with its more than 200 nuclear heads. Mr. Satloff should know that any American war on Iran will only spill over the entire region and draw more and more hatred towards the US administration. This in turn will lead to mushrooming of violent groups and spread of Qaeda’s ideology in the region. We see that the only right point in this interview is Satloff‘s attitude toward the inheritance of power in Egypt and his rejection to back a specific presidential candidate.

Comment From Ahmad Al-Jaser:

Dear Khaled Salam:


I write to you regarding the interview with Mr. Satloff (The U.S. Has Abandoned Reformists In The Middle East) which was published on your web site. Your comments on the Hypocrisy, yes hypocrisy not discrepancies, of Mr. Satloff are well placed and expose him, but their is one additional information, the problem with Mr. Satloff, and all employees of this think tank, is that he is on the pay roll of AIPAC.

The Washington Institute for Near East Policy is a propaganda instrument of the AIPAC “American Israeli Public Affairs Institute” the pro Israeli lobby in Washington.  This institute was set up in 1985 to influence US policy in the Middle East.

Our problem in the region, is that the likes of Mr. Satloff, Mr. Ross & Mr. Indyk are presented as prominent American researchers, intellectuals, etc.. on our news media outlets to the Arab world audience. These people, and their likes, are hard-core Zionists who represent the Zionist movement and dedicate their lives to the cause of the Zionist ideology.

I personally have no objections to hearing the opposite opinion, though no such fair chance is given to our point of view on these vital issues in the American media, but they should be introduced as Zionist representatives of the AIPAC, the Zionist lobby in the USA, not as Americans representing American views or interests.

I am very frustrated with Arab Media, for giving these warmongers too much space to disseminate their Zionist propaganda. This does not mean that I question the intentions of the editors & journalists (though some are phonie like Al-Sharg Alwasat & Al-Arabia Sat. Channel), only ALLAH the All-Mighty knows the intentions, but I think that the media is making a grave mistake for not exposing the background of these vultures.





Washington Institute for Near East Policy

From SourceWatch

The establishment of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy’ (WINEP) in 1985 greatly expanded the pro-Israel lobbys influence over policy as well. WINEP’s founding director, Martin Indyk, had previously been research director of AIPAC which, then as now, focuses much of its efforts on Congress. Indyk developed WINEP into a highly effective think tank devoted to maintaining and strengthening the US-Israel alliance through advocacy in the media and lobbying the executive branch. Indyk is a major proponent of the two-state solution.

On the eve of the 1988 presidential elections, with the first Palestinian intifada underway, WINEP made its bid to become a major player in US Middle East policy discussions by issuing a report entitled “Building for Peace: An American Strategy for the Middle East.” The report urged the incoming administration to “resist pressures for a procedural breakthrough (on Palestinian-Israeli peace issues) until conditions have ripened.” Six members of the study group responsible for the report joined the first Bush administration, which adopted this stalemate recipe not to change until change was unavoidable. Hence, the US acceded to Israel’s refusal to negotiate with the Palestine Liberation Organization despite the PLO’s recognition of Israel at the November 1988 session of the Palestine National Council.

When Israel became serious about attempting to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, it circumvented the US-sponsored negotiations in Washington (and the pro-Israel lobby) and spoke directly to representatives of the PLO in Oslo. The result was the 1993 Oslo Declaration of Principles.

Thus, the adoption of WINEP’s policy recommendation to “resist pressures for a procedural breakthrough” by both the Bush and Clinton administrations delayed the start of meaningful Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, contributed to the demonization of the PLO and multiplied the casualty rateof the first Palestinian intifada.

Despite what might reasonably be judged as a major policy failure, WINEP’s influence grew, especially in the mass media. Its associates, especially deputy director Patrick Clawson, director for policy and planning Robert Satloff and senior fellow Michael Eisenstadt, appear frequently on television and radio talk shows as commentators on Middle East issues. Its board of advisors includes Mortimer Zuckerman, editor-in-chief of U.S. News & World Report, and Martin Peretz, editor-in-chief of The New Republic.

WINEP’s advocacy extended to matters far beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Well before most Americans took note of radical Islam as a potential threat to their security, for instance, WINEP and its associates were promoting the notion that Israel is a reliable US ally against the spread of Islamism. After Israel expelled over 400 alleged Palestinian Islamist activists from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in December 1992, Israeli television Middle East analyst and WINEP associate Ehud Yaari wrote an op-ed in the New York Times summarizing his Hebrew television report of a vast US-based conspiracy to fund Hamas. WINEP’s 1992 annual [[Soref Symposium]] “Islam and the US: Challenges for the Nineties” focused on whether or not Islam was a danger to the United States. At that event, Martin Indyk argued that the US ought not to encourage democracy in countries that were friendly to Washington, like Jordan and Egypt, and that political participation should be limited to secular parties. This recommendation seemed like a formula for ensuring that Islamist forces would forsake legal political action and engage in armed struggle – precisely what happened in Egypt from 1992 to 1997.

The Clinton administration was even more thoroughly colonized by WINEP associates than its predecessor. Eleven signatories of the final report of WINEP’s 1992 commission on US-Israeli relations, “Enduring Partnership,” joined the Clinton administration. Among them were National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, UN Ambassador and later Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, Undersecretary of Commerce Stuart Eisenstat and the late Les Aspin, Clinton’s first secretary of defense. Shortly after assuming office in 1993, the Clinton administration announced a policy of “dual containment” aimed at isolating Iran and Iraq. The principal formulator and spokesperson for that policy was Martin Indyk, in his new role as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Near East and South Asian Affairs at the National Security Council.

In the current Bush administration, however, WINEP’s influence has been outflanked on the right by individuals linked to more monolithically neo-conservative and hawkish think tanks like the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). [excerpted from Beinin, op. cit.]


Other Topics

CONDOLEEZZA RICE: Interview With the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board
Ikhwanweb, London-UK

Morsy, Al-Erian and 500 MB and Kefaya Activists Arrested
Ikhwanweb, London-UK

Egypt keeps more than 300 pro-reform protestors in custody
Middle East Times – Cairo,Egypt

Egypt`s opposition suffers painful blows
Monsters and – Glasgow,UK

Fight looms in US Congress over aid to Egypt
Washington Post – United States

AKI – Rome,Italy

Security Tight for World Economic Forum
Forbes – USA

Egypt criticises US comments on Nour verdict as infringing …
Pravda – Moscow,Russia

Egyptian blogger arrested (belated edition)
Media girl – Durango,CO,USA

Opposition groups suffer setbacks
Seattle Times – United States

Photos of Disgrace: Police Brutalities Against Demonstrators
Ikhwanweb – London,England,UK

Police clash with protestors in Cairo
Al-Bawaba – Amman,Jordan

Egypt Riot Police Beat and Arrest Hundreds of Demonstrators
New York Times – United States

Police Beat Protesters, Detain 100 People in Egypt – Dalton,GA,USA

Back to the Future: Libya and Egypt
The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) – Washington,DC,USA

Egypt judge in dock has heart attack
Gulf Times – Doha,Qatar

Security men beat protesters backing Egypt judges
Reuters South Africa – Johannesburg,South Africa

Judges Become New Focal Point for Egyptian Democracy and Human …
Human Rights First – New York,NY,

A growing political force in Egypt
The State – Columbia,SC,USA

Egypt judge cleared as police get tough – Qatar

Legal precedents
Al-Ahram Weekly – Cairo,Egypt

Mubarak’s foes brave beatings for a cause
Chicago Tribune – United States

Police Beat Pro-Democracy Protesters in Egypt
FOX News – USA

Lockdown Is Set As Cairo Readies Trial of Judges
New York Sun – New York,NY,USA

Police crack down on Muslim Brotherhood
Mail & Guardian Online – Johannesburg,South Africa

Accused judge’s heart attack puts his case in doubt
Washington Times – Washington,DC,USA

Top US official defends Egypt aid to skeptical Congress
Kuwait News Agency – Kuwait

Democracy in Egypt Faces 2 Tests Today
New York Times – United States

Stress on progress for Egypt
Khaleej Times – Dubai,United Arab Emirates

US Officials Defend Aid to Egypt
Voice of America – USA

Egyptian police beat protesters, arrest hundreds of Muslim …
San Diego Union Tribune – United States

Egypt panel reprimands one judge, clears another in disciplinary …

Violence mars Cairo court hearing – Hadley Gardens,UK

Arab economic integration ’must speed up’
Financial Times – London,England,UK

Needed: Holistic Support of Middle Eastern Democracy
Washington Post – United States

Pressure builds against Egypt’s new crackdown
Socialist Worker Online – Chicago,IL,USA

Worldview | Democracy disconnect in Egypt
Philadelphia Inquirer – Philadelphia,PA,USA

50 members of Muslem Brotherhood arrested for protesting
Monsters and – Glasgow,UK

Judges supporters dispersed with tear gas
United Press International – USA

Mubarak’s battle with judges heats up
International Herald Tribune – France

Police, demonstrators clash
News24 – South Africa

Egypt Cracks Down on Dissent
Voice of America – USA

Egypt regime: Between survival and repression
Middle East Online – London,UK