And Now We Come to the Payoff...

Okay, so now that we've been through the background of the mess in Egypt, and you've all suffered through me saying "I told you so," what about now?

First off, let me say that I respectfully disagree with Vice-President Joe Biden. I would call Hosni Mubarak a dictator. What else could you call him? A leader with the occasional nefarious urge? The man's a dictator, and while I understand the rock and hard place the Obama administration is stuck between, surely Biden could have obfuscated a little bit better than that. But I digress...

Two months ago, Hosni Mubarak presided over the most corrupt elections during his 30 year rule. That, by the way, is really saying something, because Mubarak has presided over some pretty corrupt elections. Of the 88 seats contested, the NDP won 84, NDP members running as independents won 3, and the opposition Tagammu party won the only other seat. 87 of 88 seats won by the NDP. So, when Mubarak went on television two days ago promising "reform" including hiring a new cabinet, it's easy to understand how people were struck by the ridiculousness of it all. And if I thought it was ridiculous, imagine how Egyptians felt.

Likewise, appointing Omar Suleiman as his vice-president isn't likely to persuade anyone that Mubarak is serious about reform. Suleiman is a carbon copy of Mubarak, except maybe with a little more blood on his hands. He's an obvious choice if you're Mubarak--low tolerance for Islamists, relationships with the Palestinians and Israelis. He's just not a choice that screams "Reform!"

Lots of people have been asking what Egyptians want. The answer is easy. They want regime change. They hate Mubarak. They want freedom, economic opportunity, and a better life. And they don't feel like they can have those things with Mubarak in power. But the question remains: how and who? The usual suspects include the military, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Mohamed ElBaradei. ElBaradei is the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and has expressed a willingness to lead a transitional government. However, any freely elected government elected now would have a heavy Muslim Brotherhood presence. This is problematic because the Brotherhood is still highly distrustful of Israel and has stated publicly that it thinks Egypt should abrogate its peace treaty with Israel. Ruh-roh...

Whatever issues folks have with the Muslim Brotherhood, I think it's time to take a risk on freedom in Egypt. As Secretary Rice said, we have privileged security over democracy in the Middle East for decades and gotten neither for our trouble. It seems the definition of insanity fits quite well in this instance. Perhaps it's time to try a new strategy. My sense from the Egyptians I met is that they want democracy--one that looks a lot like what we're used to, but still indigenous. If the Brotherhood doesn't uphold the desired standard of freedom or listen to the will of the people, then the people will boot them out of office and start over. It may be a bit painful in the short term, but it will be a better situation for American national security interests in the long term.

Egyptians, like many others in the Middle East, like the idea of America--free press, free speech, free assembly, the right to protest government policies and run for office in free and fair elections. What they don't like is that America doesn't extend those ideals to everyone unless it's politically expedient. The hypocrisy infuriates them. This is a chance to prove them wrong. We owe it to our long term security and to the Egyptian people to give them a chance.