Nervous tics in the crowd surfaced, and young mothers with toddlers up past their bedtime started packing their things in case the scene turned ugly. Tears gave way to anger in about 90 seconds, and by the end of the speech no one cared what Mubarak was saying. The protesters heard only themselves, yelling "Irhal," or "Go away."Cellphone camera flashes had been popping like fireflies through the night. Now they ceased completely, and a few people looked angry at me when I took a few shots of my own. When Nasser cracked down on dissent, Egyptians used the phrase "zuwaar nuss al-layl," or "midnight visitors," to describe the knocks at the door by secret police. Were people suddenly worried that the crackdown might happen, and that snapshots would go into a secret police scrapbook somewhere? They were certainly worried about something. ...Graeme Wood, Atlantic
The Egyptian military have moved towards support of Mubarak and asked the demonstrators to go home. The demonstrators are worried about their safety.
The military also promised that the “honorable people who have rejected corruption” and who have demanded reform would not be “pursued.” Many demonstrators fear that if they call off their protests they will face arrest and punishment.
In a direct appeal to the demonstrators to end protests that have forced the autocratic Mr. Mubarak to make once unthinkable concessions, the army said that people should return to work and resume normal life. The turmoil has cost Egypt dearly in terms of its economy, the prestige of its leaders and its vaunted reputation for stability.
It was not immediately clear how the protesters would react to the military’s statement. ...NYT
NPR reports that the military seem unwilling to toss Mubarak and risk instability. The instability issue appears to be a real one, not just a concession to Mubarak. Allowing the "old man" to leave more gently -- as opposed to being thrown out -- is probably part of the army's plan.
Obama doesn't appear to be exerting any pressure. Which is another way of say the US government may have some very good reasons for shutting up.
In his speech, Mr. Mubarak said he would not brook foreign interference, suggesting that he was digging in his heels after days of prodding by the United States for “immediate, irreversible” change.
Mr. Obama’s remarks earlier in the day, in which he celebrated the hopes of a “young generation” of Egyptians, were broadcast in Cairo, drawing cheers from the protesters.
“The administration has to put everything on the line now,” said Thomas Malinowski, the Washington director of Human Rights Watch, who has been among several outside experts advising the White House on Egypt in recent days. “Whatever cards they have, this is the time to play them.”
In its first reaction, the administration offered few overt signs of a change in policy. ...NYT
The CIA's director, Leon Panetta got it all wrong. He announced before Mubarak's speech that the Egyptian leader would step down. The CIA, which has been in the dog house since its screwups and misuse during the Bush administration (after all, the CIA has its own special relationship with Egypt's torture chambers). If only Panetta hadn't had a rare moment of enthusiasm. If only he'd stayed mum.
Panetta, who had little intelligence experience before taking the CIA job two years ago, has been praised for his skill in leading a notoriously temperamental agency, and for handling public controversies with a deft touch.
His testimony Thursday as part of an annual hearing on national security threats, which coincided with new chaos in Cairo, seemed to mark a rare misstep.
Unlike other senior intelligence officials who were more circumspect in their comments on Egypt, Panetta did not hesitate in offering assessments of the rapidly shifting events. ...WaPo
So much of governing -- and above all relationships among nations -- depends on a gavotte of pretense and other trappings of diplomacy that it must be hard for a realist, a pragmatist like Barack Obama, to play the game. Joshua Keating writes at Foreign Policy:
...The idea of Mubarak remaining president in name only while all authority is transferred to Suleiman makes some sense if you buy the notion that governing authority in Egypt is constitutionally proscribed and that Suleiman is an independent political actor rather than a loyal confidant of the president since their army service. As long as Mubarak is in the government, who has the "authority as president" is a technicality. (Somewhere, Dmitry Medvedev is chuckling right now.)
... It is now the regime that is pretending it operates in a free country, using the democratic trappings of elections and constitutional amendments. Judging for the reaction in Tahrir Square tonight, the people of Egypt don't seem to be buying the idea.
We -- America -- don't have the ability or credibility to do anything about Egypt now. Our credibility was lost, experts say, when we invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. We are seen as, and probably are, greatly weakened. Aaron David Miller had this to say on NPR:
"We find ourselves in the worst of all possible worlds," he says, "with grand expectations and supporting very important values, but without the capacity and leverage to implement a preferred American outcome or even an outcome in Egypt that we can control."
Miller says this is part of a long trend for the U.S.; America's credibility, he argues, has been sinking to new lows.
"We are neither admired, respected or feared to the degree that we need to be in order to protect our interests and the reality is — and this is just another demonstration of it — everybody in this region says no to America without cost or consequences," he says. "Hamid Karzi says no, Maliki on occasion says no, Khameni says no, Netanyahu says no. Mubarak says no repeatedly."
U.S. credibility fell over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, analysts say, and again last year when Israel rejected U.S. calls for a building freeze in the occupied West Bank. Egypt is one place where the U.S. can stop this decline, says Amjad Atallah of the New America Foundation.
But, he says, the administration needs to get its act together first and stop giving Egypt mixed messages.
"There is this back and forthing on any given day," he says. "On one day it might be that Mubarak looks like he has to leave; on another day you get a call from a king, you get a call from an emir, and you get weak-kneed and you think we are going to have to keep as much as the status quo as possible."
And the longer this plays out, particularly in public, the weaker the U.S. looks to everyone, Atallah says.
"The great danger to the administration right now is that they might end up losing influence on both sides. They might lose influence with the autocrats we've been supporting for so long but they might also lose influence with the protesters and the forces for democracy in freedom," he says.
