| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa North |
| Cheney Calls Mubarak a 'Good Friend' |
| 2011-02-06 |
| Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Saturday called Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak a good friend and U.S. ally, and urged the Obama administration to move cautiously as turmoil continued to shake Egypt's government. Mr. Cheney's comments came a day after President Barack Obama pressed Mr. Mubarak to consider his legacy and exit office in a way that would give his country the best chance for peace and democracy. Mr. Cheney said the U.S. should take measured steps in public, and suggested that too much pressure could backfire. "There is a reason why a lot of diplomacy is conducted in secret. There are good reasons for there to be confidentiality in some of those communications. And I think President Mubarak needs to be treated as he deserved over the years, because he has been a good friend," Mr. Cheney said at an event commemorating the centennial of President Ronald Reagan's birth. Mr. Cheney noted it can be difficult for some foreign leaders to act on U.S. advice "in a visible way" without appearing compromised in their own countries. "The bottom line is, in the end, whatever comes next in Egypt is going to be determined by the people of Egypt," he added. The former vice president, looking markedly thinner than during his days in Washington and sitting throughout his remarks, said Mr. Mubarak helped the U.S. get military aircraft into the region in the 1991 Gulf War, and committed troops to fight alongside U.S. forces in the liberation of Kuwait. "He's been a good man, a good friend and ally to the United States," Mr. Cheney said. "We need to remember that." |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #2 There are other parallels. The shah was educating girls, discouraging the veil, and promoting an educated middle class - all of which angered the Islamicists greatly. He also offered a bulwark against the USSR at the time, in part through a US-educated and trained military officer corps. |
| Posted by: lotp 2011-02-06 15:31 |
| #1 1) By no means was he a 'good friend', but he was somebody we could work with, as his motivations were rational. 2) His human rights abuses pale beside so many of his peers across the area - and most likely beside his successor. His biggest offense was diversion of funds to personal accounts - which pretty much describes all politicians, to some degree. 3) At this point the US is in a 'no-win' position. Any successor we support will be stained as an enemy of Egypt, but supporting Mubakak is pointless now. I understand we had been putting subtle pressure on him for several years to clean up his act, but he either wouldn't or couldn't. Situation does remind me of Iran - Shah was no saint, but he was OUR sinner, and in retrospect he wasn't all THAT bad. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2011-02-06 11:19 |