Southeast Asian leaders warned of Arab-style uprising

Harakahdaily

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 28: Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim said that the current uprising in the Arab-Muslim would soon reach Southeast Asian nations if governments did not take heed to initiate socio-economic reform and strengthen democracy.

Speaking at a conference held in Phnom Penh on February 26, Anwar said such governments could carry on as long as their state controlled organs such as the police, security forces or the military did the regimes' bidding to suppress dissent.

“The problems that plague the Middle Eastern nations are no different from those affecting other parts of the world under autocratic regimes.

The amassing of wealth by the elite at the expense of the masses, inadequate infrastructure, outdated education systems, deplorable health care and declining incomes in real terms – these are problems that almost all nations under autocratic regimes have in common," he said.

Saying the Middle East uprising was a warning to Southeast Asian leaders to vigorously pursue the reform agenda, Anwar said draconian laws had undermined the independence gained from colonial powers.

Anwar cited Indonesia as the example of a real democracy after going through political upheaval, and urged countries in the region to emulate the country's democratic institutions.

“There are rare exceptions though. Indonesia, having undergone her transformational political upheaval and emerging from the storm a new nation altogether, still remains the shining example of a real democracy. Press freedom is alive and well, and the practice of free and fair elections leaves her neighbours looking like pathetic upstarts in the race for democracy,” said Anwar.

Anwar also said that any empowerment of a particular community at the expense of another would lead to conflict in a plural society.

“It is therefore incumbent on politicians be they in power or those in opposition to conduct themselves responsibly even if it means risking popularity," he added.

Kuan Yew and Najib

Anwar said the current revolution in several Arab countries was proof that Islam and Muslims do not tolerate dictatorship, as claimed by some right wing commentators.

“In any event, the fear of Islam hijacking freedom and democracy has been proven to be without foundation.

Hence, this rising tide of Islam catch phrase is nothing but another new way of beating the Islamic bogeyman, in its various manifestations of Islamophobia,” stressed Anwar.

He added however that 'Islamophobia', or the fear of anything Islamic, was not a disease among Western leaders only.

“We have on record a supposedly retired statesman in Southeast Asia expressing opinions on Muslims which betray an utter lack of sensitivity," he said, in a apparent jibe at Singapore's former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew over his recent statement criticising Muslims.

Anwar also did not leave out prime minister Najib Razak's latest statement in Turkey, in which he cast suspicion on Egypt's Ikhwan Muslimin over its role in post-Mubarak Egypt.

"We even have Muslim leaders in the region who appear to be suffering from the paranoia about the Muslim Brotherhood to a degree that rivals that of say Mubarak or even the Neo-cons of America,” he said.

http://en.harakahdaily.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2354:southeast-asian-leaders-warned-of-arab-style-uprising&catid=34:primary&Itemid=56

Anwar on Middle East revolution and its impact on Southeast Asia

Anwar Ibrahim

Speech by Anwar Ibrahim at the Fifth Asian Renaissance Seminar on February 26, 2011 in Phnom Penh

SPEECH My congratulations once again to the Sasakawa Peace Foundation and the Institute for Policy Studies for hosting this Fifth Seminar. This is indeed a most opportune time for our future leaders to engage with each other on the issues that matter most to meet the challenges of a rapidly evolving world.

It was only two years ago that I addressed the last Renaissance forum held in Manila and recounted the episode of my attempt at some crystal ball gazing on the geo-political situation in the Middle East. Today, as we all know, it gives me some degree of satisfaction to be able to say that I wasn’t too far off the mark when I said that the winds of change from autocracy to democracy had been blowing across various parts of the Muslim world. Of course, little did I expect that the winds of change would transform into the sandstorms of revolution.

Indeed, regardless of the locus of the upheaval, where the formula for repressive rule is founded on the suppression of dissent by state controlled organs, such as the police, security forces or the military, the powers that be can only continue to be so as long as these organs do their bidding. As we witnessed in Tunisia, and then more significantly in Egypt, when these organs malfunction, or refuse to do their bidding, the entire substratum of control collapses enabling the people to progress from mere assemblies of protest to a virtual behemoth of regime change. Even as we speak, we know that events in Yemen, Bahrain and Libya are spiralling towards their inevitable resolution, no matter how stubbornly their leaders cling on power.

The problems that plague the Middle Eastern nations are no different from those affecting other parts of the world under autocratic regimes. The amassing of wealth by the elite at the expense of the masses, inadequate infrastructure, outdated education systems, deplorable health care and declining incomes in real terms – these are problems that almost all nations under autocratic regimes have in common. Political marginalization in all its implications and economic impoverishment, these are the perfect ingredients for political upheavals. Regimes that have gone past their expiry dates but continue to paint a facade of peace, security and even prosperity through the use of an elaborate propaganda machine are only delaying their final reckoning.

True, it will take some time for Tunisia and Egypt to move into the league of Muslim democracies such as Turkey and Indonesia, but even as the point of no return has been reached for the Middle East, we ask ourselves how these events may now impact the supposedly ‘older’ democracies in Southeast Asia.

It would do well to remind leaders here to vigorously pursue the agenda for socio-economic reform and to strengthen further the institutions of democracy and freedom. Fundamental safeguards put in place upon the attainment of independence from colonial powers have been systematically dismantled. In their place are draconian laws that violate fundamental liberties together with a systemic destruction of the separation of powers equation.

There are rare exceptions though. Indonesia, having undergone her transformational political upheaval and emerging from the storm a new nation altogether, still remains the shining example of a real democracy. Press freedom is alive and well, and the conduct of free and fair elections leaves her neighbours’ looking like pathetic upstarts in the race for democracy.

Granted it is no Utopia, but the phenomenal changes in the areas of governance, the judiciary, and the pre-eminence of the rule of law set it as an exemplary nascent liberal democracy. So what happened to the rest of the pack?

The Philippines was at the fore front in the democratization process displacing their dictator with People Power. Under the late president Corazon Aquino, the Philippines got way ahead of the curve but, as they say, democracy can be here today and gone tomorrow. So this great nation has had its fair share of the trials and tribulations associated with the passage from martial law to full freedom and democracy. Fortunately, the backsliding from democracy was never that insidious as to destroy the entire foundation. The recent elections results make us optimistic that under its new President, the Philippines will be firmly on the road back to real freedom and democracy.

Taking lessons from history, we can say that with the exception of Japan and India, not more than 30 years had passed in the countries in Asia before the euphoria of independence became supplanted with the gloom of despotism and autocracy.

Still being championed by aging autocrats some still in power and some having ostensibly retired, the view is that authoritarian systems are better suited towards realizing socio-economic ends. The proposition is that in order to eradicate poverty and exploit resources to accelerate modernization, government must be paternalistic. This means rapid centralization of power together with the dismantling of the checks and balance. These are obviously antithetical to freedom and democracy.

Today, we see the rights and liberties of the people being progressively eroded – whether they are from minorities, the marginalized poor, the progressive middle class or from those on the other side of the political spectrum. At the same time, we see political leaders grandstanding before their electoral constituents even if it means fanning the fire of ethnic tensions and putting the long term stability of the nation in danger.

In a plural society, the empowerment of one ethnic group at the expense of another would only lead to a clash of competing interests which would in turn threaten the essential overlapping consensus. This consensus requires making adjustments to overlapping claims to entitlement of rights or competing goals. It is therefore incumbent on politicians be they in power or those in opposition to conduct themselves responsibly even if it means risking popularity. It is therefore doubly reprehensible for leaders in multi-ethnic societies who control the state organs including the mass media to stoke the fires of ethnic rivalry and animosity just so that they can stay in power.

Now apart from free, fair and transparent elections, the basic institutions of civil society must be in place with an independent judiciary that will function as an effective check and balance against the powers of the executive and the legislature. We cannot overstate the profound importance of an independent judiciary. A judiciary which is compromised can and will take a nation to political damnation. It breeds systemic failure of due process and the rule of law.

If the next generation is to inherit the legacy of an Asian Renaissance in its full bloom, then the lessons of the latest upheavals in the Middle East must be learned by the leaders of the region. Some seem to have taken cognizance and are humbled. Yet others have not only remained in denial but, for reasons best known to themselves, have displayed pure arrogance in the face of these stark realities. Some pride their sense of security in the attainment of economic wealth and progress. Some pride theirs on their own evaluation of their contribution to the political well being of the state. But let us remind these pompous and pontificating autocrats that the consequences for not heeding the call for freedom and democracy will be profound and far reaching. You may be able to swim against the current in the river when it serves but you cannot swim against the force of history.

While the collapse of the regimes in Tunisia and Egypt has proceeded on an uneven keel, the common thread that links it remains clearly a collective desire to break free from the chains of tyranny and political enslavement. In as much as democracy is not time bound, the world of cyber linkages is borderless. This has immense implications for autocratic regimes. Whether they call it managing information or filtering negative content, the fact remains that the Internet is being seen by such regimes as major threats to efforts in stifling dissent. Yet, despite having been proven to be a Sisyphean endeavour, (as in Egypt and Libya) the powers that be in this part of the world, continue to flaunt its role of cyber Big Brother.

But these are things that don’t really surprise us, coming from a basically totalitarian state. But we need not look too far for surprises though. In Southeast Asia, bloggers are being hauled up to face charges for exercising their freedom of expression and that’s simply because their expressions are not in favour of the ruling governments. Bloggers and websites dedicated to opposition bashing are allowed free rein and some are funded by the powers that be.

Finally, let me say a few words about the view that is gaining currency fast in the wake of the revolutions in the Middle East. This is the so-called ‘rising tide of political Islam’. As I’ve said before, given a choice between freedom and dictatorship, Muslims will overwhelmingly choose the former. In any event, the fear of Islam hijacking freedom and democracy has been proven to be without foundation.

Hence, this rising tide of Islam catch phrase is nothing but another new way of beating the Islamic bogeyman, in its various manifestations of Islamophobia. This psychotic fear has not dissipated since 9/11 and has been given a new lease on life in the wake of the convulsions in the Arab world. And contrary to general belief, this phobia is not prevalent only in the West. We have on record a supposedly retired statesman in Southeast Asia expressing opinions on Muslims which betray an utter lack of sensitivity. We even have Muslim leaders in the region who appear to be suffering from the paranoia about the Muslim Brotherhood to a degree that rivals that of say Mubarak or even the Neo-cons of America.

We have already seen that right from the Tunisian revolution, and throughout the Egyptian phase and now in Libya, Yemen and elsewhere, the rallying cry had been freedom against tyranny and oppression. The demands of the people remain to be good governance, accountability for corruption, political empowerment and social justice.

http://en.harakahdaily.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2353:anwar-on-middle-east-revolution-and-its-impact-on-southeast-asia&catid=34:primary&Itemid=56

Najib nafi label Muslim Brotherhood pengganas

Feb 27, 11 4:47pm

Datuk Seri Najib Razak berkata beliau tidak pernah melabelkan gerakan Ikhwan Muslimin (Muslim Brotherhood) dan ulama terkenal dunia, Syeikh Dr Yusuf Al-Qardhawi sebagai pengganas.

Perdana Menteri berkata sebaliknya gerakan itu perlu menghilangkan persepsi dunia terhadap mereka yang dianggap sebagai kumpulan ekstrem.

"Saya tak kata Muslim Brotherhood ini kumpulan pengganas. Saya kata Muslim Brotherhood boleh ambil bahagian dalam pilihan raya dengan syarat menolak keganasan dan fahaman ekstremis, sebab ini (kumpulan pengganas adalah) pandangan umum terhadap Muslim Brotherhood, bukan pandangan saya," katanya kepada pemberita selepas menghadiri majlis ramah mesra bersama penduduk Felda Jengka 25, di Temerloh hari ini.

Najib berkata demikian ketika diminta mengulas kenyataan Timbalan Presiden PAS, Nasharudin Mat Isa dan Penasihat Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang mendesak beliau menarik balik tuduhan liar yang dilemparkan kepada gerakan Ikhwan Muslimin dan Syeikh Dr Yusuf Al-Qardhawi.

Najib berkata gerakan itu perlulah menghormati undang-undang, proses demokrasi dan cintakan keamanan.

"Kalau mereka (gerakan itu) kata, bahawa mereka tak ada ideologi sedemikian rupa (ekstrem), mereka nak ambil bahagian ikut proses undang-undang, menghormati proses demokrasi, cintakan keamanan. Kita (Malaysia) tak ada masalah untuk menerima mereka untuk bertanding dalam pilihan raya.

"Lagipun ini bukan keputusan saya, ini keputusan yang perlu dibuat oleh negara lain, negara masing-masing. Saya tak kata mereka ini golongan ekstremis atau pengganas. Soalnya, untuk mereka menghilangkan persepsi dunia terhadap kumpulan ni," kata Najib.

Nasharudin dan Anwar berkata demikian sebagai merujuk satu laporan berita yang disiarkan dalam laman web National Review Online yang memetik ucapan Najib di Istanbul, Turki baru-baru ini yang mendakwa bahawa parti politik Ikhwan Muslimin terlibat dengan keganasan dan sifat ekstremis.

http://malaysiakini.com/news/157193

Egyptians mass in Cairo to mark Mubarak fall

AP – A young boy watches from a rooftop as tens of thousands of Egyptians pray and celebrate the fall of the …

By BEN HUBBARD, Associated Press Ben Hubbard, Associated Press – 44 mins ago

CAIRO – Hundreds of thousands of flag-waving Egyptians packed into Cairo's central Tahrir Square in the first major rally since the fall of longtime leader Hosni Mubarak a week ago, celebrating his ouster and pressing Egypt's new military rulers to uproot the rest of his regime and steer the country toward reform.

Organizers are seeking to turn their movement, which forced Mubarak's removal after 18 days of mass protests, to now put pressure on the military to take greater action against regime figures who still hold considerable power.

Friday's crowd appeared to spiral well beyond the quarter-million that massed for the biggest of the anti-Mubarak protests. But for many, it was much a nationalist celebration of what has been accomplished as a rally to demand more. Parents painted children's faces with the national colors of black, white and red; the crowd unfurled giant Egyptian flags. Vendors hawked T-shirts praising the "Jan. 25 revolution" — a reference to the date protests began.

Protest leaders addressed the sprawling crowd, saying rallies must go on until the military meets their demands.

Protesters want the army to dissolve the caretaker government headed by Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq, which was appointed by Mubarak in his final weeks and contains many of his stalwarts. They also want the lifting of emergency laws that give police near unlimited powers of arrest. So far, the military has not moved on either issue, or on another demand for the release of thousands of political prisoners.

"We'll stay in the square until there is a new government, because there is no way we will see change under a government by the National Democratic Party," proclaimed prominent TV journalist Wael el-Ibrashi, one of the speakers on a stage before the crowd, referring to Mubarak's former ruling party.

Protest organizers have called for weekly protests every Friday, and their ability to keep them going will be a major test of how much they can influence the army.

Prominent Muslim cleric Sheik Youssef el-Qaradawi, who is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, led the crowd in prayers, proclaiming, "The revolution is not over, until we have a new Egypt."

El-Qaradawi's appearance in Cairo's main square marked a dramatic return for the influential cleric, who has mostly lived abroad for decades after being jailed for his anti-government stances. During the protests, he used his weekly TV show on Al-Jazeera to urge Egyptians to join. In the square Friday, he hailed the young protest activists — from a range of ideologies — saying, "They knew that the revolution will win in the end."

In Egypt's second largest city, the Mediterranean port of Alexandria, hundreds of thousands rallied outside a main mosque, then paraded down the seafront boulevard. They shouted for the Shafiq government's removal, using the same chant as protests against Mubarak — "The people want to topple the regime." Soldiers in the streets did not interfere.

In Tahrir, the military seemed eager to encourage a festive, nationalist atmosphere: Soldiers distributed Egyptian flags to families as they streamed into the square. At one point, a military marching band paraded through the square the entertain the partygoers. Army tanks and checkpoints were stationed at entrances to the square, with soldiers checking IDs and bags of those heading in.

The Armed Forces Supreme Council, a body of top generals which forced Mubarak to resign and hand it his powers, has promised a swift transition to an elected government and president — within six months. In the final days of the protests, many in the crowds had pleaded with the army to push Mubarak out.

But in the past week, worries have begun to arise among protest leaders about the military's handling of the transition. Changes to the constitution are being planned behind closed doors by a military-appointed panel. So far, reform leaders have not been given any position of power or influence in the transition, the Mubarak-apppointed government remains in place, and police powers remain intact.

The military has hinted over the past week that its patience is running out with protests and especially labor strikes that have spread wildly since the days just before Mubarak's fall.

But far from cracking down, the army's attitude toward Friday's rally could mark a different strategy: Turn the "revolution" into a nationalist event, celebrate it, but then move on.

Manal Samir, 49, a pediatrician who brought her two daughters to the celebrations, said she had faith in the army for now, "but only for a temporary period." She said her sons had participated in the 18 days of massive protests that led to Mubarak's resignation a week ago, but she and her daughters, aged 12 and 16, hadn't come until now.

"We came to celebrate what the young people (had done). I want my children to know what happened here, and to learn from it," she said. "Not everything comes at the same time, but I believe we won because Mubarak left and the other demands will be fulfilled in time."

The atmosphere was festive. Vendors hawked T-shirts proclaiming "Jan. 25, the day we changed Egypt," flags, headbands and badges all in the red-black-and-while national colors. Some even sold vuvuzelas, the buzzing horns that became the soundtrack to the World Cup in South Africa last summer.

"We are excited about Egypt and the revolution," said 48-year-old Ashraf Abdel-Azim, who made his way to the square with his wife, Nadwa, and their 9-year-old son, Ahmed. "We want freedom and change, so we are happy to see it coming."

His wife held a handwritten cardboard sign, "The people want to cleanse the country of corruption," it read.

A monument to those killed in the uprising — at least 365 civilians, according to the Health Ministry — was erected in one area of the vast plaza. Many lay flowers in front of the monument or took photos of the pictures of the dead.

Many said they were focused on continuing to pressure the military.

Mohammed Zuheir, an activist handing out signs, said: "We have one main demand, we want the end of the old regime and a new government that has no people left over from Mubarak's regime."

Asked what the organizers plan was, he pointed at the huge crowd in the square. "That's what we are doing," he said. "We are still concentrating on coming out together as one to get rid of the old regime."

Speaking with a microphone on stage, Mohammed el-Beltagy, a Muslim Brotherhood member prominent in the protests, led the crowd in a call-and-response, shouting, "Can we stop the protests when the government of Ahmed Shafiq is still there?" The crowd roared back, "No, no, no."

In a small counterpoint to the scene at Tahrir Square, scores of Mubarak supporters protested outside a mosque Friday. Demonstrators, many dressed in black, held photos of the ex-president and said they wanted to honor the man who led them for nearly three decades because they felt he had been humiliated by the revolt.

While the uprising has lifted national pride, it has pounded the Egyptian economy, raising the tension between protesters and their new rulers.

The tourism industry has been hit hard, with many vacationers abandoning trips and tourism sites closed. Egypt plans to reopen heritage sites Sunday, and France's CETO association of tour operators said Friday that it will start sending tourists to Red Sea resorts, Nile River cruises and the southern Lake Nasser starting next Tuesday.

"Tour operators are still evaluating the situation in other areas of the country, notably for the city of Cairo," a CETO statement said.

Banks and the stock market also have been shuttered by the uprising, and the military has twice warned Egyptians not to strike. Even so, at least 1,500 employees of the Suez Canal Authority protested for better pay, housing and benefits Thursday in three cities — just one example of workers nationwide using this opportunity to voice long-held grievances.

Wael Hassan, a 32-year-old dentist who participated in the Cairo protests and witnessed major clashes on Jan. 28, went to Tahrir Square on Friday and captured the anxiety many Egyptians have about the future.

"For me, it's not a celebration," he said. "It's a message to the army and the government that we're still here and we will still protest, that we won't stop until we see a civilian government, not a government appointed by Mubarak himself."

___

Associated Press Writer Maggie Michael contributed to this story.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110218/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt

The Muslim Brotherhood: The Future of Egypt?

AFP – Egyptian army soldiers take position in front of the Giza pyramids. The all-poweful army said on Monday …

Caitlin Dickson Caitlin Dickson – Mon Jan 31, 12:44 pm ET

WASHINGTON, DC – As protests in Cairo continue, attention has turned to the Muslim Brotherhood, the 83-year-old Islamist opposition group. Members of the long-suppressed organization have recently been arrested in the protests. The opinions of the Muslim Brotherhood are vast and varied, as beliefs that the group's sole motivation is to oust President Mubarak and bring peace to the country are contradicted by proclamations that the Brotherhood plans to take over Egypt and create an anti-American state. Here is a sampling of the current discussion and the questions everyone is asking.

• What Is the Brotherhood's Role in the Protests? Cara Parks at the Huffington Post attempts to break down who exactly the Muslim Brotherhood is and what role it plays in the current protests. Founded in 1928 and suppressed in Egypt since 1952, the Muslim Brotherhood is known both for its support of democracy and its criticism of American foreign policy. In the protests currently ravaging Cairo, Parks writes, the Brotherhood's role is minimal. She cites news reports crediting Egypt's youth for the uprising. Still, members of the group have been arrested during the protests, as "the Egyptian government has warned protestors of the group's 'hidden agenda'." But, Parks points out, Nobel laureate Mohamad ElBaradei insists "the Mubarak government uses its Islamist opposition as an excuse for authoritarian rule."
  

• Are They Violent? "For most of its existence in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has refrained from violence against the state. It is not the organization of radical jihadists that it is sometimes made out to be. But its caution in dealing with Mubarak has made it appear recently that it is more concerned with protecting itself than with improving the nation," writes Will Englund at The Washington Post. Still, "the groups running the demonstrations have organized a committee of 10 to deal with the government; the Muslim Brotherhood is included. When its eight regional directors were arrested last week, it chose not to mobilize in their defense so as not to distract from the main goal--the departure of Mubarak."

• Are They a Threat to the U.S.? Think Progress writer Tonya Somanader scoffs at the purported threat of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, calling it the Republican hardliners' "delusion-du-jour." She writes that Representative Thaddeus McCotter and UN Ambassador John Bolton are among many in the U.S. who believe "the result of this pro-democracy movement will be the enfranchisement of the Muslim Brotherhood and other anti-American 'jihadist nutjobs.'" She cites Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei's appearance on Fareek Zakaria's CNN show in which he denounced such assertions as "a myth perpetuated and sold by the Mubarak regime," insisting that the religiously conservative group is a minority in Egypt, but has a lot of credit because they are interested in a secular state. Somanader affirms ElBaradei's comments by writing that the Muslim Brotherhood has moved away from its past violence and, now peaceful, is the largest opposition group to the Egyptian government.

Now allied with legal Egyptian political groups and tied to Egyptian professional unions, university campuses, and social welfare programs, the Brotherhood is a “peaceful” group that “could draw moderate Muslims who identify with [its] ideology to participate in electoral politics, thereby isolating violent jihadis.” Indeed, the Brotherhood denounced a recent terrorist attack in Egypt as a “cowardly act” and is not on the U.S. State Department’s terrorist list....Though banned by Mubarak’s regime from participating in parliamentary elections, the Brotherhood has 17 supportive representatives in the Egyptian Parliament and is supporting ElBaradei’s leadership role in forming a new government without Mubarak.

• What Would a Muslim Brotherhood-Run Egypt Mean for Israel? The Israeli government fears that an Egypt run by the Muslim Brotherhood will mean "not only a stronger Islamist force in Gaza but also in the West Bank, currently run by the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority, as well as in Jordan, meaning Israel would feel surrounded in a way it has not in decades," writes the New York Times's Ethan Bronner from Jerusalem.
  
  According to Bronner, the Muslim Brotherhood, which has ties to Hamas, is the "best-organized political force in Egypt." If in charge of the country, the group could be expected to turn Egypt's long held alliance with Israel into a hostile relationship and "quite likely stop in its tracks any further Israeli talk of peace negotiations with the Palestinians."

• Is the Brotherhood Being Disingenuous? At The Daily Beast, Leslie Gelb warns strongly against believing the Muslim Brotherhood's assertion that they are "misunderstood Islamic democrats" and that having the group in power "would be calamitous for US security." He explains why:

The MB supports Hamas and other terrorist groups, makes friendly noises to Iranian dictators and torturers, would be uncertain landlords of the critical Suez Canal, and opposes the Egyptian-Israeli agreement of 1979, widely regarded as the foundation of peace in the Mideast. Above all, the MB would endanger counterterrorism efforts in the region and worldwide. That is a very big deal.

It would be delusory to take the MB's democratic protestations at face value. Look at who their friends are—like Hamas.The real danger is that our experts, pundits and professors will talk the Arab and American worlds into believing we can all trust the MB. And that's dangerous because, outside of the government, the MB is the only organized political force, the only group capable of taking power. And if they do gain control, it's going to be almost impossible for the people to take it back. Just look at Iran.

• Will the Muslim Brotherhood Prove to Be Egypt's Version of Ayatollah Khomeini? Haaretz.com reports that the Muslim Brotherhood is working with Mohammed ElBaradei to form a national unity government, excluding President Mubarak's National Democratic Party. To some, like Don Surber, this is evidence that the results of the current uprising in Egypt will look like Iran's 1979 revolution. At his Daily Mail blog, Surber writes that if he were the president, he would bring home all of his ambassadors now. "Revolutions are dangerous, and the post-revolutionary period is often autocratic," he writes. "Pray for Egypt." Many who fear Egypt's revolution will turn out like Irans, envision the Muslim Brotherhood as the post-revolutionary autocratic regime. At The American Spectator, Hal G.P. Colebatch suggests that, "in the endless, dusty, jerry-built tower-blocks ringing Cairo, the Muslim Brotherhood is watching and waiting to seize its chance."
• 
  
• http://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/20110131/cm_atlantic/themuslimbrotherhoodthefutureofegypt6780