City Journal Winter 2016

Current Issue:

Winter 2016
Table of Contents
Tablet Editions
Click to visit City Journal California

Readers’ Comments

Judith Miller
The Pharaoh Weeps « Back to Story

View Comments (26)

Add New Comment:

To send your message, please enter the words you see in the distorted image below, in order and separated by a space, and click "Submit." If you cannot read the words below, please click here to receive a new challenge.

Comments will appear online. Please do not submit comments containing advertising or obscene language. Comments containing certain content, such as URLs, may not appear online until they have been reviewed by a moderator.

Showing 26 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
governance , governor, give the people what they want, and all shall be well ? me thinks the pharaoh is smiling, salafist rule may be the beginning of a sweet return to a normalcy whatever normal maybe, got to get better, got to get the world back to the sand of and that river nile, c'mon now lets do this...
One did not need be a rocket scientist to know that it was going to drift to that, with lots worse in store, including civil and religious war.

All in the name of that holly cow: democracy. None of these self-destructing nations, were/are ready for abstract concepts.
I agree that Egypt is spiralling downwards. It'll take decades to return it back to where it was before the revolution, and that wasn't great either.
"Egypt: two years old" is an article along the same topic.
Sadly true word for word
It appears that most people on this blog know nothing about Egypt, having never been there or known well any Egyptians. It appears that everyone shoots from the hip and uses this blog to voice hatred for Obama or the State Department. It appears this is the same mentality that was such a success in Iraq and Vietnam. Your only solution is hate, bigotry, ethnocentric garbage, and random analysis. This is unfortunate for our country and for the world.
First, a point of information. The word "fundamentalism" means a strict adherence to a particular theological doctrine. By this accepted definition, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is fundamentalist in every way. Salafists are Sunni Muslims who attach militance to their fundamentalism and regard all of their co-religionists who do not share their fundamentalism as impure and not following the true path.

It's difficult to sympathize with the Egyptian people's sorry plight. In a democratic election for parliament, the MB and the Salafist parties won about seventy percent of the seats - a landslide.

How the Egyptian people could reason that parties of religious fanaticism could successfully repair an economy is beyond comprehension. "The Arab Spring" has been an unmitigated disaster.

In a sad but ironic way, they got exactly what they deserved.
ask laura logan if Cairo is safer than Chicago or New York - this is what Middle eastern civilzation looks like without Western-backed strongmen in power.
What does the author mean by "while Cairo may be safer than Chicago or New York"? Have you ever actually been to Cairo, especially since the revolution? It is laughable, especially as a woman, to suggest Cairo is "safer" than NYC or Chicago.
The world has been upside down for centuries, we who are without sin cast the first stone. President Obama is no more responsible for the insanity in Egypt than is Judith Miller for her go to war stories in the New York Times. Is she responsible for the thousands of people who died. I don't think so It is up to every citizen to educate themselves on all issues so they are not fooled by politicians and the military
Egypt has no oil and can't feed itself, but it does have one natural resource - cannon fodder - and lots of it. If Egypt wants to be a radical Islamic state, it must conquer other Islamic states that have oil. As a Caliphate, it can be prosperous until the oil runs out. Then it has to build a bigger Caliphate and try to conquer the world.
Egypt does not need money or food from the infidels of the West; it needs more Islam, it needs to become more pious. Islam is the Answer, right?
This chain of events was set in train by Obama's "Arab spring" nonsense. With its characteristic messianic approach to healing all ills, Obama's incendiary, finger-in-the-eye oratory was just enough to spark a revolution. But the result was not what he expected.

O then quickly pivoted to siding with the Muslim Brotherhood against Mubarak. And O is just now learning that he who sups with the devil must use a long spoon.

Moral: To be an enemy of the United States is dangerous; to be her friend is fatal.
Egypt's problems under Mubarak, their underinvestments in education, and his corrupt financial clique have been kicked down the road. Whoever won the most recent election would be looking at exactly the same situation.

The easy way out is to blame the Muslim Brotherhood. And to be sure, Mohamed Morsi is not an experienced politician. None of the MB people and none of the leaders of the other non-Mubarak parties have this experience.

Mubarak made sure of it.

He also set up the policies that encouraged large families with subsidies on food, fuel, rents and other basics.

Egyptian capitalism is not the problem. MB has changed nothing there. What kills the economy is the decades of underinvestment in education. Egypt has an enormous underclass of semi-literate slum dwellers. As adults they test below 80 IQ. If the country had kept those millions of people in schools, in apprenticeships, and away from early childbearing, you would not see this crisis.

Sadly, InTrade is both insolvent and not running betting lines. One sensible bet on Egypt's next "president" would be Col. Gen. Abdul Fatah Al-Sisi.
Meanwhile, our ambassador is assassinated, we will give the Muslim Brotherhood more F16's and Tanks and we will legislate the number of bullets I can put in my handgun.
So, what do you do when people vote in repressive religious leaders, who are bent on subverting democracy? It seems that Egypt is falling into the standard model of governmental change following revolution - an interim period of weak democratic government followed by repressive rule that makes what came before it seem mild by comparison. We've seen this is Russia ca. 1917, Iran, ca. 1979 and other places which started out, at least on the surface, as democratic. And the repressive rule lasts for generations...

It's just our luck that we have the same inept, incompetent Democratic leadership that we did in 1979. In both instances the left scorned the pro-United States government that existed prior to the revolution, and cheered its replacement. The left was shocked - shocked - when the mullahcracy took over in Iran - but you don't hear much about the revolution itself since it would make a Democratic President look bad, and our media never does anything that results in a Democratic President looking like the incompetents they are. In Jimmy Carter's case it was a weak, amateurish leader with no foreign policy experience. Sound familiar?

It is too easy to say that sometimes people aren't ready for western style democracy - they would rather be slaves.
But, again, what do you do when people use the vote to put in government people who reject democracy? The answer is you don't bring in democratic government before people are ready - there has to be some preparation. Democracy doesn't work when it is instant - look at the corruption in places like Bulgaria, Russia etc.

Some adjustment period would have been preferable to a drastic changeover. But how to do that? These things by their very nature aren't orderly. Plus when you have inept leadership, calling for change, you lose the ability to have any influence the process.

So, the promise of the revolution turns to dust and next thing you know, there's another mullahcracy, this time in the most populous country in the Arab world. And once these government get started, they stick. Look at how long it took for the Soviet Union to become Russia....

And you can bet that Iran is guiding Egyptian leaders - it's why and how Egypt continues to get US weapons. Iran surely advised Egypt not to make the mistake it made when it lost the ability to fly recently purchased F-14's.

I'm trying , trying really hard , to care .Yes , a good deal of the problem is overpopulation . But NY's Lower East Side was horribly overpopulated 80 years ago , but it was overpopulated with strivers and doers , not whiners and haters . This is a failure of a society and , yes, its religion . The religion is a fatalist one , in 'shallah , and it begets apathy and anger . But it is an Arab problem and like a Great Man said " We don't have a dog in that fight " . Though it is nice to see the Saudis and the Qataris kicking in some loot . But all in, I don't care
BHO and HRC encouraged the Arab Spring. Egypt is showing the other side of the Arab Spring: The Arab Winter of Discontent.

Nothing like the Ivy-League graduates in government and banking and the academy for getting their hypothesis wrong and acting on it in spite of known outcomes, a study of histtory.

Population growth is a problem, but an ageing population is no prize either.
The problem is food and this needs to be grown in Egypt, or hard currency earnt to pay for its importation.
There will simply be major Middle Eastern uprising over food prices, just as there were in Europe a hundred odd years ago. Personally, I think the government should be encouraging people to grow as much themselves as they can. No balcony should be empty of tomatoes, potatoes or beans! I saw this tongue in cheek, but making public land available for allotments, would provide food and jobs, or at least food for exchange. To convert half a park to allotments takes very little hard cash. Also it provides work for idle hands..
Edna M.Seaside,NJ April 04, 2013 at 6:38 PM
I HAVE MET eGYPTIAN STUDENTS in our rentals. I tried to be friendly to show our American hospitality. Youth is so important. I do hope they are coping with current events.
So much for the Islamic Spring.
War is a step that can distract the people from their troubles for a spell, and shift the blame abroad. But it's not a real answer. Egypt cannot conquer Libya without a wink and a nod from NATO. Her army would not be able to move fast enough to secure Tripoli, which is on the other side of Libya from Egypt and about a thousand miles away from anywhere, before some sort of quick reaction force from NATO could arrive.

What's more, the conquest of Libya, if somehow made good, would cost more in fuel and other supplies for an occupation army than could be wrung from the turnip that Libya's economy would become in the wake of (yet another) war.
the reason the mb took over is obama. he empowered them by demanding they by able to attend his famously stupid 2009 cairo speech. he then forced mubarak out.
Egypt has no hope, but has a great many young men with nothing to lose, and a Brotherhood government. Next door is Libya, with a comparatively tiny population, oil wealth, and now virtually no government, thanks to Obama and his Europals. No political solution, you say? War is a political solution. Conquest is a political solution.
Some people are fit for Democracy and personal freedom. Some aren't. And being fit isn't a permanent condition.
Nowhere does Miller mention overpopulation, which is the underlying cause of Egypt's distress. Life under Mubarak would presumably have reached the same state not many years down the road. (The Muslim Brotherhood is a horror, but physical reality still is what it is.)
lessthantolerant April 04, 2013 at 9:47 AM
One should be careful that you may get what you wish for. Egypt wanted its Islamic nutjobs to run the country.