Dr. Aaron Lerner: The Five Words Missing When The US Talks About Egypt

"Do we do business with, do we have relations with, do we support governments over the past 50 years that we do not always see eye-to-eye with? Of course," Clinton said. "That's the world in which we live."

"But our messages are consistent about what we think is in the best interest of the United States, which is to have more democracy, more openness, more participation. And that is a consistent principle. We then have to deal with what comes of that."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, NPR "Clinton Sticks To U.S. Principles On Egyptian Reform"

Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA writes about the sound bites that enunciate present US policy and notes that when Secretary of State talks about Egypt--something is missing.

Notice what's missing from the American sound bites?

And let's be perfectly clear about this point. The Americans are the top professionals when it comes to developing packages of sound bites that describe American policy. Take a string of words from remarks by President Obama, Mrs. Clinton or others on the American team and "Google" them and you find that they appear repeatedly in different presentations. And that's a good thing. Because it allows them to develop clear and consistent messages.

Now let's consider what string of words is terrifyingly absent from the American sound bites relating to developments in Egypt?


Here is a hint: The #1 American sound bite for Israeli - Palestinian relations includes "side by side in peace".

That's right.

Now while the Americans have certainly suggested that Israel should race to cut a deal with the Palestinians - and perhaps even the Syrians - in light of developments in Egypt, they haven't said a word regarding their expectations/desires as to how a future Egyptian regime relates to Israel.

Mrs. Clinton even talks about the participation of the Moslem Brotherhood in at neutral-positive way.

She refers several times to what the United States "expects".

But all these "expectations" relate to the Egyptian domestic scene.

Taken to an extreme, there is nothing in Mrs. Clinton's remarks that indicates that America would have a problem with a democratically elected Egyptian regimes using its advanced American weapons to destroy Israel.

"Do we do business with, do we have relations with, do we support governments over the past 50 years that we do not always see eye-to-eye with? Of course," Clinton said. "That's the world in which we live."

"But our messages are consistent about what we think is in the best interest of the United States, which is to have more democracy, more openness, more participation. And that is a consistent principle. We then have to deal with what comes of that."

Gulp.

Now of course, resolving the Egyptian crisis takes priority over introducing secondary issues such as Egyptian relations with Israel. After all, issues such as that can be taken up later once the transition of power in Egypt is resolved.

At that point, we can expect the US to take the same firm stand it took when it made it clear that the US expected Abbas to reign in anti-Israel incitement--in other words, to express itself with strong words, but take no action to back it up--which is why the incitement of hatred against Israel in the West Bank continues unabated.

So Israel will have to depend on the US to have Israel's interests--and security--at heart as it pushes Mubarak out the door and brings in a transitional government. Judging from how the Obama administration has been dealing with its allies thus far, that would be a good reason to worry.

Technorati Tag: Egypt and Clinton.