It’s almost like they have some mysterious reason for not wanting the Muslim Brotherhood to take over Syria. And it’s almost like alienating a country has geopolitical consequences.
Or as the New York Times puts it, “Fearful of the Islamist-dominated Syrian rebels, the new Egyptian government installed by Gen. Abdul-Fattah el-Sisi has gone further to oppose the strikes than any other ostensible American ally in the region. It has broken with the pattern of reliable cooperation with Washington shown by former President Hosni Mubarak and also, for the most part, by Mr. Morsi.”
Somehow I doubt Mubarak would have backed a Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Syria either. Morsi did, but then again he was Brotherhood.
How severe are the consequences of Obama’s failed Muslim Brotherhood regime change operation in Egypt? Severe enough that Egyptian officials are routinely tweaking His Majesty Barack I.
Egypt’s Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy said Cairo rejects military intervention in Syria except under Chapter 7 of the U.N. charter, whereby it is proven that the country has become a danger to international peace and security. Fahmy also asked that any decision be put off until the report of the U.N. investigators regarding the use of chemical weapons comes out.
Speaking on MBC Egypt TV, in comments relayed by the state-run news agency MENA, Fahmy said Obama was seeking Congress’ approval to “immunize” himself politically in the wake of controversial U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Fahmy is right, obviously. The domestic Pravda press corps just won’t say it. We, like Egypt, have a domestic media apparatus that blathers government talking points non-stop.
Egypt is now taking the Russian position on Syria. Not even the Saudi position. The Russian position. But that fact is buried inside a CBS story about France and a New York Times story lambasting the Egyptian government.
As our Beloved Leader likes to say, Forward!. Never mind what’s ahead. Or behind. Or overhead.