USA,Caught off guard by the sustained strength of the popular revolt in Egypt, President Barack Obama has responded publicly by hedging his bets--neither voicing support for President Hosni Mubarak nor calling for the outright removal of the longest-standing Arab ally of the United States in the Middle East. The approach is winning him few fans among pro-democracy activists, in the Arab world and elsewhere, who once hoped he would embrace the "freedom agenda" championed by his predecessor, George W. Bush.
Grounded more in realpolitik than any altruistic notion about fomenting Middle East democracy, the White House's cautious call for an "orderly transition" to a new government reflects a more sober recognition that there may be few good outcomes for the United States, no matter how the crisis in Egypt resolves itself.
"The best result is that there is no bloodbath and you have a coalition government of various elements in Egypt that can work with the United States," said Thomas Whalen, a Boston University political scientist.
"But whatever regime comes to power and replaces Mubarak, it probably will put the United States at an arm's length, at the very least."
Repressive and uncompromising in dealing with his own people, General Mubarak has been the U.S.'s strongest ally in the Middle East for three decades. Not only has Egypt been a moderating force in how the Arab world deals with Israel, it has provided valuable military and intelligence assistance to successive U.S. administrations.
In turn, the United States has backstopped the Egyptian military. Since 1979, Gen. Mubarak's regime has received about US$2-billion a year in aid -- primarily military -- from Washington, says the Congressional Research Service.
Clifford May, president of the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said it would be "unseemly for the U.S. to be seen as pushing Mubarak out" because of his loyalty to America.
Rather, it should be using its influence to quietly but forcefully urge him to step down and allow the formation of a stable transitional government.
"We have had many years to plan for the transition from Mubarak. The guy is 82 years old. This is not a contingency that could not have been foreseen," Mr. May said.
While the U.S. wants to be seen as siding with Egyptians seeking an end to decades of iron-fisted rule, analysts say the Obama administration is also deeply concerned about how a power vacuum created by Gen. Mubarak's departure would be filled.
The prospect the powerful Muslim Brotherhood might unite with secular opposition groups to form a new government may pose the greatest threat.
This would cast uncertainty over Egypt's long-standing strategic alliance with the U.S. and the fate of its 32-year peace agreement with Israel.
On Monday, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, likened the danger lurking in Egypt to the rise of Islamic fundamentalists in Iran in 1979 after the ouster of the Shah, another strong-armed U.S. ally.
"The big threat here is that this upheaval, which is in favour of more freedoms, more democracy and more prosperity, gets hijacked by the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the one opposition group that is disciplined and well organized," Mr. May said.
"That would be a tragedy for Egypt, for American interests and it would be a great threat to Israel as well."
When pressed Monday whether Gen. Mubarak should stay on and if the U.S. believes he can implement democratic reforms, Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, dodged.
"It is not up to us to determine when the grievances of the Egyptian people have been met by the Egyptian government," he said.
When asked what the U.S. means by its call for an "orderly transition" to democracy, he said Egypt's leadership must hold "free and fair" presidential elections in September and implement "constitutional changes that facilitate a more open and more democratic process."
