This is not the sort of thing I usually write about but I am
so attracted to the subject, I feel compelled to get it out of my system or
I'll be so badly hit by a writer's block, I'll have a difficult time writing
something else for a long time. Reading an article written by James Traub in
Foreign Policy Magazine is what caused this electro-chemical unbalance to
develop in my brain.
The article has the title: “Washington 's
Kid Gloves and Egypt 's Fist”
and the subtitle: “Why has the Obama administration given up on speaking truth
to the military rulers in Cairo ?”
This is not a question as to whether or not something is happening; it is at
once an assertion that the thing is happening, and a question as to why it is
happening. What galling pretense!
The first thing that hit me when I read those words is the
lamentation in the subtitle about Obama giving up “speaking truth to the rulers
in Cairo .” I
felt that for someone to dare come out at this time, and with a straight face,
write something along this line when the whole world is abuzz about nations
spying on each other and lying about it, and when Obama himself is accused of
lying to his own people, is the height of hypocrisy on the part of the author
or the height of a self-delusion that borders on insanity.
More than once in my life, I experienced the agony of having
to separate from a girl I loved. It was hard but was nowhere near what I saw
happen to couples that were married for many years, and had to go through
divorce procedures. It so happened, long ago, that I found myself helping in
the office of a divorce lawyer where I met with one, the other or both in a
divorcing couple. I saw first hand the raw expression of extreme love for the
other person coupled with the raw hatred for them; I saw the wish to possess
the other person coupled with the wish to cut loose from them. I don't know
what that is but I think it has to do with obsession.
I remembered those moving moments in my life when I read the
words in the first paragraph of Traub's article. This is what he wrote:
“Remember that moving passage in Obama's 2009 speech in Cairo ? … I [was] thinking of that as I read
Kerry's agonizingly circumscribed remarks during his recent visit to Cairo .” Well, the obsession
I felt was gripping each party more than anything was the longing that each had
– not for what the other did that was considered to be wrong – but for the
other to just admit they did something wrong. These people longed not for the
undoing of the wrong that could probably never be undone, but for the telling
of the truth about it. The truth as each saw it, that is.
And yet, as I always discovered and always concluded,
neither will perish without the other, and neither will live happily without
the other. Life for the rest of us will continue with or without them while
they learn to move on as if nothing had happened. This is because neither was
completely right or completely wrong, but that both were imagining scripts that
were filled with characters that never existed, and scenes that never unfolded.
This is what came to mind when I read the following passage in the Traub
article: “Condoleezza Rice came to Egypt [and] had an audience: the
activists who were delighted and emboldened.” No. No American can ever have an
audience in Egypt
unless you call an audience half a dozen slightly curious and very disgusted
people. Like the divorcing individuals, Traub is imagining characters that
never existed, and scenes that never unfolded.
After you see a number of these couples, and after you hear
them tell the same sort of stories over and over, you get used to that, and you
cease to be shocked. But once in a while, you hear something that says to you,
this one person could use the services of a mental professional. Likewise, you
cannot help but see a disease display itself each time that an American
publication mentions a legal case outside America , calling the charges
“trumped-up” charges. It seems to be an incurable disease that will still be
here after the universe has ceased to exist. And this is the disease that has
shocked our esteemed author. Look what he writes: “It's shocking that Kerry
said nothing about the trial of Morsy on trumped-up charges.” James Traub needs
help, alright.
And nothing says so more that the lamentation which
continues to pour out of his pen. Look at this: “The rulers [of Egypt ] … are
planning to promulgate a law which gives the Interior Ministry the right to
approve of demonstrations in advance, or to cancel or relocate them.” To get
your arms around what he is trying to advance, compare the situation of an
Egypt that is situated in a “rough neighborhood,” that is going through
revolutionary times, and that is experiencing terrorist violence in the Sinai –
with the situation of an America that is flanked by two protective oceans, that
is at peace, and that is experiencing no violence on any of its territory. Are
you done with the comparison?
If so, now think of what America has done in the name of
security since the one serious incident called 9/11 that occurred on its soil
twelve years ago. Think of the lifetime detention of people without charge or
trial, and of the National Security Agency that pokes its nose in every nook
and cranny representing the life of every American, and beyond it to the life
of everyone in the world. Well, anyone that fails to appreciate the magnitude
of the contrast between the two situations and still believes that Egypt is
overdoing things, needs help and needs it badly. And that includes James Traub.
So then, what do you do when you finally realize that the
marriage is off for good, and that you must seek the best accommodation you can
have to protect the common interests that may include the management of shared
property, and perhaps the children if any? Well, what you do is speak of
aesthetics, which is what James Traub is doing: “From a strictly aesthetic
point of view, it would be preferable to … After all, the United States needs to stay on Egypt 's good
side. And Washington has no leverage with Cairo right now.” The
addition of “right now” means that the obsession with Egypt does not
end with the divorce.
This done, you have nothing left but to think of the real
and imagined good moments of the past, and fantasize about a future that you
hope will turn out to be as good. Here is how Traub does that: “a people who
have earned their freedom in the streets will not accept the military
dispensation … If Egyptians take to the streets again to protest against their
government, they will be looking to the U.S. for support as they did in
2011.” This is an imaginary moment that is more than a fantasy. It is inserted
here to serve a practical purpose: “For that reason, it would be a mistake to
cut off all aid to Egypt and
declare the country a lost cause … Because there is reason to hope for a better
future, the United States
should hold Egypt
to the values of the revolution.”