The egyptian regime knows that it can count on the acquiescence of western countries; development minister niebel explains why more money must remain in the country
In egypt, the situation for protesters no longer looks so pleasant. Despite all the rallies, despite new protests by the unions and changes in the government, the regime is firmly in the saddle; it seems to want to sit out the unrest for the time being, makes promises to the outside world that it does not keep, and starts making threats again. Vice president suleiman said that civil disobedience would no longer be tolerated.
This is also possible because mubarak and his corrupt network have seen that foreign countries, the usa in particular, exert verbal prere, but no consequences follow. They want to keep all doors open, which also means that they do not openly side with the opponents of the regime and do not want to alienate mubarak completely if everything remains more or less as it is. In addition, the familiar persons then love to assert their own interests at the expense of the people as before and to preserve the much-invoked stability.
The talk about "orderly transition", us secretary clinton made it clear what this means: mubarak’s resignation would not make the situation easier, but more complicated. Not only israel, but also jordan, saudi arabia and the united arab emirates are putting prere on the u.S. Government to hold on to mubarak because they themselves fear for their power. Suleiman gratefully accepted the phrase from the "orderly transition" the government’s decision to resign is also a bridge that guarantees the regime’s survival. The only alternative to talks between the opposition and the government that would cut them off, they say, is a "coup", he said: "we want to avoid rash and hasty steps that create more irrationality." after him, there will be neither a coup nor an end to the regime, "because the chaos became mean".
So far, there is no talk that the us government could stop military aid to egypt. The federal government also falls into restraint. After cuddling up to mubarak, they continue to cling to stability and thus to the repressive regime, otherwise they try to save face by talking about democracy and human rights. After chancellor merkel and aubenminister westerwelle, this attitude has now also been made clear by niebel, the minister for development aid. Asked by the frankfurter rundschau if the government was thinking of cutting off aid to egypt – 190 million in the last two years – if the regime would not back down, the "liberal" minister:
Thus we were burdened the population. For example, if we do not renovate the turbines in the aan dam, the consequence would be less electricity, less industrial production, fewer jobs, more poverty and thus more food ground for extremists. We do not want that.
Argued in this way, could continue to support even the worst dictatorships without hesitation. Its development policy, which for niebel nevertheless allegedly "value-oriented" is in agypt "remote from the government", does not support the government, because "every cent we spend (benefits) people first and foremost, because we demand projects that otherwise would not have been demanded." this is hypocritical, as is the chain of arguments above, which has already been disproven in light of the current protests. After all, the aid has not led to a reduction in unemployment in egypt, poverty remains high and both poverty, unemployment and a brutal, repressive regime, which has only wrapped itself in the mantle of democracy, have encouraged extremism. Aid stabilizes unjust and repressive systems, which sooner or later lead to resistance, which is expressed in different ways depending on the possibilities. If the west now leaves the opponents of the regime sitting, one would have to argue, then they will turn away from the west even further and possibly only really turn to the islamists.