A Matter of Strategy

In a interview published in Al-Gomhouria newspaper marking the anniversary of the 23 July 1952 revolution, President Mubarak said that (1) Egypt will not fight for Lebanon or Hezbollah or anybody else for that matter and the days of foreign adventures are over. (2) That any money spent on military campaigns is better off spent on domestic development for hospitals, schools, roads, and all the things Egypt need. He also said that the (3) Egyptian Army is for the defense of Egyptian soil. Finally, (4) he said that Egypt would never be attacked by Israel.

This overview by the President of the Egyptian army's doctrine is unusually revealing in a country like Egypt (not fully democratic according to the Egyptian government itself) but nevertheless it is a bit bewildering to me. I certainly don't have the same military background as the President, which I truly respect him for. Nevertheless, I can measure the President's strategic objectives against the yardstick of Lidell Hart's famous book on strategy and can make few comments.

The Late Basil Lidell Hart: British Father of Modern Strategy. Some of Hart's Famous Quotes Are: "The chief incalculable in war is the human will." and "Without mobility an army is but a corpse - awaiting burial in a trench."

1- Fighting On Lebanon's Behalf

First, I fully understand that Egypt will not fight for Hezbollah or Lebanon for various reasons:

1- Hezbollah doesn’t need the help. In fact, the presence of a classical army (such as Egypt's) on the battle ground will complicate what is a hit-and-run guerilla campaign that Hezbollah is best at.

2- Egypt’s intervention will make Egypt subject to a strong Israeli retaliation, losing economic aid, and would constitute a major neck sticking that Egypt is likely not capable of.

3- Finally and most important, intervene to do what? I don’t think the Egyptian army has the capability nor the ability nor the will, nor the plans to do anything beyond its boarders.

6th October 1973: The Proudest Moment in the History of the Modern Egyptian Army Since Mohammad Ali Pasha's Army Victories. It is the Only Moment When A Classical Arab Army Neutralized The Israeli Army. In All Other Wars, Only Guerilla Warfare Achieved Any Success Largely Because of Israeli's Airforce Superiority. Note that the Arab Classical Army Victory in 1973 Was Only When that Airforce Was Neutralized.

This Israeli Strategy of Airforce Superiority Was Not Invented by the Israelis But Rather by Churchill After the First World War. Churchill Realized that the Easiest Way to Subjegate the Arab Population (Which is Isolated in Finite Number of Locations Separated by Vast Deserts) is to Use Airforce. Churchill Built 4 Airbases (Suez Canal in Egypt, Al-Adm in Libya, H-4 in Jordan, and Al-Habanyea in Iraq) and Were Enough to Control Arabs for a Long Time. Lebanon's Guerilla Warfare Neutralizes the Israeli's Aifroce Superiority While A Classical Army Lacking in Missles Doesn't.

Therefore, I got the rationale for the President’s first argument and it frankly makes sense.

2- Nobody Wants War (Especially Egyptians)

The second argument is straightforward. Egyptians in particular are among the most pacifist people in the world, which rooted in history (and will take a long separate article to discuss). Especially these days, Egypt on the international scene is as Egyptians say is walking next to the wall. In fact, how Egypt behaves on the international arena reminds me with Ali Al-Kassar who eternally wants to do good and stays out of troubles but always finds himself locked in one. Egypt on the international scene is really a "well-wisher" or in Arabic "Fail Khair" or literally "good-doer."

Comedian Ali Al-Kassar: All of His Movies are About Intending to Do Good In a World Full of Bad Guys, But Ali Clearly Lacks the Will or the Power to Deter the Bad Guys. So, He Always Falls in Hillarious Troubles.

So, I really got the 2nd argument.

3- Defending Own Soil

The third argument is quite straightforward. All armies in the world are primarily for the defense of the country’s boarders. This is the most basic role of an army. We can argue that Lidell Hart's book really says that each nation must define its strategic objectives and that the security of a nation is not necessarily within its boarder but can be in securing its sphere of influence. However, nobody will dispute that defending boarders is the most basic duty of a national army.

4- Israel will Never Attack Egypt

The fourth argument is the one that doesn’t really fit. Don't get me wrong. I am not suggesting that Israel will attack Egypt but really this argument doesn’t fit when you put it together with all the previous arguments. How so?

The president announced that Israel will not attack Egypt, which I am fully onboard with because Israel really has no strategic interest in attacking Egypt. For sure there are extreme elements in the Israeli society and maybe even in government who want to pick up any fight with any Arab or Muslim. But Israel really as a state cannot just pick an unprovoked fight with a country it has a peace treaty with that is an important component in reducing the cost of defending Israel itself on the long run, a treaty really that was vital in freeing up Israeli resources for the Israel’s development, and frankly freeing up resources for Israel to go after all of its adventures in Lebanon.

OK. I got this one too and I agree that Israel doesn't have a strategic interest in attacking Egypt. So, each piece of the president’s arguments makes sense on its own. It is really when you put them all together they don’t. Why?

Who is the Enemy Then?

If Israel will never attack Egypt and we will not defend anybody else and will not intervene in any regional conflict, then I am puzzled then as to why we still have universal suffrage and spend that much money on the Egyptian army? I don’t think that keeping an army of more than 250,000 men is needed to fight Sudan or Libya even if they are more foolish than the Israelis to the extent of attempting to attack Egypt? Who exactly will attack Egypt? Is it Cyprus, Italy, France, or Saudi Arabia, or South Africa, or the United States whose military supplies Egypt’s arsenal and essentially provides protection to the Suez Canal approaches?

Is it Iran who would attack Egypt? How would the Iranians attack a fellow Muslim country that is 3000 miles away, a country that has Al-Azhar, and a country they have been trying to re-establish relations with for the past 20 years? What are the strategic objectives for Iran to attack Egypt proper? What do they gain from that? They have a lot more to gain by attacking Qatar or UAE, and even that they won't do? The answer is no gain whatsoever.

One could argue they might think of attacking the Suez Canal in case of an open conflict between them and the United States. Even this one is a far-fetched scenario because it is easier for the Iranian to block the straits of Hormuz, which is within a stone-throw from them. An alternative for them is to attack the Suez Canal to block movement of US troops. This argument makes more sense, however it begs the question: who is really defending the Suez Canal? Is it the Egyptian army who doesn’t have the power to intervene in Lebanon or is it the US military who has the sixth fleet essentially protecting the northern and southern approaches to the Canal? So, if none of these potential attackers make sense, then what are the strategic objectives behind spending money on such a vast institution?

One can argue that you build an army to protect your standing both regionally and internationally. Essentially this is about being respected. However, I don't understand how avoiding to having anything to do with a regional conflict like the one in Lebanon now would do anything to protect Egypt's regional stature. Do we really understand that this conflict is between Israel and Iran and the winner will for all practical purposes dominate the region? Do we understand the stakes here and how high they are?

Is Egypt's Stance Really Improving Its Stature in the Region? US Secretary Rice Didn't Even Make the Customary Stop in Cairo. In Rome, Kofi Annan Called for Iran and Syria to Participate in the Talks. Egypt Mediation Behind the Scenes Is Apparently Not Intriguing Enough for Secretary Rice to Stop Over in Cairo on the Way from Tel Aviv to Rome.

An army could also be a detterant for anyone thinking of making foolish moves. But do you really need that vast institution in to deter Cyprus from making a foolish mistake (given that the President ruled out Israel from making such a move)? In the absence of strategic objectives, I think it is a waste of money. It is money that according to the president is better spent on a road or a school or whatever.

Now, I understand that even neutral Switzerland has an army. But at the same time, each country (at least the ones I am familiar with) has strategic objectives behind keeping an army and a specific culture that is derived from those strategic objectives.

Not Only Strategy But Culture Too

Strategies aside now, let us look at the culture inside the army. Maybe the President's intreview is for public consumption. Maybe that there is a strong secret enemy that we have to build a strong army for. But even this argument doesn't fit if we look at the culture inside the Egyptian army. For example, the whole universal suffrage system now in Egypt is a sham and is need of a major reform. It is a system that puts the poor and the unconnected at a major disadvantage to the wealthy and the connected. This is pure and simple unfair. Besides, I'd rather have those poor farmers who are taken from their lands to serve and mayebe get killed on the boarder with Israel to be just let go back to their land. I think this will be much better for their families and for the economy.

Even worse, at the officer level, the current system requires an officer in his mid-forties (which is when an officer has youth, energy, and experience) to retire because his loyalty is questionable. This makes the officer corps at the mercy of the top leadership whims. Not only that, loyalty is reviewed every 2 years to keep all officers on a short leash.

The Egyptian Army Is One of the Most Vital And Most Honorable Institutions in Egyptian Life. However, Like All Institutions in Egypt, It Needs Reform. I Take The President's Word That Egypt As A Whole Needs Reform and Prominently Among Those Who Are In Need of That Reform is the Egyptian Army. Reform Has to Start With Clear Directions, Objectives, and A Cultural Change.

This is a system that will never breed competence. Either this system is a mistake and must be corrected or really the strategic objective of the army is to maintain loyalty...both are equally troubling and my worry is the current system will not even breed loyalty but will beget false acquiescence.

Bottom line, the Egyptian army needs a major reform and it needs a strategic direction for where it is heading and how to get there. Egypt's role in the world cannot always be Ali Al-Kassar. A little bit even of Yusuf Wahbi screaming "Oh My God" or "Ya Lal-Haul" would be a refreshing reminder that when you see something wrong you have to speak up especially when you cannot afford to act like the unique Farid Shawki and pick up a fight (as Egyptians say Korsi Fil Kolob).

The Uncertainty

There are increasing signs that the Egyptian government is entering a period of uncertainty. This is the uncertainty that faces someone who had a plan (passing presidency to Mr. Gamal Mubarak) for a long time and then the plan suddenly faces significant resistance to the extent that it backfires. The natural reaction of the government is to contain the resistance, pretend the plan never existed, and manage the fallout especially with the important constituencies (such as Europe and the US). Instead of finding a real alternative plan, the Egyptian government now tries to pretend the original plan is not there and everything is normal while in reality reserving a space in the future to resurrect the original plan at the opportune moment.

The Many Faces of Egypt's Resistance to the Status Quo. From Top to Bottom: (1) Egyptian Judges Stand for Independent Judiciary and Against Revoking Their Right to Speak Against Election Rigging. (2) Poor Sections of Egyptian Cities Demonstrated Against Status Quo and the Plan to Extend it Through Rigged Elections. (3) Even the Wealthy and Most Westernized Section of Societies (Students of the Americans University in Cairo) Rose Against the Status Quo. These are Section of Society that Are Supposed to be the Most Loyal.

[As an aside, nobody has anything against Mr. Gamal. He may be the truly the best person to rule Egypt. However, the problem is in the cultural impact of inheriting the presidency. Think about everybody in Egypt now doing the same and passing his profession to his children and even twisting the law to do so. If you complain that is already happening, wait until you see the presidency passed in that way. The other implication is that long-term effect on Egyptian politics and the chances of being a freer society with citizens exercising their free right to elect with no impositions.]

Let us first look at the signs of attempting to control the backfire and managing the fallout.

Egyptian Government Used Significant Violence to Control Demonstrations in Egypt During the Judges Crisis in May 2006. Journalists were Jailed and Demonstrators were Beaten and Jailed for Simply Expressing Their Opinions. The Violent Campaign is Part of Strategy to Quell the Unrest and Ensure It Doesn't Spread.

1- Usage of violence in the streets and absolute zero tolerance of demonstrations for the fear they escalate into something bigger that can potentially shake the regime.

Judges Bastawisy (left) and Mekky (right) Spoke Against Vote Rigging During 2005 Elections and Subsequently Faced Prosecution Because of That. The Stand of the Rest of Judges and the Egyptian People Next to the Two Judges Forced the Regime to Save Face and Reach A Compromise. The Affair Proved the Ability of Egyptian People Not Only To Resist the Status Quo but to Force It to Change.

2- The verdict on the two judges Mekki and Basatouisi is seen as a compromise in which they got no real punishment whatsoever to avoid them becoming magnets of dissent and at the same time they didn’t go with no slap on the wrist – otherwise it would have been seen as a capitulation by the regime leading to further and similar acts of defiance from the same or other quarters.

3- President Mubarak has been spending most of his time outside Egypt in Germany for 2nd time in 2 months to inaugurate a museum and in Spain to inaugurate another – while avoiding attending the conference of the nine largest Islamic nations and sending instead a minister without portfolio making Egypt the least represented nation of all nine. This is a sign that Mubarak is trying to sense how his regime is perceived in Europe (which is an important constituency) opting to visit generally friendly and courteous countries such as Germany and Spain. Europe is generally safe territory for Arab heads of state because European countries are sensitive to upsetting the status quo in their Southern neighbors triggering a mess they have to deal with (because of their proximity) or even worse, triggering boat mass exodus to European shores. These visits also show the Egyptian people that the regime still has the full backing of the outside world.

President Mubarak Inaugurating a Museum Show in Berlin. In His Second Visit to Germany in 2 Months, the President is Trying to Manage the Fallout of the Internal Crisis in Egypt on the Image of His Regime in European Capitals. Still President Mubarak Cannot Risk a Similar Visit to the US Seen As "Unfriendly" Territory Simply Because the Americans Will Not be Shy of Talking Tough. Even if the US Administration is Shy (for Various Interests), the American Press Won't.

4- At the sametime, President Mubarak is avoiding a visit to the US seen as unfriendly territory since a visit will attract all kinds of dissent from Christian groups to Congress to media and can be a major embarrassment. The solution is to send someone to feel the waters on a secret mission. That someone cannot be Nazif since he did well last time in establishing relationships. This can only now be entrusted to Gamal Mubarak.

Mr. Gamal made a secret back-channel visit to the US. The primary purpose was to visit National Security Advisor Hadley. The National Security Council in the US is responsible for coordinating foreign policy and intelligence affair and traditionally has been the backdoor to secret unofficial messages to an American president. Otherwise, official communication has a whole apparatus dedicated to it through the department of state. If, as Mr. Gamal claims, he visited the US as an emissiary from the National Democratic Party to discuss his party's reform agenda , the normal channel would be to meet with members of the US national Democratic or Republican committees, which are the US national parties leaderships. Claiming that a meeting with US national security advisor is to discuss the Egyptian National Democratic Party reform agenda is an insult to our intelligence and makes the assumption that we know nothing about how the US government works.

Reserving Future Space for The Old Plan

Finally, let us look at the telltale sign that the original plan is still under consideration.

AP reporter: "You said you don't have a desire or intention, but you know … desires do change, and intentions."

Mr. Gamal Mubarak: "Let me just respond to this one just to get it out of the way. My statement stands, go back and read my statement, I made it absolutely clear and I'm not going to be dragged into responding to that question again. Go back and read my statement. Okay, back to the first question ..."
AP reporter: "I read them, that's why I told you."

Mr. Gamal Mubarak: "Okay, read it again, read it again, read it again."

Why is Mr. Gamal Mubarak that upset about it? He actually doesn’t get asked that question often – only when he sees foreign reporters in Egypt which didn’t start until recently. He could have denied it again. However, the key to understanding Mr. Gamal Mubarak anger is that the question was looking for a categorical answer and is really dragging him to deny that it will ever happen in the future. This probably made Mubarak feel that he is literally being dragged into a position that will make him sound he changed his mind in the future or into revealing his real intentions. The reporter was asking for an answer that says "I will never be a president." In American politics, you are always taught to never say never. The reporter wanted the "never" word. The problem with a statement like "I don't have intentions", is that I can have no intention of doing something but eventually I do it either because circumstances change or because my friends and family pressure me to, or because it is in the interest of the country, or for whatever reason. The word "I have no intention" is often used in American politics to simply signal I reserve my space in the future.

Mr. Gamal Mubarak Speaking at A National Democratic Party Press Conference. April 2006.

Obituary

This article is dedicated to the 2 Egyptian soldiers who were killed by Israeli fire while they were patrolling the Egyptian-Israeli boarders. First, I'd like to address the late two soldiers: if you were an Israeli soldier, your government would have at least asked for an apology and most likely would have deprived a population of 1.4 million from sleep, food, and electricity. If you were singers, you could have produced fake army service exemption papers and still got away with it. If you had a connection to even a Corporal in the Egyptian army, you may have been at home now. If you had a connection to a general in the army, you may have been at home with your parents helping you to find a job. Even better, if you were a member of the People Assembly (according to documented news accounts in Egypt and from court rulings) or the grandson of the President (according to rumors on the internet) or one of the higher ups in the country, your mother would have given birth in the United States and as a dual citizen you would have been exempted from serving in the army. Your mistake my fellow citizen is you had the wrong government, you voices didn’t help you, and you had no connections. I tried to even find your names anywhere but couldn’t. Therefore, you will remain anonymous at least to me.

Israel Launched a Major Offensive in Gaza in July 2006 to Liberate Its Kidnapped Soldier. Prime Minister of Israel Promised to Leave No Stone Unturned to Liberate the Soldier. By Doing So, Israel is Showing Respect for Its Citizens and Its Army...Now Israel Normally Goes Far in That Respect But the Concept is there!

To the Egyptian Government

What would have happened if you had called the prime Minister of Israel and asked for him to come to Cairo, go on Egyptian television, or in the People’s Assembly to apologize and promise it won’t happen again. Do you think that Mr. Olmert would say no? I doubt it. First of all, it is an opportunity for him to speak directly to the Egyptian people and gain that level of recognition. Second, his army made a mistake that caused the loss of Egyptian life. It is that simple. Third, is the late King Hussein of Jordan better than you are? When Israel attempted to assassinate Khalid Meshaal (who is not even Jordan but Hussein assumed it shameful for a guest of Jordan to assassinated on Jordanian territory), he called the then Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu (who is no nice guy) and told him: “what the F*** is going on?” The Israelis sent a team to apologize and sent the poison antidote on the same plane. Now, King Hussein did many things which critics argue to be questionable but at least he got this one right.

To Dr. Ahmed Nazif: The Prime Minister of Egypt

You are technology geek, I suppose. Here is a question for you. Have you heard about "combat identification" systems? These are gadgets that soldiers could wear to identify them as friendly. In this case, Egyptian boarder patrol would wear to identify them as Egyptian Security to the Israeli soldiers on the other side? In fact, my feel that a simple wireless device that constantly sends a certain code to a receiver on the Israeli side could be enough. Please google on "combat identification" and let me know what you find.

One Type of the Battlefield Identification System -- This One is More Suited for Night Vision: ICIS (R), the Individual Combat Identification System, is Comprised of a Series of Different Size Patches Made of a Special Material which Creates a "Negative" Thermal signature on Infrared Sights. Needing No Power Supply to Operate, these Flexible Patches Can be Attached at Numerous Locations on the Body. From www.ez-info.com/icis.html

To Mr. Gamal Mubarak

I am surprised you didn’t comment on this one. Don’t the lives of Egyptian people deserve a policy?

Gamal Mubarak son of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, right, talks to his fiancee Khadiga el-Gammal during the session of "Responsible Leadership for the next Generation" at the world Ecocnomic Forum at the International Congress Center, at the Red Sea resort of Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, Sunday, May 21, 2006. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla). Mr. Gamal's Personal Life is Certainly Up to Him and We Have No Intentions of Meddling Into It. However, His Fiancee's Appearance Sitting Next to the Egyptian Foreign Minister During a Conference Sponsored by the Egyptian Government Opens Questions About Role of Protocol. What is the Official Designation of the President's Son's Fiancee in Egyptian Protocol to Be Seated Next to the Foreign Minister? What Are the Implications for the Rule of Law? Next Time I have a Meeting in My Company, I will Invite My Wife and My Kids to Offer their Opinions While Being Seated Next to the Chairman of the Board.

To the Egyptian People

(Particularly to the Wealthy and the Educated)

You have badly treated your own fellow citizens who are poorer or more needy. If you are poor in Egypt, there is no fairness and no dignity for you. Don’t be surprised if other governments kill your own fellow citizens – the same who are poor or needy – with no apology. You also have accepted to be humiliated by your government, and deprived of dignity and fairness. Don’t be surprised when other governments humiliate you and deprive you of dignity and fairness. Please go and read Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. If you have read it before, please read it again.

Egyptian Children Playing in Dirty Cairo Streets...A Constant Reminder that Egypt is a Poor Country. A Fact that is Often Forgotten or Wanted to be Forgotten by the Re-Emerging Egyptian Middle Class.