Socialist Action (US)

The monthly paper of Socialist Action, San Francisco, 1983–2018

U.S. solidarity with Egyptian revolution

Socialist Action, Vol. 30, No. 7, July 2012 · scan p. 8 · Andrew Pollack · about 622 words

Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 8 →

The words are the paper's own, from its digital file; the division into articles was made by machine, so a box or caption can end up inside the article next to it.

Scan page 8

8 SOCIALIST ACTION JULY 2012 Since the uprising against Mubarak began there have been regular solidar­ ity protests, forums and other activities in the U.S. In New York, this support coalesced in the formation of the Coali­ tion to Defend the Egyptian Revolution. In April, leading members of that Coali­ tion were among the lawyers, activists, and scholars who organized and par­ ticipated in a National Lawyers Guild Delegation to Egypt. Their primary mis­ sion was to investigate the role and re­ sponsibility of the U.S. government and corporations in human rights abuses, and to document how decades of U.S. military and economic intervention has violated Egypt’s popular sovereignty and locked the country in a web of debt.

The delegation met with a broad range of activists, including human rights ad­ vocates, youth leaders, Islamists, left­ ist intellectuals, and trade unionists, as well as with civil society organizations that provide vital legal and social ser­ vices to poor and working-class Egyp­ tians who have been targeted by the state for their activism.

The delegation’s press statement upon release of its initial findings noted that “the U.S. government has been complic­ it in these gross violations by providing direct military and financial aid to the current Egyptian regime, by maneuver­ ing politically to help the regime cling to power in the days after Jan. 25, 2011, and by delaying for almost 15 years the passage of the Small Arms Trade Treaty, which could prevent the regime from using American weapons against the Egyptian people.

“During the people’s uprising, U.S. corporations continued to ship tear gas and other weaponry to the very gov­ ernment that was shooting at unarmed men, women, and children in the streets of Egypt. … Furthermore, the U.S. gov­ ernment and private corporations have supported the economic policies of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, which have resulted in long-term job insecurity, increased poverty, and drastic concentration of wealth.”

In a media-briefing conference call to release the statement, Delegation mem­ ber Corinna Mullin reminded listeners that the main demands of the revolution have been “Bread, Freedom and Social Justice,” and that U.S. and IMF/World Bank economic intervention stand in the way of realizing those demands.

She described the web of aid and loans in which Egypt is enmeshed, a web drawing tighter all the time. What’s more, the $1.3 billion in U.S. military aid each year subsidizes both the U.S. and Egyptian military-industrial complexes (in the latter case that means subsidiz­ ing businesses owned directly by the military representing about 40% of the economy).

The U.S. Agency for International De­ velopment also sends $815 million a year to promote “market freedom,” which reinforces the neoliberal poli­ cies encouraged by imperialist govern­ ments, banks, and agencies, and which are enforced through austerity-impos­ ing Structural Adjustment Programs, as well as by mandating opening markets and ownership to foreign firms, ending food and other subsidies, and privati­ zation. These policies, said Mullin, are responsible for the conditions that gave rise to the revolution’s core grievances. What’s more, under USAID’s “Food for Peace” program, Egypt has gone from being an exporter to an importer of grain.

The most recent proof of what Mul­ lin said is contained in a July 2 Reuters report quoting Morsi’s top economics adviser as saying that Egypt will soon approach the IMF and other financial institutions for loans. Since Mubarak’s departure last February, says Reuters, SCAF has swelled the country’s budget deficit by borrowing short-term from local banks at high interest rates and by draining the country’s foreign reserves.

Mullin concluded that these policies taken together are a form of neo-impe­ rialism, and are intended to restrict the ability of any post-revolution govern­ (continued on page 7, in “The ongoing potential”)

← Contents of Vol. 30, No. 7, July 2012

Something wrong on this page? Tell us →