Mubarak unlikely to step down soon: Clinton - Hindustan Times

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak might not be able to quit his post as early as being demanded by the protesters as the transition process will take some time to roll out. Clinton described Mubarak's assurance of not running for the presidency again and the dialogue on constitutional reform initiated in the country as "significant actions" but said if Mubarak resigns immediately, presidential election would have to be held in 60 days under the Egyptian constitution.

"He (Mubarak) announced he wouldn't run again. He announced his son wouldn't run again. He announced he was resigning his position of the national party, and his son was resigning his position at the national party.

He installed a vice president for the first time in 30 years. Those are significant actions," Clinton told reporters on her way back from international talks on Egypt in Germany.

She said these were only preliminary steps and do not constitute an orderly transition but welcomed the process of dialogue that has started with the opposition. "... but I think they have to be viewed as a very important set of steps being taken to keep the movement going in the direction that we seek," she said.

Referring to the Egyptian constitution, she said if the President were to resign, he would be succeeded by the Speaker of the house and presidential elections would have to be held in 60 days, and suggested that this is too short a time to arrive at final constitutional reforms.

"Now, the Egyptians are the ones who are having to grapple with the reality of what they must do. And maybe I misheard it, but on CNN this morning... one of the leaders in the Muslim Brotherhood, and Al-Baradei, they were saying, 'Well, it's going to take time.

Now, that's not us saying it, it's them saying it," she said. She said once the protests have gotten the attention of the government and the government has launched a response, there is already an effort underway within the civil society, the opposition, the political parties, to decide the future course of action.

"That's a really hard issue. I don't think it's appropriate for us to be sitting thousands of miles away saying, 'Well, this is what you should do, and that's what you should do', and, 'Oh, everybody knows that's self-evident'," Clinton said. She said it is for the country of 80 million people, with a very complex political, economic, and social realities to move ahead in a new direction.

View the original article here

Why the Arab Democracy Wave is Unlikely to Reach Syria -- Yet - TIME

After decades of living under oppressive dictatorships, the people of the Arab world are rising up to stake their claim to democracy. Inside the historic popular upheaval that began in Tunisia and is spreading to Egypt and across the vital region

Palestinians refugees living in Syria shout as they take part in a demonstration against Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his assistants at al-Yarmouk camp near Damascus January 28, 2011

As all eyes in the Arab world are riveted by Egypt's democracy uprising, activists in countries such as Jordan, Yemen and Syria have begun organizing protests against their own authoritarian regimes to demand reforms. Activists on Facebook pages such as "The Syrian Revolution" have called for a day of protests on Friday, with marches planned in front of the parliament in the capital city of Damascus — and at Syrian embassies around the world. But unlike Egypt, and even Yemen and Jordan, demonstrations in Syria are unlikely to pick up anywhere near enough momentum to seriously threaten the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. The reason is simple: Syria, unlike Egypt, Yemen and Jordan, isn't allied with the United States.

It's not that anti-Americanism is a driving force behind these Arab demonstrations. On the contrary, the rage of the Egyptian protestors is directed at President Hosni Mubarak, with America and Israel barely rating a mention. But being friends with America opens Mubarak to a host of liabilities that the Syrian government doesn't have. (See TIME's exclusive pictures of the clashes in Cairo.)

For one thing, Syria doesn't depend on billions of dollars in U.S. aid in the way that Egypt and Jordan do. The Assad regime, which has been a pariah country for years because of its support for various of the region's militant groups, gets only sanctions from the U.S. government, and comparatively little international aid besides. Its currency isn't traded on international markets. Its banking system is pretty closed. And its stock market is miniscule. Syria's central bank has been stocking up hard currency for years for just such occasions, and Damascus doesn't have the vast slums teeming with African-levels of poverty that Cairo has.

That means that unlike Egypt — which, out of deference to the domestic sensitivities of its U.S. patron, chose to do its dirty work against democracy protestors in Tahrir Square with plain-clothed thugs rather than use an army funded by American taxpayers — Syria has shown precious little concern for world opinion in meting out domestic repression. Being on the wrong side of the Bush Administration's "democracy agenda" also helped the Syrian regime. While many Syrians resent the blatantly rigging of their country's elections, stability-Syrian style was preferred by many to the chaotic democracy created next door by the U.S. invasion of Iraq. (See the state of paranoia on the streets of Cairo.)

Syria also has a few strategic cards — notably its support for Palestinian militants Hamas and Lebanese militants Hizballah — to play when necessary to divert attention from domestic discontent. And there's the fact that the country is still officially at war with Israel, which occupies Syrian territory on the Golan Heights: That conflict is the grounds on which Damascus keeps its state of emergency laws in force.

But the advantages of being an anti-American Middle East authoritarian will begin to wear thin in the not-so-distant future, especially if the Obama Administration more firmly backs democracy in Egypt and pushes for similar changes in other U.S.-backed autocracies of the Arab world. Though its economic problems are less acute than Egypt's, Syria also has a huge population of young people who want more opportunity than Syria's closed economy can provide. And if the Middle East begins to have elected governments that deliver on the aspirations of their people, it will no longer be good enough for Syria just to be better than Iraq.

See Fareed Zakaria on how democracy can work in the Middle East.

See TIME's special report "The Middle East in Revolt."

View the full list for "The Middle East in Revolt"

View the original article here