CAIRO: The US will relieve “democratic Egypt” of up to $1 billion in debt and guarantee $1 billion in borrowing, US President Barack Obama promised in a speech Thursday.
Local analysts and politicians, however, weren’t cheering the announcement or the speech.
“We will relieve a democratic Egypt of up to $1 billion in debt, and work with our Egyptian partners to invest these resources to foster growth and entrepreneurship,” Obama said in his speech to the Middle East on Thursday.
“We will help Egypt regain access to markets by guaranteeing $1 billion in borrowing that is needed to finance infrastructure and job creation,” he added.
Political groups described the announcement as “futile.”
“The US administration paid trillions to ignite wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it only relieves Egypt of $1 billion in debt which is nothing,” prominent Muslim Brotherhood leader Essam El-Erian told Daily News Egypt.
Karima El-Hifnawy senior member of the Kefaya Movement and the National Association for Change, said that the US should swiftly help Egypt in retrieving the illegally-acquired assets smuggled to the US by former officials instead of making void statements.
Obama said that the US would help Egypt and other regimes retrieve illicit assets smuggled to the US.
He added that the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund would present a plan at next week’s G-8 summit for what needs to be done to stabilize and modernize the economies of Tunisia and Egypt.
He said that the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) will soon launch a $2 billion facility to support private investment across the region. “And we will work with allies to refocus the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development for democratic transitions and economic modernization in the Middle East and North Africa.
Obama addressed the sectarian tensions in Cairo and said that Copts should enjoy freedom to worship “just as Shia must never have their mosques destroyed in Bahrain.”
Diaa Rashwan, deputy head of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies who specializes in Islamist movements, told DNE, “The Coptic issue is an internal Egyptian issue that shouldn’t be addressed by the US President.”
“This gives the impression that the Copts have certain impunity from the US and that the Copts’ problems in Egypt should be addressed by the international community which is not true,” he added.
Political groups and analysts said that Obama’s speech was nothing new and served the strategy and interests of the US only.
Obama said that two years ago in Cairo, he began to broaden his engagement based upon mutual interests and mutual respect.
“I believed then — and I believe now — that we have a stake not just in the stability of nations, but in the self-determination of individuals,” he said.
“It is not America that put people into the streets of Tunis and Cairo — it was the people themselves who launched these movements, and must determine their outcome,” he added.
El-Hifnawy said that, “The US supported all the former dictatorships and people forced it to support the revolutions.”
Gamal Eid, head of the Arab Network for Human Rights, agreed saying, “Obama said nothing new about Egypt.
“The US had an indecisive stance towards the Egyptian revolution which made Egyptians angry.”
“They lie when they say they supported the revolution, “ he added.
Political analyst Wahid Abdul Meguid, director of Al-Ahram Center for Translation and Publishing, said, “Back in 2009, we were waiting for something new in his speech because back then he was in power.
“However, now the power is in the hands of the people and they are the only ones who control their destiny.”
Analysts were also critical of Obama’s statements on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying the American president’s bias to the Israelis is in line with the US agenda.
“As for Israel, our friendship is rooted deeply in a shared history and shared values. Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable,” Obama said. “Ultimately, it is up to Israelis and Palestinians to take action. No peace can be imposed upon them, nor can endless delay make the problem go away.”
“But what America and the international community can do is state frankly what everyone knows: a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples,” he added.
Obama described issues including the return of Palestinian refugees and the stance of Jerusalem as “emotional issues” that obstruct peace negotiations.
“Palestinian refugees have the right to return to their country,” El-Erian said. “That’s not a sentimental issue.”
“We are against the establishment of a Jewish state based on religion,” El-Hifnawy said.
“That will allow the establishment of other states based on religion,” she added pointing out the hypocrisy of the US administration which supports civil and democratic regimes.
“The recent announcement of an agreement between Fatah and Hamas raises profound and legitimate questions for Israel; how can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist,” Obama said.
Rashwan said that “It’s in Israel’s best interest to deal with one Palestinian delegation representing both Fatah and Hamas.”
“Netanyahu is considered an extremist in Israel and yet he’s negotiating with the Palestinians.” Rashwan said. “Let Hamas be the extremist wing of the Palestinians that Israel has to negotiate with.”
Obama addressed the revolutions in the Middle East including Syria, Yemen and Bahrain.
“Bahrain is a long-standing partner, and we are committed to its security,” he said.
“We recognize that Iran has tried to take advantage of the turmoil there, and that the Bahraini government has a legitimate interest in the rule of law,” he added.
He said that Bahrain needed to hold a discussion with its opposition groups and release them from detainment.
“Syria has followed its Iranian ally, seeking assistance from Tehran in the tactics of suppression,” he said.
Political powers and analysts accused Obama of using a friendly tone with Bahrain to serve the US’s best interests while strongly condemning Libya, Syria and Iran.
“The Arab countries are looking for democracy while the US is looking for stability and there is a great difference between both,” Eid concluded. –Additional reporting by Ahmed Hazem.
