Egypt 2.0, Israel, America: Thomas L. Friedman.

                                                                  
Thomas L. Friedman, columnist for The New York Times, began his writing on the Egyptian protests on February 1 with this:

"Whatever happens in the only two Arab states [Jordan's the other] that have peace treaties with Israel, the moderate secularists who had a monopoly of power will be weaker and the previously confined Muslim Brotherhood will be stronger. How much remains to be seen."

That would be bad, and Mr. Friedman continued:

"As such, it is virtually certain that the next Egyptian government will not have the patience or room that Mubarak did to maneuver with Israel. Same with the new Jordanian cabinet."

Ergo, as we Latin scholars say, Mr. Friedman recommended to Israel that it conclude a peace treaty with the Palestinians forthwith.

"If Israel does not make a concerted effort to strike a deal with the Palestinians, the next Egyptian government will 'have to distance itself from Israel because it will not have the stake in maintaining the close relationship that Mubarak had,' said Khalil Shikaki, a Palestinian pollster.

I would be surprised to know that Israel had not made a concerted effort before Mr. Friedman's column but I will defer to him as having greater knowledge. Mr. Friedman concluded:

"What the turmoil in Egypt also demonstrates is how much Israel is surrounded by a huge population of young Arabs and Muslims who have been living outside of history — insulated by oil and autocracy from the great global trends. But that’s over."

"It is vital for Israel’s future — at a time when there is already a global campaign to delegitimize the Jewish state — that it disentangle itself from the Arabs’ story as much as possible. There is a huge storm coming, Israel. Get out of the way."

As advice goes, "Get out of the way," seems to me generally to be sensible advice to a country with regards to other countries. All in all a pretty sensible column, I thought. 

Something happened on the way to get out of the way (Feb. 13):

"...when young Egyptians looked around the region and asked: Who is with us in this quest and who is not?, the two big countries they knew were against them were Israel and Saudi Arabia. Sad. The children of Egypt were having their liberation moment and the children of Israel decided to side with Pharaoh – right to the very end."

So inside of two weeks Israel was supposed to get in the way. I thought they were to conclude a peace treaty with the 'Stinians asap because, "whatever happens," "it is virtually certain" that Egypt 2.0 would "not have the patience or room to maneuver." Yes, that is what the man wrote and cited as authority for the proposition "Khalil Shikaki, a Palestinian pollster." So even according to a 'Stinian, Israel was supposed to get out of the way on Feb. 1, according to "Thomas L. Friedman, an American columnist."

But wait, Israel did get in the way, but in the wrong way:

"…this Israeli government took two approaches during the last three weeks: Frantically calling the White House and telling the president he must not abandon Pharaoh – to the point where the White House was thoroughly disgusted with its Israeli interlocutors – and using the opportunity to score propaganda points: 'Look at us! Look at us! We told you so! We are the only stable country in the region, because we are the only democracy.'"

Really, Israel went "Look at us! Look at us!"?  Well, that's pretty childish; Israel, don't be so childish.  But wait a minute, "Pharaoh?"  I thought President Mubarak was "Moderate Secularist" on Feb. 1. Yes, that is what the man wrote. 

What happened?

"You did not need to be a Middle East expert to see that what was breaking loose here in the past three weeks was unprecedented – the first ever, largely bloodless (except for what the regime did), Facebook-driven, youth-led democracy uprising in an Arab country." 

to be continued.