The man, identifying himself as Colonel Riad al-Asaad, said in a telephone call to AFP in Nicosia that he was speaking from inside Syria “near the Turkish border”.

“I am the commander of the Syrian Free Army,” he said.

“We are hundreds,” he added of the number of troops under his command.

The claim could not be independently verified.

But the caller warned the Syrian regime against carrying out any security operations in Deir Ezzor, where activists said a massive military convoy, including tanks, deployed on Saturday.

“I warn the Syrian authorities that I will send my troops to fight against the [regular] army if they do not stop the operations in Deir Ezzor,” Al-Asaad said.

Earlier the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights based in Britain said soldiers shot dead three stone-throwers as a convoy of 60 military vehicles made its way towards Deir Ezzor.

Rami Abdel Rahman, quoting a witness in the city, said the troops deployed in Deir Ezzor, with some of them taking positions near the offices of the governor.

Deir Ezzor is at the forefront of more than four months of anti-regime protests and scene of a deadly crackdown by the Syrian authorities against dissent.

News24

It’s impossible to know for sure what is happening on the ground in Syria. But recent events have thrown up several clues as to the regime’s worsening predicament, its widening internal divisions and its overall lack of a clear strategy.

One is persistent reports that the army – which regime spokeswoman Reem Haddad calls “Syria’s backbone” – is divided against itself.

Take the following account, published in the Turkish newspaper, Hurriyet, of last week’s violence in the north-east town of Jisr al-Shughour that left 120 security personnel dead. “It was not the protesters who killed the soldiers; it was the [army] commanders who killed them. Then most of the soldiers ran away with the protesters,” a security officer told the paper.

“We received a phone call from the centre and they ordered us to shoot and kill all the protesters,” said Ahmad Gavi, 21, a defecting Syrian soldier in a separate account. “Five soldiers who refused to follow this order were killed immediately in front of me. Then commanders and some soldiers started to shoot each other. There were 180 soldiers at the security check post and 120 of them were killed.”

Such accounts of mutiny and defections recall similar stories told in other towns, including Homs and Daraa in the south. Writing in Foreign Policy, Syria expert and author Robin Yassin-Kassab noted that, despite the fact that most anti-regime demonstrations remained non-violent, soldiers were undoubtedly being killed.

“Firm evidence is lost in the fog, but there are reliable and consistent reports, backed by YouTube videos, of mutinous soldiers being shot by security forces,” Yassin-Kassab said.

The fact that Assad has not been seen in public for weeks, that his army commander brother, Maher, is leading the offensives in the north, and the fact that the president seems to be hiding from the world – Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, says he is refusing to take his calls – all suggests Assad may not only have lost the initiative but has also lost control of the reins of power.

It was the supposed “reformer” Assad, after all, who in April proposed lifting Syria’s emergency law and opening a dialogue with the regime’s critics, only to see the army launch a nationwide crackdown within days. Since then, there have been instances when Friday prayer demonstrations were tolerated, then suddenly brutally dispersed, and then tolerated the following week, apparently depending on which army or police commander was in charge that day. But, overall, the hardliners are in the driving seat.

As Syria’s refugee and humanitarian crisis mounts and its economy and ability to trade suffer, the regime is visibly floundering and making matters significantly worse through its many random, undirected and often illegal actions. This cannot continue indefinitely.

Two disturbing scenarios are now coming into closer focus. One is the prospect of civil war, possibly along sectarian lines. The other is the possibility of direct Turkish intervention in a country with which Ankara has a long history of disputes over territory, water and other matters.

Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a key but very recent ally, is increasingly publicly critical, decrying the “savagery” and “inhumane” behaviour of the Syrian armed forces. He is said to be angry that promises made to him personally by Assad at the onset of the protests have been broken. And he is facing a growing refugee crisis on Turkish territory at a sensitive political moment.

Yassin-Kassab said: “Turkish military intervention remains unlikely but if the estimated 4,000 refugees who have crossed the border thus far swell to a greater flood, particularly if Kurds begin crossing in large numbers, Turkey may decide to create a safe haven in north or north-eastern Syria.

“This territory could become Syria’s Benghazi, potentially a home for a more local and credible opposition than the exile-dominated one that recently met in Antalya, Turkey, and a destination to which soldiers and their families could defect. A council of defected officers might then organise attacks on the regime from the safe haven.”

If that happened, then Turkey, a Nato member, would be entitled to request help from the US and other alliance members. Which is how, despite all assurances to the contrary, Britain could yet end up at war in Syria.

Guardian

Video footage showed hundreds of troops firing weapons and charging in large numbers into the square to clear it.

Tahrir Square – which for 18 days was the centre of the Egyptian revolution that ousted President Hosni Mubarak — was occupied again on Friday by hundreds of thousands of Egyptians calling for Mubarak to be put on trial, and for the head of the army, Field Marshal Mohammed Hussein Tantawi, who is the titular head of state, to be removed.

Many demonstrators were demanding that the army council be replaced by a civilian one during a transitional period to democracy, accusing the military of protecting members of the former regime.

The huge turnout followed growing fears that the revolution had been hijacked by the army.

Witnesses in the square said the raid was led by a mixture of army, police and internal security forces. About 300 soldiers swept into the square at around 3am, backed by 20-30 military trucks. Witnesses said firing continued in the square until around 5.30am on Saturday.

Although an army spokesman insisted that only “blanks”, not live bullets, had been fired to warn protesters, images on social media websites appeared to show spent casings of both blank and live shells.

The soldiers honed in on a tent camp in the centre where protesters had formed a human cordon to protect several army officers who had joined the demonstration in defiance of their superiors.

The troops dragged an unknown number of protesters away, throwing them into trucks, which video footage showed driving into the square amid the sound of gunfire. Among those arrested were understood to be soldiers who had joined the protest.

Tamer El Said, an Egyptian filmaker who was in Tahrir Square at the time of the late night attack said: “There was a huge demonstration that started at about 11 o’clock.”

“There were some military officers who joined it who were dissatisfied with what the Supreme Military Council was doing. There were between 15-20 of them. Obviously it was really dangerous for them so the other protesters decided that it would protect them from being arrested by the military police.

“At about 11 o’clock last night the security forces, who had surrounded the square, tried to enter it to try and catch these soldiers but the protesters would not allow them to come in. There was army and police and special forces. At 3 o’clock they attacked the square.”

“They were firing bullets in the air at first then rubber bullets and then live rounds. They pushed all the demonstrators out of the square. Then they started to chase the protesters into the surrounding streets and into the down town area using tear gas and bullets. I have a friend who was there who said there was continuous shooting.”

One female protester, who took refuge in a nearby mosque, said: “I saw women being slapped in the face, women being kicked.”

Troops surrounded the mosque and heavy gunfire was heard for hours.

The military issued a statement afterwards blaming “outlaws” for rioting and violating the country’s 2am to 5am curfew. It said no one was harmed or arrested.

“The armed forces stress that they will not tolerate any acts of rioting or any act that harms the interest of the country and the people,” it said.

As troops withdrew, protesters armed with makeshift weapons returned to the square and dragged debris and barbed wire to seal off the streets leading into it.

“We are staging a sit-in until the field marshal is prosecuted,” said Anas Esmat, a 22-year-old university student.

“The people want the fall of the field marshal,” chanted protesters, in a variation on the chant that has become famous across the Middle East in protests calling for regime change. “Tantawi is Mubarak and Mubarak is Tantawi,” went another chant. Guardian

Assad deployed the army in the main port city of Latakia
last month and around the southern city of Deraa, where protests
broke out nearly three weeks ago inspired by Arab uprisings
elsewhere in North Africa and the Middle East.

Syria’s armed forces total 295,000 active personnel, backed
by heavy artillery, tanks, warplanes and a small navy. There are
also 314,000 reservists. In a move to curb dissent last month,
Assad shortened military conscription to 18 months from 21.

* GROUND FORCES:

Numbers: 220,000 including conscripts. Assad’s brother Maher
controls the Presidential Guard, the Republican Guard, and the
Fourth Armoured Division which together with Syria’s secret
police form the heart of the country’s security forces.

4,950 main battle tanks, 590 reconnaissance vehicles, up to
2,450 armoured infantry fighting vehicles, 1,500 armoured
personnel carriers, 3,440 artillery pieces, up to 500 mortars
and at least 4,100 surface-to-air missiles.

* PARAMILITARY FORCES:

Numbers: 108,000. Made up of 8,000 Interior Ministry
gendarmerie and 100,000 Workers Militia or People’s Army (Baath
Party).

* NAVY:

Numbers: 5,000
Bases located at Lakatia, Tartus and Minet el-Baida

* AIR FORCE:

Numbers: 100,000, including 30,000 reserves.

Combat capable aircraft: 555 Mig planes, including more than
150 fighters, more than 300 fighter-ground attack planes, 48
intelligence/surveillance planes, and 22 heavy transport planes.

Helicopters: 36 attack helicopters, 100
reconnaissance/transport helicopters, 20 transport helicopters.

Reuters

Mubarak, 82, quit on February 11 after a series of half-measures failed to satisfy popular demands for him to go immediately. He handed over to a military council, which is now facing domestic and U.S.-led pressure for a transition to civilian rule.

The revolution in Egypt, a staunch U.S. ally under Mubarak, has wrenched the most populous Arab country from the former president’s stultifying grasp, although it remains to be seen if his whole security-based system will also crumble.

Here are some of the main political risks:

* TRANSITION OF POWER

Mubarak’s overthrow leaves Egypt in charge of a Higher Military Council led by armed forces commander Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, who has also served as defense minister for 20 years.

The council said on February 12 the present government would remain in place until a new one could be appointed as part of a transition to civilian, democratic rule.

The fate of all Egypt’s institutions is up in the air, as well as its constitution, tailored to keep Mubarak in power.

The 16-man military council excludes Omar Suleiman, appointed vice-president by Mubarak on January 29. The former spy chief announced Mubarak’s resignation, but it is not clear what role, if any, he will play in the transition.

Pro-democracy activists, in a “People’s Communique No. 1,” are demanding the dissolution of the cabinet Mubarak appointed on January 29 and the suspension of the parliament elected in a rigged poll late last year. They want emergency law ended, military courts scrapped and all political prisoners freed.

The communique demands a transitional presidential council, with four civilians and one military member, and a transitional government of technocrats to run the country and prepare for elections within nine months.

It demands free media and syndicates, and the formation of political parties. In addition, it seeks the creation of a body to draft a democratic constitution enshrining human rights.

The military council has not said exactly how it will proceed, although before Mubarak quit it said a presidential election, due in September, would be free and fair. The timing is now uncertain, but U.S. President Barack Obama has urged the military to lay out a clear path for free and fair elections.

The army, generally respected by Egyptians, made no effort to crush the anti-Mubarak protests. The future of riot police and other security forces, who lost control of the streets after failing to quell demonstrators by force, is uncertain.

What to watch:

* Any sign of the military reneging on its promised handover to civilian rule could ignite new demonstrations by protesters emboldened by their victory over Mubarak’s security apparatus.

* NEW POLITICAL FORCES

Assuming some form of democracy emerges from the tumult, many different parties or individuals could come to the fore.

Egypt’s registered opposition parties have been weakened, fractured or compromised under Mubarak. Protest groups that have sprung up in recent years have proved far more nimble, effective and adept at using social media as Mubarak’s grip weakened.

Among possible leaders is Ayman Nour, who challenged Mubarak in the 2005 presidential poll and was later jailed on forgery charges which he denied, saying they were politically motivated.

Another contender for high office may be Amr Moussa, a popular former foreign minister, who has said he will resign from his post as secretary-general of the Arab League. Other individuals have emerged, such as retired diplomat Mohamed ElBaradei and scientist Ahmed Zewail, both Nobel Prize winners.

The best organized group is the Muslim Brotherhood, but its true level of support — and internal cohesion — is not known.

Nor is it clear that the Brotherhood, which came late to the protest movement that blossomed in January, wants power, or at least wants it now. The group’s previous strategy has been to win over Egypt’s majority Muslim population gradually to its vision of a pluralistic, democratic and Islamist state.

What to watch:

* Any signs that an Islamist-led government might be elected would arouse concern in Israel and the United States, which now gives Egypt about $1.5 billion a year, mostly for the military.

* DOMESTIC CHALLENGES

Egypt’s daunting social, economic and sectarian problems have not gone away. Any new government will have to cope with high expectations from a rapidly growing population of 80 million desperate for jobs and improved living standards — 20 percent of Egyptians live on less than $1 a day.

Much of the economy has ground to a halt since the unrest broke out. Banks reopened on February 6 without a dramatic fall in the pound. The stock exchange, hammered before the protests forced its closure, is expected to reopen on February 16.

Some analysts predict political turmoil will halve Egypt’s economic growth this year, push its budget deficit into double figures and weaken its currency, boosting already high inflation.

In December, analysts polled by Reuters had forecast that the economy would grow by 5.4 percent in the fiscal year to June. The government’s target is 6 percent but it now acknowledges this could be cut by 2 percentage points or so.

Egypt’s economy was worth an estimated $217 billion last year, half that of Saudi Arabia. It relies on tourism, foreign investment and Suez Canal fees. A sustained dip in foreign currency revenue could put the pound under pressure.

Egypt faces widespread poverty, unemployment of at least 10 percent and stubborn inflation.

Before Mubarak fell, the government raised public sector salaries by 15 percent. Public spending is likely to stay high, and any government will feel pressure to keep taxes down, maintain subsidies and provide money for the unemployed.

As a result, the state budget gap is likely to balloon toward 10 percent of gross domestic product this year, BNP Paribas estimates, above the government’s 2010/11 guidance of 7.9 percent.

Central bank reserves stood at $36 billion at the end of 2010, enough to cover immediate capital outflows and defend the pound.

Egypt will have to revive business confidence, perhaps helped by prospects of a serious anti-corruption drive in the post-Mubarak era, and persuade tourists it is safe to return.

What to watch:

* Fiscal deterioration as post-Mubarak authorities try to assuage demands for better living standards and services.

* FOREIGN POLICY

The anti-Mubarak protests focused inward, rather than trying to fire up crowds with anti-U.S. or anti-Israeli slogans.

The Muslim Brotherhood, which espouses non-violence itself but which has ties to the Palestinian group Hamas, is certainly hostile to Israel, but has not demanded that Egypt immediately tear up its 1979 peace treaty with the Jewish state.

The Higher Military Council said on February 12 Egypt was committed to its international treaty obligations.

Without Mubarak, it is unlikely Egypt will be as loyal a partner of the United States and Israel as before. However, few Egyptians are interested in returning to a state of war with Israel or in shredding ties with Washington.

A new government must decide how to deal with the border with the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, which Egypt had kept largely shut in line with Israel’s economic siege of isolate the territory.

What to watch:

* Any change in Egypt’s relations with Israel could have knock-on effects on ties with the United States.

Reuters

Egyptians celebrate at Tahrir Square after President Hosni Mubarak resigned and handed power to the military in Cairo, Egypt, Friday, Feb. 11, 2011.

By HAMZA HENDAWI

It was the people who forced President Hosni Mubarak from power, but it is the generals who are in charge now. Egypt’s 18-day uprising produced a military coup that crept into being over many days – its seeds planted early in the crisis by Mubarak himself.

The telltale signs of a coup in the making began to surface soon after Mubarak ordered the army out on the streets to restore order after days of deadly clashes between protesters and security forces in Cairo and much of the rest of the Arab nation.

“This is in fact the military taking over power,” said political analyst Diaa Rashwan after Mubarak stepped down and left the reins of power to the armed forces. “It is direct involvement by the military in authority and to make Mubarak look like he has given up power.”

Army troops backed by tanks and armored fighting vehicles were given a hero’s welcome by the protesters angry over brutal treatment by the police. The goodwill was reciprocated when the military vowed not to use force against protesters, a move that set them apart from the much-hated police who operated with near impunity under Mubarak.

The generals adopted a go-slow approach, offering Egyptians carefully weighed hints that it was calling the shots. They issued statements describing the protesters’ demands as “legitimate” and made halfhearted calls on the demonstrators to go home and allow normal life to resume.

Rather than quit the protests, the demonstrators turned out in ever greater numbers. Mubarak offered one concession after another, but they all fell short of the protesters’ demands that he immediately leave.

The military was clearly torn between its loyalty to the regime and the millions of protesters. Mubarak is one of their own, a former air force commander and a hero of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.

But as the president continued to defy the growing crowds and cling to power, the Egyptian army moved more definitively toward seizing control for the first time in some 60 years.

Thursday brought the surprise announcement that the armed forces’ highest executive body, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, was in “permanent session” – meaning that it was on a war footing.

State TV showed Defense Minister Hussein Tantawi presiding over a table seating some two dozen stern faced generals in combat fatigues – but no sign of commander in chief Mubarak. His newly appointed vice president, former army general and intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, was not there either – indicating a rift between the civilian and military leadership.

A statement, tellingly referred to as “communique number 1″ – phrasing that in the Arab world suggests a coup – made no mention of Mubarak or Suleiman.

The council, it said, met to “discuss what measures and arrangements could be taken to safeguard the homeland and its achievements and the aspirations of the great Egyptian people.”

Translation: The generals are in charge, not Mubarak, not Suleiman nor the Cabinet.

The communique set the stage for what the crowds of demonstrators expected would be Mubarak’s resignation Thursday night. Instead, Mubarak announced he would stay in office and hand over power to Suleiman, who told protesters to go home and stop watching foreign news reports.

The protesters were furious – and so were the generals.

“Both of last night’s addresses by Mubarak and Suleiman were in defiance of the armed forces,” Maj. Gen. Safwat el-Zayat, a former senior official of Egypt’s General Intelligence, told al-Ahram Online, the Internet edition of Egypt’s leading daily, on Friday.

Protest leaders pleaded for the military to take over after Mubarak’s speech, saying the country would explode until the army intervened.

If Mubarak had stepped down, handing Suleiman his presidential powers in line with the constitution would have kept his regime largely intact after he had gone, something that would have left the protesters unhappy.

In contrast, a military coup would provide a clean break with a regime they hated for so long, opening up a wide range of possibilities – suspending the constitution that many protesters saw as tailored to keep Mubarak in office and dissolving a parliament formed by an election marred by widespread fraud. A coup seemed to be the best way forward.

The first official word the protesters received from the generals on Friday, however, was discouraging.

A second military communique contained what appeared to be a reluctant endorsement of Mubarak’s blueprint for a way out of the crisis, though it also projected the military as the ultimate guarantor of the country’s highest interests. El-Zayat said the language in the statement was an attempt to avoid an open conflict.

Later Friday, with millions out on the streets demanding that he step down, Mubarak finally did just that. He may have been denied the chance to announce his own departure – say goodbye to the people he had ruled for nearly 30 years. Suleiman announced the decision for him.

Alternatively, he may have not wanted to go on television to say he was stepping down after less than 24 hours after insisting to serve out the remaining seven months of his current term.

It was a humiliating end.

Keeping up appearances, The military later issued a third military statement praising Mubarak as a leader who has done much to his country. It hinted that the military would not be in power for long, saying the armed forces were not a substitute for a legitimate administration. But it gave no clue as to what its plans are.

“The truth is that even the senior military now at the top of the power structure under Mubarak almost certainly have no clear idea of what happens next,” Anthony Cordesman of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in a commentary on Thursday. “It will be days before anyone know how well the transition will function, who goes and who stays, and how stable the result really is.” WP

Obama spoke after Mubarak handed over power to the Egyptian army after an 18-day popular uprising, with Washington now facing deep uncertainty and huge challenges in a potentially volatile power shift in Cairo that could have repercussions for U.S. policy across the Middle East.

“The people of Egypt have spoken,” Obama told reporters. “Egyptians have made it clear that nothing less than genuine democracy will carry the day.”

He warned that this was not the end, but just the beginning of Egypt’s transition to democracy, saying, “There will be many difficult days ahead and many questions remain unanswered.”

Though the U.S. role in Mubarak’s resignation remained unclear, Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, head of the military council that took control Friday, spoke with U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates by phone five times during the wave of mass protests, including as late as Thursday evening.

Washington walked a fine line since the demonstrations erupted, endorsing the democratic aspirations of the protesters but trying not to openly abandon a long-time ally or encourage upheaval that could spill over into other parts of the oil-rich region.

Obama, who has pressed for an orderly process toward democracy, now confronts the challenge of helping broad political reform to take root in the Arab world’s most populous country while keeping Islamists from ending up with enough power to undermine U.S. interests in the region.

He will face the test of keeping the power shift in Cairo — marking the end of Mubarak’s 30-year authoritarian rule — from unnerving Middle East allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel or emboldening foes like Iran and al Qaeda.

That may explain why, even as Obama praised Egyptian protesters for forcing political change in their country, he was careful to avoid saying anything that might be seen as promoting further unrest elsewhere in the Arab world.

TIES WITH EGYPT’S MILITARY

But Obama made clear the importance Washington places on its close ties with the Egyptian military, which relies on $1.3 billion in annual U.S. aid and is seen as the key to keeping the situation from descending into chaos.

“The military has served patriotically and responsibly as a caretaker to the state and will now have to ensure a transition that is credible in the eyes of the Egyptian people,” Obama said.

Pentagon officials have been tight-lipped about the talks between Tantawi and Gates though the U.S. defense chief has praised Egypt’s army as a stabilizing force during the unrest.

While viewing Tantawi as an ally committed to avoiding another war with Israel, in private some U.S. officials have depicted him as resistant to reform, according to a 2008 State Department cable released by the WikiLeaks website.

Mubarak’s exit came a day after Obama seemed to rebuke the Egyptian leader for not going far enough in a televised speech in which he ceded some powers to his vice president but defiantly insisted he would stay in office until presidential elections scheduled for September.

After Obama’s show of impatience, it was unclear whether U.S. officials, who have had constant behind-the-scenes dealings with the Egyptian government and military, helped secure Mubarak’s decision to go now.

“This is very good news for Obama given that he and his administration so publicly staked out a position that change should happen now. But it is only the start of a process,” said Brian Katulis, Middle East expert at the Center for American Progress in Washington. “Now the real work has to begin.”

Obama’s cautious approach has been based on Egypt’s strategic importance: a rare Arab state no longer hostile to Israel, the guardian of the Suez Canal linking Europe and Asia and a major force against militant Islam in the Middle East.

Obama launched his outreach to the Muslim world with a speech in Cairo in 2009 but was then low-key about U.S. concerns over human rights. The United States is now mindful that it can no longer be seen as backing autocratic Arab rulers just for the sake of stability in the region.

But Washington will also want to reassure friends like Saudi Arabia’s rulers, who control vital oil supplies and may be unsettled by popular discontent in Yemen and Jordan, inspired by uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia.

In an apparent effort to calm Israeli concerns, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said it was important that the next government of Egypt uphold its 1979 peace treaty with the Jewish state. Israel is worried that Egypt’s future leaders might not be as committed as Mubarak was to maintaining peace.

U.S lawmakers swiftly welcomed Mubarak’s exit. “It is crucial that Mubarak’s departure be an orderly one and that it leads to true democracy for Egypt, including free, fair and open elections,” said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid.

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Republican chair of the House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee, pointed to concern in Washington and Israel that the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s biggest opposition group, might end up with greater clout.

“We must also urge the unequivocal rejection of any involvement by the Muslim Brotherhood and other extremists who may seek to exploit and hijack these events to gain power, oppress the Egyptian people, and do great harm to Egypt’s relationship with the United States, Israel, and other free nations,” said Ros-Lehtinen. cnews

But many questions remain about what comes next — and there are strong doubts about whether military rule will lead to the demonstrators’ ultimate goal: a credible transition to democracy.

“The heavy lifting begins now,” says Robert Springborg, a professor at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School. “Now is the time for the military to confront its moment of truth.”

More Questions Than Answers

Recently appointed Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman announced the dramatic shift in a simple, one-sentence address on state TV. He said President Hosni Mubarak had decided to waive his office as president and asked “the Armed Forces Supreme Council to run the state.”

As with just about every official pronouncement these past two weeks, it left many more questions than answers. Will a new, more democratic constitution be created and when? Will the Parliament, filled with Mubarak loyalists, be dissolved? Will elections scheduled for September go ahead, be rescheduled or be put off? And what about the opposition leaders who’ve emerged over the past three weeks?

“We don’t know how this new military junta will interact with them,” says David Patel of Cornell University. “Will it just consult with them? Even if the military today says it wants early elections, the question is whether that opposition is part of this interim regime.”

During 18 days of street demonstrations, there were numerous signs that the military — or at least some junior members — were siding with protesters. Some stood together with protesters on military tanks and some outright joined the ranks in Tahrir Square. On Friday, before the takeover announcement, military personnel in Alexandria handed out water bottles to demonstrators. A growing number of protesters had been asking for what they call “the people’s army” to step in and launch a coup.

Still, Jason Brownlee, of the University of Texas, Austin, questions whether Egypt’s military really has a sovereign, civilian government in mind.

“I don’t see evidence the military is willing to go backstage,” he says. The message could be “we’ve heard you, we’ve responded, congratulations, now go home.”

Brownlee thinks protesters might keep more of their new leverage if they maintain a peaceful presence on the streets, pushing for broader change in the overall security regime. “If the Ministry of Interior, the police, and all of that stays around,” he says, “it’s hard to see how Egyptians’ daily lives would be substantively improved a year from now.”

Protesters have made clear they want not only Mubarak’s departure but true regime change.

“There are tens of thousands of members of the regime and the military-industrial complex,” analyst Patel says. “How many of those people are going to see their patronage-based positions challenged?”

Springborg, of the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School, says Egypt’s military has ossified for decades, with little role other than to support the president. The institution “needs to be modernized and subject to civilian control,” he says. “They’re going to fight that and it’s going to be a huge issue.”

Egypt’s Long Military History

Egypt’s military has been integral to governance ever since it staged a revolt against the Egyptian monarchy and its British advisers in 1952.

That’s when Col. Gamal Abdel Nasser led a clandestine group of junior “Free Officers” to seize power, with the aim of modernizing and democratizing Egypt. But the leadership was beset with infighting. Nasser’s plans for a vibrant socialist economy foundered. A fairly liberal constitution was eventually written, but never implemented.

Today’s top military officials see themselves as the heirs of those Free Officers. But Robert Scales, the former commandant of the U.S. Army War College, says there’s a generational split that could prove crucial.

“One is the old guard represented by Field Marshal Tantawi, and [recently named vice president Omar] Suleiman and others, and then you have the young guard, those who came up in the Egyptian army after the ‘73 Yom Kippur War. And what you see is a sort of internal tension that seems to be evolving inside the army, as one part seeks to hold on to the old and the younger generation looks for the new.”

Scales notes the older generation was trained by the Soviets, while the younger one has been trained and educated by the U.S., “and so there really is a cultural rift.”

Military Links To Economy

On Friday, Egypt’s military said that Defense Minister Tantawi was presiding over the Supreme Council, the military body that has taken control of the state.

Top commanders, all with strong political ties to Mubarak, may have decided they needed to break with him for the sake of their own legitimacy. But they still have a vital stake in the status quo, not just politically but also economically.

In a strange public-private alliance forged decades ago, Egyptian military officers own a share in just about every industry in the country, from road construction to car assembly to tourism. This could lead to a serious clash with protesters who’ve been calling for an end to corruption and for Mubarak to be put on trial.

“To investigate the transgressions of the regime is to take it directly into the military economy,” says Springborg. Military leaders have “less than zero interest in having an investigation of that.”

The military on Friday also said it would end the 30-year-old state of emergency “as soon as the current circumstances are over.” And that it would oversee a revision of the constitution to allow “free and fair presidential elections.”

But rewriting a constitution is a long and complicated process. So far, the opposition that’s coalesced on the streets of Cairo and other cities has agreed on one key thing: Mubarak’s departure. Whether they can agree on broader goals during a protracted debate on constitutional policy is an open question.

Springborg suspects that a real constitutional overhaul is not on the military’s agenda. The current document heavily centralizes power in a strong president, something he believes top commanders are loath to change.

“I think the military would breathe a sigh of relief if they had a successful [presidential] candidate under the current constitution,” he says. “Someone who won’t challenge its privileges and powers.” NPR

The army statement was expected to be delivered later on Friday and followed President Hosni Mubarak’s dramatic resignation after 30 years in power.

Egypt Supreme Council

Some of the officials on the council, according to Al Jazeera, include:

- Omar Suleiman, 74, who was promoted by Mubarak as VP less than two weeks ago from his previous position as intelligence chief. He is among the retired or serving military officers in the council.

- Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, 75, who became the minister of defense and commander-in-chief of the Egyptian Armed forces in 1991, according to the network.

On the Egypt Armed Forces website, Tantawi is listed second on the list of commanders behind the “Supreme Commander,” Hosni Mubarak.

- Lt. Gen. Sami Hafez Anan, 63, who holds the title of Armed Forces Chief of Staff, according to the network. Anan is listed third on the armed forces website, behind Tantawi.

Air Marshal Reda Mahmoud Hafez Mohamed, 58, the air force chief, is also on the council, Al Jazeera reported.

- Lt. Gen. Abd El Aziz Seif-Eldeein, the commander of air defense

- Vice Admiral Mohab Mamish, chief of the navy.

The council issued a statement on Friday ahead of the announcement of Mubarak’s resignation, the Associated Press reported.

The council said it would guarantee the implementation of several steps.

The first step included ending the state of emergency law “once the present circumstances end,” an “outcome of the (court) appeal against the parliamentary elections and the measures that will follow, and “implementation of the constitutional amendments and holding a free and fair presidential election in line with the agreed constitutional amendments.”

The second step included “shepherding the legitimate demands for the people “with firmness and accuracy to ensure their implementation within a definitive timetable until the realization of a peaceful transition that produces the democratic society to which the people aspire.”

The third included a promise not to detain “the honorable sons of the nation who rejected corruption and demanded reform,” and stressed the importance of “resuming work at government’s services, the return of normal life in order to preserve the interests and the achievements of our great people.”
IBtimes

Egypt has just witnessed a popular revolution — but also a military coup. So as we in Washington watch the crowds celebrate in Cairo, we also have to wonder: will this be a good coup, or a bad coup?

The one sentence announcement read by Vice President Omar Suleiman on Egyptian state television this morning said that President Hosni Mubarak had ceded authority to the supreme military council, which announced yesterday that it had gone into session. That means the Egyptian constitution — which the regime has been insisting must be followed — is no longer in effect. Under that constitution, Mubarak would have to be succeeded by the speaker of parliament, and new elections for president held within 60 days.

Clearly the military council, not the parliamentary speaker, is the country’s authority at the moment. Suleiman may or may not have a role — he is a former general and intelligence chief, but left the military when he became vice president. He did not participate in the military council’s meeting on Thursday.

The most likely scenario, one Egyptian protest leaders seem to be taking for granted, is that the military council intends to accept the popular call for democracy, and will now organize a transition. It issued a statement this morning, before Mubarak’s resignation, that promised democratic elections and the eventual lifting of an emergency law that is the foundation of the old autocracy. But the statement also appeared to back the positions of Mubarak and Suleiman Thursday night.

Opposition leader Mohammed ElBaradei told CNN in an interview that he believes Suleiman as well as Mubarak are now out of power and that the military council will soon reach out to the opposition forces. But neither he nor Egyptian Arab League chief Amr Moussa, who also spoke to CNN, seemed to know for sure who among the generals was in charge and what their intentions were. Let’s hope the “good coup” expectations are correct.

By Jackson Diehl

Washington Post