Strikes in Egypt - Gaining Ground or Losing Out?

There seems to be two distinct views of the recent waves of strikes in Egypt. One side cites the relatively low turnout of the planned strikes that took place several weeks ago. This side also points to the decline of the public sector (where most union activity historically took place) and the resentment of the official state-sponsored labor unions run by discredited regime touts. The private sector, so goes the reasoning, is much less amenable to unionization not only because it can be grounds for dismissal, but also because these factories are often isolated (far away from city centers where political activity is at its highest) and smaller than their public sector predecessors. They also claim that the government has given in to public sector strikers (usually for an increase in wages) in attempts to mollify the workers before the plant is privatized - thus paving the way for the disappearance of the unions altogether.

The alternative view is that the wave of strikes is something new (not seen since the middle of the century) and combined with the bread riots and the skyrocketing cost of living, presents a generally new direction in state-labor relations. The decline in standards of living, combined with the increasing poverty level (from 16% in 2000 to almost 20% in 2005), the police presence and repression of political dissent, and the regime's unpopular policy to police the border with Gaza (to buttress the Israeli regimes blockade of Palestinians) seems enough to spark major social unrest, whether in the form of labor strikes or protests with the main political opposition, the Muslim Brothers.

Gender in the Middle East

Gender in the Middle East is a perennial hot topic, and there's a few topics that come up again and again (women in the workplace, family planning, women in Islam, etc.) But one strange policy I've noticed is that groups of young men are not allowed into certain establishments unless they bring an equal number of young women with them. I first encountered this in Lebanon in Monoe (sp?) where groups of foreign men from AUB would ask us (the girls) to go with them to neighborhood bars so they could get in. I noticed it again when I booked a reservation at a jazz club in Cairo - the reservation system said "couples only" - and explained that too much testosterone ruins any party (which I wholeheartedly agree with).

But this policy does belie a more systemic problem: too many unemployed or underemployed young males with too much time on their hands. The higher education system in Egypt (although free to all those who achieve qualifying grades on their secondary school exams) is very poor, and the job market is too small even to accommodate those who graduate with the necessary skills. The result is large roving bands of shabab getting in street fights and otherwise causing trouble. I have noticed an inordinately large number of sports clubs (gyms) - maybe this is an effort to deal with the problem?

The Police

The police are everywhere! We've been to five universities since we've arrived, and armed personnel and paddy wagons (anywhere from 1-3 vehicles) have been stationed at the main gates to all the public universities (higher education in Egypt is free – with the exception of AUC – where I saw the most guards). The one exception was the Future University – a for-profit private school established to serve the wealthy families of the New Cairo Developments. In contrast to the public universities, with their aging infrastructure, inadequate facilities and low-paid faculty (some universities have around ¼ million students) – the new private universities look like space age monstrosities: the one I visited was built in the shape of the Roman Coliseum, but with silver steel accents and blue tinted windows. In addition to the campus installations, there's lookout towers everywhere (although the windows are so dirty I don't see how they do much looking). There's also guards stationed along the expressways, up on perches that make them level with the road (they're in little white cubbies that remind me of something you'd find in the children's reading room at a library).

Every time . . . .

Every time I travel in the Middle East I make so many female friends . . . and I learn to dislike men even more. I know that it's a function of under-education, poverty and joblessness, but women (even their own women) are treated as sex objects. I always expect to be jeered at, and to be forced to change my behavior (like cross the street, or not sit down at a certain cafe) to avoid groups of males. But I was walking with one of my Egyptian female friends today (she was wearing hijab), and because we were walking on a highway (waiting for a taxi in front of my hotel) at least 5 cars beeped and pulled over all in a manner of minutes. She jerked me aside and told me to walk the other way. I didn't understand why, but she told me that any women walking on a street like this alone (even with a headscarf) is considered a prostitute. So - not only is reasonable behavior considered a sign of loose morals, but there's also an inordinate number of Egyptian men cruising for prostitutes at 2 in the afternoon. I know the matter is more complicated (we have parallels in our own society, etc.) but it just really pisses me off.

Egypt's Nouveau Riche

I was absolutely shocked when I saw the new real estate developments going up on the edges of Cairo (these developments have names like "New Cairo," "Hyde Park," "Fern Valley," "Palm Sands," etc. At first impression they look like an all-inclusive resort in Mexico or the Caribbean. There's a huge main gate (comparable in size to the façade of a large grocery store) with the name of the development complex usually in stand-alone letters (ala the Hollywood sign) surrounded by perfectly manicured landscapes. The homes themselves are almost unbelievable. These aren't McMansions – they're compounds (usually in Spanish-Mediterranean or French-Rococo styles – the more ostentatious the better). They have armed guards stationed at regular intervals, and many of the larger developments have their own private schools for the residents' children (these buildings rival some of the grandest mosques I've seen during my travels – particularly Shrouk Academy in the new Shrouk development).

From the looks of it many of the houses remain empty. This is in contrast to the rest of Cairo - where overcrowding and population concentration around the Nile have been perennial problems for the government since the 1960s. Of course these homes come with all the most modern amenities, again in contrast to the rest of Cairenes, many of whom still practice un-mechanized cultivation (you can see them bent over in the fields along the Nile delta from the main Cairo highway).

Construction and real estate are two of the biggest growth sectors in Egypt – both dominated by the military (it buys most of the land from the government at subsidized prices, develops it and resells it for huge profits and it dominates the building materials industry (cement, etc.) I did notice that some sort of military complex was adjacent to one of the largest new developments – there were training fields, barracks and lookout towers (another ubiquitous part of Cairo's architecture: the panopticon).

The Star City Shopping Center is another sign of the rising class of uber rich. The huge structure (financed by Saudi investors) covers a few city blocks and is flanked by tall Pharonic Statues and various manifestations of the Sphinx. It's also gated – and anyone who doesn't look the part of shopper is quickly ushered away by armed security personnel. Inside you're greeted by a huge incense burner that fills the foyer with (a bit too much) perfume. Inside you'll find all the stores you would find in any shopping center in the US (and many European chains you wouldn't find – like the French company Vero Moda, Mango, etc). I didn't get much chance to peruse, but there's also many upscale coffee shops, home décor stores, electronics stores, a Virgin Megastore, and of course a prayer room (conveniently located next to the bathrooms – where many women were doing their ablutions in the sinks).

Nuclear Deterrence Workshop Write-Up

One of the perks of being an underpaid graduate researcher is that you get to sit-in on events hosted by your professors (which usually involves free food). Last week I attended an all-day roundtable on nuclear deterrence, which included my professor Shibley Telhami, but also Thomas Schelling, John Mearscheimer, Stephen Walt, Stephen Van Evera, William Quandt, and lots of other amazing scholars. It was quite an experience to sit around the table with such big names and listen to their exchanges. The roundtable focused on: the credibility of US foreign policy and US deterrence, deterring non-state actors and nuclear proliferation among non-state actors, Iran's nuclear program, and the role of public opinion in deterrence. Most of the conference centered on deterring non-state actors, beginning from the assumption that, since non-state actors have no 'home base' to target in response to an attack they are more difficult to deter. I was pleased that, from the beginning the participants distinguished between Al Qaeda - which can easily be categorized as a terrorist organization, and groups like Hamas and Hizbullah, which not only have national territories that could be targeted in a policy of deterrence, but which are actually legitimate political representatives engaged in resistance operations (and occasionally use terror as a tactic).

Another topic touched on during the roundtable was the decay of the nuclear taboo. One participant pointed out that the rhetoric and weapons-systems projects (the missile defense system) of the Bush Administration has severely damaged the nuclear taboo, which of course affects not only state use of nuclear (or biological or chemical) weapons, but also their use by non-state actors. All states have an interest in maintaining the nuclear taboo - and we cannot condemn other nuclear programs in other states while we ourselves discuss their use in conventional battle-field scenarios and make them increasingly key in European balance of power politics. By contrast, some non-state actors, specifically the most radical groups who want to overhaul ALL of societies norms may be MORE likely to use nuclear weapons because they are outside the bounds of what is accepted by current social norms.

Comments on US credibility were perhaps the most depressing - one participant pointed out that US capacity to create carnage is still widely respected, but that US ability to rebuild or engage in more complex activities is pretty much non-existent. However another participant pointed out (presciently) that most of the actors we are concerned with (the Bin Ladens and opposition movements of the world) were well aware of the failures of empire long before we fudged ours - making reference to earlier comments made by Bin Laden in taped statements pointing out the follies of the Roman Empire, the Soviets in Afghanistan, and the overthrow of colonial governments.

My favorite comment came from a controversial academic - and he basically said "Why the hell are we even talking about nuclear deterrence? What did we do wrong since the fall of the Soviet Union that we are STILL worrying about deterrence." IE - why does everyone want to nuke us? This was the point of the roundtable where everyone nodded their head and resigned themselves to the fact that successive US administrations have made such egregious and arrogant foreign policy decisions that we will most likely be holding this roundtables annually.

You know how everyone hates Congress but loves their own Congressperson?

I'm a crazy liberal - but I love my home-state senator Richard Lugar (with the exception of his position on farm subsidies - I even interned for him a few times) Obama likes him too!!

I don't know which is more shocking, the US condoning illegal settlements in the Occupied Territories or Bush writing a letter all by himself?

"A letter that President Bush personally delivered to then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon four years ago . . . . gave the Jewish state permission to expand the West Bank settlements that it hopes to retain in a final peace deal, even though Bush's peace plan officially calls for a freeze of Israeli settlements across Palestinian territories on the West Bank." The WaPo article from yesterday is here.

Israeli-Syrian Peace Talks on the Horizon?

Although Dick Cheney would probably sacrifice himself on the altar of the DNC in order to keep this from happening - there is some movement on Syrian-Israeli peace (that is if the US manages to stay out of it)

You can read about the talks here.

The CIA or the Office of Strategic Plans? "CIA to describe North Korea-Syria Nuclear Ties"

I'm attending a conference today and a colleague joked about how the CIA knew that it was in fact North Koreans visiting the nuclear sites in Syria: "Easy - they were wearing Hard Rock Cafe Pyongyang t-shirts"
The consensus among those I know seems to be that this is a last-ditch attempt by administration hawks to ensure that talks with North Korea do not take place (and that Israeli-Syrian peace talks are also derailed)

CIA to describe North Korea-Syria nuclear ties

Officials will tell Congress members this week that North Korea was helping Syria build a reactor last year when it was destroyed by an Israeli airstrike, a U.S. official says.

By Paul Richter and Greg Miller
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

April 23, 2008

WASHINGTON — CIA officials will tell Congress on Thursday that North Korea had been helping Syria build a plutonium-based nuclear reactor, a U.S. official said, a disclosure that could touch off new resistance to the administration's plan to ease sanctions on Pyongyang.

The CIA officials will tell lawmakers that they believe the reactor would have been capable of producing plutonium for nuclear weapons but was destroyed before it could do so, the U.S. official said, apparently referring to a suspicious installation in Syria that was bombed last year by Israeli warplanes.

The CIA officials also will say that though U.S. officials have had concerns for years about ties between North Korea and Syria, it was not until last year that new intelligence convinced them that the suspicious facility under construction in a remote area of Syria was a nuclear reactor, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing plans for the briefing.

The administration is planning to ease sanctions on North Korea as part of talks aimed at removing Pyongyang's nuclear weapons. The six nations involved in the talks, which also include China, Russia, South Korea and Japan, have been negotiating since 2003.

You can read the rest here.