The better of two evils

Submitted by Michael (Egypt), Jul 2, 2013 at 15:24

Your analysis is spot-on as usual, Mr. Pipes. But this view runs contrary to two common wisdoms I think can apply here: 1) choosing the lesser of two evils; and 2) finishing off your opponent whilst you still can.

Theoretically speaking, yes, the military might muddle and freeze things up in order to remain in power. It would be a very big blow to the future of democracy in Egypt. But the alternative is to let Morsi -- and consequently, the Muslim Brotherhood -- stay in the top administrative position in the country just to guard against the potential harm the military might inflict. As though leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood themselves are not a direct blow to democracy and a whole list of other liberal ideals (another thought: democracy is not a goal; it is a means).

Nobody can predict what might happen if we do not wrest Morsi off the presidency now. The Muslim Brotherhood might work up some unthought of strategy to stay in power for a longer period (make more or stronger alliances; incur chaos and bedlam; ... etc.) or they might seek revenge on the masses somehow. It is equally important to extract them now as it is that Egyptians have weakened them up.

The military, on the other hand, might not be the typical answer, but it would do for now. As you have expressed many times before in your most respectful articles, secular dictators are far better than Islamist ones. That says it all, I think.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".