So neoconservatives are supporting the uprising in Egypt as evidence of the universal yearning for democratic values. Pro-Israel conservatives, though, are hoping Mubarak holds on to power, since a democratic government might turn against Israel and support jihadi terrorists. Paleo-conservatives are thinking the revolution doesn’t concern us one way or the other. Most mainstream Republicans are supporting the President, in the name of that once-honored principle of politics stopping at the border and the need to show a united front in international affairs.
And the President is. . . .let’s see. It’s hard to tell. He’s supporting the protesters in their desire for freedom, but he is not saying Mubarak must go. That may be the best course for now, since events really are out of our control. But it’s hard to see the philosophy behind the policy.
Do Democrats and liberals in general have a foreign policy policy that shapes their position on what is going on in Egypt? I could find the different conservative takes–confirming what I have often say about how conservatives, far from being a monolithic faction, actually have more ideological diversity in their ranks than liberals do. But I can’t find a distinct liberal position on this. Can any liberals in the audience help me? Or is there the same ambivalence and range of positions that the conservatives have?
In backing change in Egypt, U.S. neoconservatives split with Israeli allies.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In