It is 2011 all over again in Egypt. A regime, though heavy-handed, is offering a glimmer of hope for United States interests in the region. Yet despite Cairo’s efforts to curtail the expansion of Washington’s enemies, it finds itself condemned by Western media. Angry over alleged human rights violations and the stifling of freedom of speech, the Western media is once again calling for revolution, risking a resurgence of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Egypt’s Downfall

To understand how dangerous another revolution would be, we need only look at the last one.

For almost 30 years, Egypt was in the iron hands of then President Hosni Mubarak. But protests, led by supposed “pro-democratic” activists, flared up in the early days of the 2011 Arab Spring. The movement quickly gained the attention of the Western media. Headlines of the ironfisted rule and corrupt administration of Mubarak splashed across news outlets worldwide.

The Obama administration was quickly on board with the protesters, wasting little time in hanging America’s most important Arab ally out to dry.

For decades, Egypt was a sturdy foundation for the ever changing Middle East. As Iran radicalized in the late ’70s, Egypt formed a peace treaty with Israel—the first Muslim nation to do so. The foundation for the U.S.-brokered deal was laid by Anwar Sadat, at the highest personal cost. Following Sadat’s assassination, the deal was maintained by his successor, Hosni Mubarak.

Exuding a level of calm few Mideast nations dream of, Egypt went on to play a vital role in U.S.-Middle East geopolitics. But just one week into the 2011 protests, Washington applied heavy pressure on Mubarak, forcing him from office.

Despite the way he ruled, the fruits of Mubarak’s reign are hard to deny. He kept religious extremism under control, promoted U.S. interests, and maintained peace with Israel. These were promises he made 30 years prior when he first stepped into office.

When Mubarak was removed, Egypt and the West received the revolution they wanted. The innocent protesters quickly shed their sheepskin coats, revealing themselves as the radical Muslim Brotherhood. It stormed to power with Mohamed Morsi as supreme ruler. Then began the real power grab. Enemies were killed outside the presidential palace; Iranian warships were permitted access through the Suez Canal; and the U.S. embassy was overrun. The Egyptian military poured into the Sinai demilitarized zone. The Brotherhood threatened to scrap the peace deal with Israel. Morsi became Egypt’s newest pharaoh.

It was only when the economy failed that the military intervened with a coup to prevent the complete disintegration of the Egyptian state. Egypt was left in tatters. Countless women had been raped, churches burned, minorities persecuted, and terrorists empowered.

Since that time, the cleanup has been left to the new president, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

The New Mubarak?

Though elected by Morsi himself, Sisi’s policies are far more akin to those of Mubarak. In a 2015 May-June Trumpet article “Why Won’t the U.S. Embrace Egypt?”, Middle East correspondent Brent Nagtegaal expounded on reasons why the U.S. should work with Sisi.

Sisi recognizes the danger of political Islam. He blames religious leaders for not doing enough to stifle violence. He has mobilized clerics at al-Azhar seminary to develop an Islamic narrative that rejects jihad.

Sisi recognizes the danger posed by Hamas; he has created a one-mile buffer zone along Gaza’s southern border. And he also understands the importance of the international community having trade access through the Suez Canal. He promotes religious freedom, while at the same time cracks down on the Islamic State.

Not All Good News

However, as critics have accurately pointed out, there has been an increase in the harassment of non-government organizations (ngos) and anyone critical of the current administration.

Restrictions on ngos are nothing new. Egypt has had them for decades, and some justify Sisi’s recent renewed effort because of the state of the nation that he is working to fix. The Muslim Brotherhood, now a designated terrorist organization, owned and operated many ngos. These included schools and hospitals, which are now shut down. The government undoubtedly fears these organizations being used as tools for the Brotherhood to stir up more insurrection. But Egypt’s differentiation between protection of national security and an attack on free speech is currently blurry at best.

Heavy-handed police forces are accused of targeting dissidents under the guise of protecting national security. But the reports of brutality and murder are being exposed, documented and propagated by international news sources. A number of high-profile activists are currently awaiting trials for what many consider trumped-up claims.

Cultural centers have been targeted, and many media outlets are not immune either. The recent kidnapping and murder of an Italian man by suspected Egyptian security forces is a grim reminder of the strong-handed rule currently being enforced by the military government.

Time for a Revolution

History is once again repeating itself. Just as the left grew upset with Mubarak’s ironfisted rule, so too is it growing tired of Sisi’s tactics. Fruits aside, many see Sisi as the new dictator, seeking to take on his own pharaoh-like power.

Thus, they reason, it is time for another revolution.

The New York Times is already on board. In an article basically calling on President Obama to end the U.S.-Egypt alliance, the editorial board opined:

Since the Egyptian military took power in a coup in the summer of 2013, the Obama administration’s policy toward Egypt has been moored in a series of faulty assumptions. The time has come to challenge them and to reassess whether an alliance that has long been considered a cornerstone of American national security policy is doing more harm than good.

Further on it stated, “Administration officials who have cautioned against a break with Egypt say its military and intelligence cooperation is indispensable. It’s time to challenge that premise. … Over the next few months, the president should start planning for the possibility of a break in the alliance with Egypt.”

Egyptian Working Group

The Times is not the only voice calling for revolution. One of the more prominent is the Egyptian Working Group. As a bipartisan organization based out of Washington, D.C., the Working Group is made up of scholars, professors, analysts and journalists calling for a major overhaul of U.S.-Egypt relations.

It was the Working Group that threw its weight behind President Obama’s decision to cut off Mubarak back in 2011, giving him much-needed bipartisan support in the media.

Some of its highest-ranking members are regular contributors to the New York Times, Washington Post and other media outlets. The cochairs are Robert Kagan and Michele Dunne from the Brookings Institution and Carnegie Endowment of International Peace, respectively.

To gauge the perceptions of the group, we can look to a Washington Post opinion piece that the two coauthored in April 2015:

You would think we would have learned from experience. The idea of supporting dictators as proxies in a fight against radicalism in the Middle East is not new. Nor is the abject failure of that strategy any secret. We supported the shah of Iran, who stamped out moderate as well as radical opposition, only to see him overthrown by the most significant radical Islamic movement of the past century. … We supported the Saudis and the milder Egyptian dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak, only to watch as their repression produced al Qaeda and the perpetrators of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

At a glance, the two make a point: Dictators haven’t stopped radicals from emerging to wreak havoc on the Middle East. But consider the scenarios they didn’t mention.

Libya: Here another ironfisted dictator ruled. Muammar Qadhafi was well known for his brutal regime. Yet it had its benefits. For one, there was no chance of a terrorist uprising while the strongman was around. The U.S. was able to maintain relations and operate an embassy out of the country. Diplomats even managed to negotiate a deal whereby Qadhafi promised to surrender his chemical weapons stockpile.

Then the U.S. called for revolution and democracy.

Today Libya is a terrorist haven and a basket case of a nation.

What about Iraq? Again—dictator removed, instability ensued. Today, Iran and its Shiite militias operate freely within the country, allowing Iran more chances to interfere in Iraqi politics than ever before. The Shia-Sunni rift created by Saddam Hussein hasn’t been healed. It has only grown wider. To top it off, the north of the country is overrun by terrorists who are launching near-daily terrorist attacks on the capital, Baghdad.

It is interesting to note that Kagan and Dunne do mention Egypt, where ample evidence suggests that the Egyptian people enjoyed far more liberties under the rule of Mubarak than they had under the Muslim Brotherhood. And this is the revolution that the Working Group wholeheartedly threw its weight behind!

Taking the Blame

Author and journalist Caroline Glick had a few choice words for the Egyptian Working Group:

[I]t is hard to accept the credibility of those who refuse to learn from their mistakes. It is harder still as well to listen to the “moral calls” of those who refuse to accept that because their past advice was heeded, thousands have died, and if their current calls are heeded, millions of lives will be imperiled.

Glick’s article is a response to the Working Group releasing an open letter to President Obama, calling for tougher action against Sisi.

The irony is that, as Glick pointed out, it was the Working Group that called for the first revolution. Now, rather than accept fault and perhaps recognize that its decision was wrong and cost the lives of thousands, it wants to do it again!

Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress said that “the recent crackdown is one of the most extreme periods in the history of government intimidation of ngos.” It is as if the 2011 rise of the Muslim Brotherhood is being completely ignored!

Unsalvageable

Senior fellow of the Brookings Institution and member of the Egyptian Working Group Tamara Wittes wrote, “Egypt’s looming instability demands that the United States take steps now to safeguard itself from reliance on a country we cannot rescue ….” In other words, the current government cannot last. We need another revolution. It ignores the fact that the Islamic State is in Egypt and has a strong presence next door in Libya, unlike in 2011. Egypt’s economy is still reeling from the effects of the last revolution. Can it really survive another one? And can we expect the result to be any more democratic than the last?

“Sisi risks everything because everything is already at risk,” Glick pointed out. “If the Islamic State wins, Egypt is finished.”

Egypt is a nation teetering on the brink of collapse, and the U.S. is faced with two choices: Work with and cooperate alongside a dictatorial regime, or push it over the edge and see what happens. The U.S. has already demonstrated that it is capable of either option. Regardless of which is taken, Egypt’s days of turmoil are not over.

At least one more major upheaval, spelled out in the book of Daniel, is set to take place in Egypt—and it is coming quickly. Curious? For more information, read our free booklet The King of the South.