´óÏó´«Ã½

President Obama is running out of patience with the Egyptian government.

President Mubarak's repeated accusations of foreign interference cannot have helped. Mr Obama may have been cross with himself for going over the top before Mr Mubarak spoke and suggesting that this would be a day of transformation when history unfolded.

He, like everyone else, thought the Egyptian president was about to resign. I strongly suspect that he, again like everyone else, listened to the speech and thought: "What on earth does that mean?"

That presented a very real problem. If Mr Mubarak was handing over power in an oblique, flowery, face-saving way, the crowd in the square - pumped up in anticipation - didn't get it.

The United States wants stability. Clarity helps but confusion feeds chaos. The Egyptian president was obtuse in the old style, circling round and round before touching lightly on the meat of the matter and then nimbly backing off into more nebulous sentimentalism. It doesn't cut it with the Twitter generation.

So it is not surprising that President Obama's statement sounded frustrated and scolding. He said of the one isolated line in the speech that suggested Mubarak might be handing power to Suleiman: "It is not yet clear that this transition is immediate, meaningful or sufficient.

"Too many Egyptians remain unconvinced that the government is serious about a genuine transition to democracy, and it is the responsibility of the government to speak clearly to the Egyptian people and the world... We therefore urge the Egyptian government to move swiftly to explain the changes that have been made, and to spell out in clear and unambiguous language the step by step process that will lead to democracy and the representative government that the Egyptian people seek."

As for Mr Mubarak's stirring calls for Egyptians to reject foreign interference: "As we have said from the beginning of this unrest, the future of Egypt will be determined by the Egyptian people. But the United States has also been clear that we stand for a set of core principles. We believe that the universal rights of the Egyptian people must be respected, and their aspirations must be met... In these difficult times, I know that the Egyptian people will persevere, and they must know that they will continue to have a friend in the United States of America."

That "persevere" is important. In a variety of ways the Obama administration has looked cack-handed in its handling of this crisis. But that shouldn't obscure the fact that for a week at least they have been quite consistent, backing the demonstrators and their hopes. I noted a few days ago that Mr Obama seemed to be using language that recalled the civil right movement.

He has put himself, and America, on the side of the demonstrators.

It may look like the easy thing to do. After all, how many commentators, how many politicians, are saying "back Mubarak, face down the protesters?" But don't doubt that this is a real and dangerous gamble.

The White House should be the first to understand that this is unpredictable. No-one can know where this goes next, or who the winners and losers will be. Supporting change the Egyptian people can believe in may not be easy.

Mr Obama may be wrong, but unlike Mr Mubarak, he couldn't be clearer.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• - What's this?