In der Asia Times Online (16.08.2013) argumentiert Pepe Escobar, die USA hätten sich eigentlich sowohl mit den Muslimbrüdern (MB) als auch dem Militär arrangieren können: „In theory, Washington had been in (relative) control of both the MB and Sisi’s Army. So on the surface this is a win-win situation. Essentially, Washington hawks are pro-Sisi’s Army, while ‘liberal imperialists’ are pro-MB; the perfect cover, because the MB is Islamic, indigenous, populist, economically neoliberal, it wants to work with the International Monetary Fund, and has not threatened Israel. […] So Morsi must have crossed a pretty serious red line. […] Arguably, it was his push to install some sort of jihadi paradise from the Sinai all the way to Gaza.” Aus dem berufenen Munde Leslie H. Gelbs, Präsident Emeritus des “Council on Foreign Relations”, haben die Muslimbrüder sich als zu unsichere Kantonisten erwiesen, weshalb er nun für deren blutige Unterdrückung plädiert: „Let’s get real and tamp down the moral posturing about democracy in Egypt. Freely elected President Morsi and his now-deposed Muslim Brotherhood government weren’t practicing democracy. They were co-opting the laws and slowly destroying all possible opposition. Besides, they were aligning with America’s jihadist enemies in Syria, Gaza, and elsewhere. Egypt’s military leaders, no democratic sweethearts either, are aligned with moderates, need Washington more than the Islamists, and back U.S. interests on the Suez Canal and Israel. Americans rightly can’t stand the military street slaughters. For sure, bloody casualties will mount. But the United States has some modest chance to influence the military in right directions.“ (The Daily Beast vom 17.08.2013 via bpb-9-11-newsletter)
