When Jimmy Carter bowed to pressure from Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller to let the Shah of Iran into the United States, he doomed the "moderate" Iranian revolt and his own re-election ambitions. The Iranian pre-Khoumeni government warned the U.S. that taking in the Shah would radicalize segments of the population who already believed that counter-coup sponsored by the U.S. was already underway.
We ignored the Iranians advice, the U.S. Embassy was overrun.
Barack Obama has been trying to thread the needle by advocating moderation and alluding to a peaceful path for Mubarak to exit. As recently as a few hours ago, our "Allies," UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Israel have asked him to "tone it down." The popular, broad-based, people coalition in Tahrir square see the U.S. as the primary supporter of Mubarak and a possible supporter of a counter-revolt.
It is not an enviable position for President Obama or U.S. foreign policy, as our immediate needs and vaulted values come into conflict. However, to act only on the former to save 50 cents a gallon for gas and preserve the heads of other US friendly dictatorships in the region, will have long-standing implications in the Middle East and elsewhere if we fail to support a truly bottoms-up democratic movement--or support it tepidly with half-hearted statements.
As the popular revolt in Egypt continues to increase in popularity, especially after the release of Wael Ghonim, it still teeters precariously as the military debates its role and the Vice President who is broadly perceived as a lacky of both the U.S., and Israel, steps up his implied use of military force to counter a "coup." We should not dismiss the military leadership's need to preserve the wealth that it has acquired under the current regime.
Justifiably, many Egyptians distrust U.S. motives and could easily drift toward the belief that the U.S. will help the existing dictatorship or the power elite that supports it maintain the anti-democratic status quo.
More than likely, Mubarak is toast. However, Vice President Suleiman as a replacement would send the message that the U.S. primary policy is "business as usual."
The result could radicalize the opposition or fragment it further as it loses steam. If this movement fails, its progeny would more than likely be radical and in consort with radical Muslims who inherently oppose U.S. hegemony.
The current democratic revolt is popular. It is of the people and by the people. It is electrifying the Middle East as it is non-sectarian and inclusive.
The revolt is a grave threat to the status quo in Egypt and beyond. If we ally ourselves with the current dictatorships we will thwart the ambitions of many to achieve democracy and empower present and future radical Muslims.
The opportunity we have is momentary. The consequences will follow us for a very long time.