Mubarak's Scathing Foreign Critics

No wonder Egyptian officials are so testy. Rarely has a Western Arab ally been so slammed by Western governments, think tanks and media as President Hosni Mubarak's regime has been the last few days. Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit's words burned of anger on Saturday when he blasted Condi Rice for interfering in Egypt's internal affairs. "It is unimaginable that someone would speak about and judge an Egyptian internal political process before it even starts," Abul Gheit said.

Abul Gheit was referring to the national referendum being held on Monday on 34 proposed changes in the Egyptian constitution that Mubarak has heralded as a "historic step" toward full democracy but that Egyptian opposition groups label a sham intended to line up Mubarak's son Gamal to be the next president.

Here's what Mubarak's foreign critics are saying now (I'll present the Egyptian government's take on the matter soon):

-- Rice on Friday:

"I'm really concerned about it. You know, the Egyptians set certain expectations themselves about what this referendum would achieve. And we-- the hope that it would be a process that gave voice to all Egyptians, you know, I think there's some danger that that hopes not going to be met. And the abbreviated timetable is a problem, and we will see what ultimately comes out of it. But, you know, I've said many times that we continued-- and by the way, I will talk about it when I'm there, meet with the leadership and with my colleagues because Egypt is an extremely important country in the Middle East; one of the key countries in the Middle East. And as the Middle East moves toward greater openness and greater pluralism and greater democratization, Egypt ought to be in the lead of that. And it's disappointing that this has not happened. Now some good things have happened. The contested presidential elections suggests to me that you will never have a presidential election in Egypt like the old elections. That is something that will never go back, and so we have to remember that there are ups and downs in these things; ebb and flow. But yeah, this is a really a disappointing outcome and we will talk about it and hopefully it will turn out better than is expected. But right now I'm concerned that it won't."

--Jennifer Windsor, executive director, Freedom House, on Friday:

"These changes remove any question about the intentions of the Mubarak government to stifle independent voices in Egypt."

--"Democracy Demotion in Egypt," Andrew Exum and Zack Synder, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, on Friday:

"...these 'reforms' will serve only to strengthen the ruling party's stranglehold on Egyptian politics and send Egypt farther down the road toward authoritarian rule."

--"Baathism on the Nile," Marc Lynch, Abu Aardvark Middle East blog, on March 21:

"This is a travesty, a crude mockery of promises of political reform, and something which deserves widespread international mockery and condemnation."

--Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, deputy director, Middle East and North Africa program, Amnesty International, on March 18:

"The proposed constitutional amendments would simply entrench the long-standing system of abuse under Egypt's state of emergency powers and give the misuse of those powers a bogus legitimacy. Instead of putting an end to the secret detentions, enforced 'disappearances,' torture and unfair trials before emergency and military courts, Egyptian MPs are now being asked to sign away even the constitutional protections against such human rights violations."

--"Constitutional Autocracy," editorial in Washington Post, Sunday:

"The package essentially will make the "emergency laws" that have underpinned Mr. Mubarak's regime a permanent part of Egypt's political order."

--"Egypt's Constitutional Amendments," Nathan J. Brown, Michele Dunne and Amr Hamzawy, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, on Friday:

"Taken together, the amendments and process by which they were passed constitute an effort by the Egyptian regime to increase the appearance of greater balance among the branches of government and of greater opportunities for political parties, while in fact limiting real competition strictly and keeping power concentrated in the hands of the executive branch and ruling party."

--By Scott MacLeod/Cairo