Mubarak has resigned, turning all governing power over to the military

The protesters are jubilant, but did they want the military to be ruling the country? While the protesters have seen the military as on their side, since the military allowed the protests to take place, how does military rule of Egypt fit into the protesters’r demands for democracy, free and fair elections, and all the rest of it?

And what happened between yesterday and today that persuaded Mubarak to leave?

Here is the New York Times’s coverage, here is AP’s coverage.

Oddly, Drudge headlines his link to the AP story this way:

MILITARY COUP IN EGYPT ROCKS MIDDLE EAST

But the AP headline says nothing about a coup, it says:

Mubarak resigns, hands power to military

However, the AP story gives possible support to the “coup” idea:

Up to the last hours, Mubarak sought to cling to power, handing some of his authorities to Suleiman while keeping his title.

But an explosion of protests Friday rejecting the move appeared to have pushed the military into forcing him out completely [emphasis added]. Hundreds of thousands marched throughout the day in cities across the country as soldiers stood by, besieging his palace in Cairo and Alexandria and the state TV building. A governor of a southern province was forced to flee to safety in the face of protests there.

His fall came 32 years to the day after the collapse of the shah’s government in Iran.

Vice President Suleiman—who appears to have lost his post as well in the military takeover—appeared grim as he delivered the short announcement.

“In these grave circumstances that the country is passing through, President Hosni Mubarak has decided to leave his position as president of the republic,” he said. “He has mandated the Armed Forces Supreme Council to run the state. God is our protector and succor.”

So the AP itself is saying that the military pushed Mubarak out. But the actual acts by the military that the AP reports do not back the claim that the military forced him out. The only action of the military described in the article is that soldiers stood by while protesters marched and beseiged the presidential palace. But soldiers have been standing by doing nothing since the protests began 18 days ago.

Meanwhile, the New York Times says nothing about a coup.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 11, 2011 12:48 PM | Send