Egypt Crisis: Struggling with the message

By Nur Özkan Erbay, Feb 3, 2011

Controlling the message is one of the hardest works for the administrations. Throughout the ongoing political turmoil in Egypt, the Obama administration was caught in a difficult spot, keeping its narrative consistent and coordinated in this volatile foreign policy situation.

Since the crisis began, the administration is walking a fine line on putting out the right message about defending the democratic right of protest for Egyptians without openly subverting Mubarak as a long-standing partner. Despite the intensive efforts to demonstrate that things are under control, the White House had a hard time controlling the message. The inconsistent statements given by the administration officials created mixed signals and caused the confusion among the domestic and international audience to understand the U.S. reaction to the developments and Mubarak’s regime.

“Mixed Signals”

By summarizing the administration’s statements chronologically, we can see the fast and scattered evolvement of the U.S. reaction just in last couple days. The first high-level statement from the administration came soon after the demonstrations began, on Jan 25^th. Secretary Clinton said the government of Mubarak is stable and trying to respond to the legitimate needs of the protesters. In a similar vein, the Vice President Biden spoke to PBS on Jan 27^th said that the Egyptian government is stable; the Mubarak is a long and strong ally of the U.S. and he is not a dictator and shouldn’t have to resign. On Jan 28^th, President Obama made his very first statement, called on Egyptian forces from refraining from using too much force and reaffirmed Egypt’s basic human rights. After two days of the President’s statement, the Secretary Clinton interviewed with five television networks and this time she called Egypt not as an ally but “important partner” in the region. She stated the Egyptian government needs to engage immediately with the Egyptian people in implementing political, social and economic reforms. Last of all, the President Obama warned Mubarak on Tuesday. On his speech he mentioned “difficult days ahead” for Egypt and he said the transition in the government of Egypt must begin immediately.

Perhaps the very often changes on the administration’s messages on this volatile issue put  the White House Press Office and Press Secretary Gibbs in a very chaotic situation in order to respond the media and the international auidence promptly and clearly. Secretary Gibbs’s efforts to deliver the administration’s view somehow remained inadaquate for the media as well as the international community.

For instance, once Secretary Gibbs was asked on what President Obama refers the word “Now” on Tuesday evening when he told President Mubarak that “…An orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful, and it must begin now”.

Gibbs’s response was quite interesting but also confusing in a rhetorical manner.

Following the question Gibbs said: “‘Now’ means yesterday — because when we said ‘now,’ we meant yesterday. … [T]ough we are in the here and now, ‘now’ started yesterday… [W]that the people of Egypt want to see is not some process that starts a week, a month or several months from now. If you’re asking if ‘now’ September is: It is unseasonably warm, but it is not September. ‘Now’ means now.”what the President meant on Tuesday with his statement: “an orderly transition … must begin now”
The administration’s struggle to control the message continued at the State Department last week. According to recent news reports, the US state department has distanced itself from comments by a US special envoy, to the effect that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak should stay in office during a power transition. The special Envoy to Egypt, former Ambassador Frank Wisner was sent by President Obama to Cairo on Monday, to urge Mubarak to announce his departure. He commented on Mubarak’s departure in Munich Security Conference on Saturday and said “We need to get a national consensus around the pre-conditions for the next step forward. The president must stay in office to steer those changes”. After his comments Spokesman Philip Crowley said Frank Wisner’s views were his own, and not co-ordinate with the US government.

Despite the fact that the administration officials put intensive efforts to control the message, they struggled to remain relevant in the principal message and keep the narrative on track.