CBS News’ Logan victim of ‘brutal’ Egypt attack

Crime

 

Correspondent recovering from ‘sustained sexual assault and beating’

 

updated 1 hour 33 minutes ago

CBS Correspondent Lara Logan is pictured in Cairo's Tahrir Square moments before she was assaulted in this photograph taken on Friday, Feb. 11.

NEW YORK — CBS News correspondent Lara Logan was recovering in a U.S. hospital Tuesday from a sexual attack and beating she sustained while reporting on the tumultuous events in Cairo.

Logan was in the city’s Tahrir Square on Friday after Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak stepped down when she, her team and their security “were surrounded by a dangerous element amidst the celebration,” CBS said in a statement Tuesday.

The network described a mob of more than 200 people “whipped into a frenzy.”

Separated from her crew in the crush of the violent pack, she suffered what CBS called “a brutal and sustained sexual assault and beating.” She was saved by a group of women and an estimated 20 Egyptian soldiers, the network said. The Associated Press does not name victims of a sexual assault unless the victim agrees to it.

She reconnected with the CBS team and returned to the U.S. on Saturday.

The attack on Logan, CBS News’ chief foreign affairs correspondent, is one of at least 140 others suffered by reporters covering the unrest in Egypt since Jan. 30, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists. An Egyptian reporter died from gunshot wounds he received during the protests.

A week before Friday’s attack, Logan was detained by the Egyptian military for a day, along with two CBS cameramen. They returned to the U.S. after their release, and Logan went back to Cairo shortly before Mubarak left.

Logan joined CBS News in 2002. She regularly reports for the “CBS Evening News” as well as “60 Minutes,” where she has been a correspondent since 2006. She has reported widely from Iraq and Afghanistan, and other global trouble spots.

CBS said it had no further comment on Logan’s assault.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

 

US welcomes any step that moves Egypt towards democracy

-

Cached:  http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/us-welcomes-any-step-that-moves-egypt-towards-democracy/articleshow/7434250.cms

6 Feb, 2011, 01.05AM IST,PTI

-

WASHINGTON: Welcoming any step that moves Egypt, which is the middle of a political unrest, towards transition to democracy , the White House today said that it is for the Egyptians to decide how this transition occurs.

“As the President has repeatedly said, Egyptians will be the ones that decide how this transition occurs. We welcome any step that provides credibility to that process,” said Tommy Vietor Spokesman, National Security Council, White House.

The White House statement came amidst reports that Gamal Mubarak, the head of the National Democratic Party and son of embattled President Hosni Mubarak has resigned.

“We view this as a positive step towards the political change that will be necessary, and look forward to additional steps,” a senior Administration official said when asked about the latest development coming from Egypt.

Later in the day, Obama was scheduled to receive a briefing on the situation from his senior national security staff on the unfolding developments in Egypt.

Earlier in the morning, the Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough convened a Deputies Committee meeting on Egypt.

Yesterday, Obama had hoped that the Egyptian President would be able to make right decision.

“In order for Egypt to have a bright future, which I believe it can have, the only thing that will work is moving a orderly transition process that begins right now that engages all the parties, that leads to democratic practices, fair and free elections, and representative government that is responsive to the grievances of the Egyptian people,” he said.

“Once the (Egyptian) President himself announced that he was not going to be running again, and since his term is up relatively shortly, the key question he should be asking himself is, how do I leave a legacy behind in which Egypt is able to get through this transformative period? My hope is that he will end up making the right decision,” Obama said responding to reporters question on Egypt at a joint White House news conference with the Canadian Prime Minister, Stephen Harper.

—

Mubarak’s men key to US reform hopes in Egypt

Seattle Post Intelligencer

Cached:  http://www.seattlepi.com/national/1110ap_us_mubaraks_men.html

FILE - In this April 22, 2009, file photo Egypt's intelligence chief Omar Suleiman is in Jerusalem for a first high-level meeting between an Egyptian official and Israel's new hard-line government. A week of American telephone diplomacy with a small group of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's closest advisers is key to a U.S. hoped-for transition towards democracy in Egypt, where smothered political opposition leaves no clear alternative to the U.S. for a bargaining partner. Vice President Joe Biden spoke to Suleiman, now 74, who became vice president on Jan. 29, 2011. (AP Photo/Tara Todras-Whitehill, File)

WASHINGTON — Seeking reform in Egypt, the U.S. increasingly is counting on a small cadre of President Hosni Mubarak’s closest advisers to guide a hoped-for transition from autocracy to democracy.

It’s a plan that relies on long relationships with military men and bureaucrats who owe their professional success to Mubarak’s iron rule. To the regret of some U.S. diplomats, it’s also a plan that steers around the Muslim Brotherhood, the powerful Islamist political movement that almost surely would play a central role in any future popularly chosen government.

Not that Washington has much choice.

Mubarak has so smothered potential political opposition that there is no clear alternative for the U.S. as a bargaining partner, even if dealing with aging Mubarak stalwarts reduces U.S. credibility with Egyptians fed up with the Mubarak era.

The Obama administration’s telephone diplomacy this past week was indicative of the American strategy to keep Egypt from tearing itself apart.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden spoke to Omar Suleiman, Egypt’s 74-year-old intelligence chief who became vice president last week. Defense Secretary Robert Gates chatted with his 85-year-old counterpart, Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi. Joint Chiefs chairman Adm. Mike Mullen discussed the situation with Egypt’s top military official, Lt. Gen. Sami Anan, 62. Another key figure is Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq, a 69-year-old former Air Force chief.

U.S. diplomatic cables released by the WikiLeaks website encapsulate part of the problem with trusting these men to be the head ushers of democratic and economic change.

Beyond the generational split with young protesters disgruntled by years of harsh unemployment, inequality and political repression, the Mubarak men belong to a military elite whose wealth and power are inextricably linked to the 82-year-old president.

“Egypt’s military is in decline,” a 2008 U.S. cable says, summarizing a series of conversations with academics and analysts. The memo cites a professor in Egypt as saying “the sole criteria for promotion is loyalty and the … leadership does not hesitate to fire officers it perceives as being `too competent’ and who therefore potentially pose a threat to the regime.”

Yet the military’s authority remains strong and its interests in Egypt vast. Mubarak built an army of almost a half-million men that holds large stakes in the water, olive oil, cement, construction, hotel and gasoline industries.

A diplomatic cable also describes large land holdings of the military along the Nile Delta and the Red Sea, and suggests that the top brass would not be served by important change toward democracy and freer markets.

Most analysts agree that the military “generally opposes economic reforms,” according to the U.S. diplomatic correspondence.

The exchanges describe an Egypt ripe for political unrest. A 2007 note from the U.S. ambassador at time, Francis J. Ricciardone, said Mubarak’s “reluctance to lead more boldly” was hurting his effectiveness.

Ricciardone singled out Egypt’s elite 40,000-member counterterror police as he described a “culture of impunity.” The ambassador noted that the Egyptian government shut down a human rights group that had helped the family of a detainee killed in 2003. The officers were exonerated of torture and murder charges.

The cables also provide glimpses of the difficult environment for Egypt’s bloggers and journalists. During protests in Cairo this past week, pro-government mobs beat, threatened and intimidated reporters attempting to inform the world of the unfolding events in the country.

In one cable, an Egyptian blogger complained to the U.S. Embassy after YouTube and Google removed videos from his blog apparently showing a Bedouin shot by Egyptian police and thrown on a garbage dump, and another one of a woman being tortured in a police station.

The cables contain mixed assessments of some of those being counted on to lead Egypt’s transition after six decades when the country’s four presidents all came from the officer corps.

Suleiman, referred to as the “Mubarak consigliere,” comes out better than others. He is described as disappointed as far back as 2007 that he had yet to be named vice president. Yet on first glance, he seems an ideal candidate to guide Egypt through an unstable period.

At a time when Mubarak’s son Gamal was being promoted as a future president, a U.S. cable says Suleiman “would at the least have to figure in any succession scenario.”

“He could be attractive to the ruling apparatus and the public at large as a reliable figure unlikely to harbor ambitions for another multi-decade presidency,” according to the cable.

But it is unclear what that will mean now as thousands of Egyptians demand Mubarak’s immediate resignation.

There’s little indication Suleiman will show his longtime boss the door, even if Obama administration officials are discussing options that include having Mubarak step aside now for a transitional government headed by Suleiman.

“His loyalty to Mubarak seems rock-solid,” a cable written four years ago concludes.

Under one proposal, Mubarak would hand his powers to his vice president, though not his title immediately, to give the ruler a graceful exit.

Suleiman has offered negotiations with all political forces, including protest leaders and the regime’s top foe, the Muslim Brotherhood. He’s spoken of independent supervision of elections, loosening restrictions on who can run for president and term limits for leaders.

He has some support.

Opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei, a former U.N. atomic energy chief and Nobel peace laureate, said he respects Suleiman as a possible negotiating partner. Some protesters have backed the idea of Suleiman playing a leading role in the transition; others see him too much of a Mubarak government figure and want him out, along with the president.

Then there’s Tantawi, known among younger servicemen as “Mubarak’s poodle,” according to one informant. His unbending support for Mubarak is described in worse terms.

“`This incompetent defense minister’” who reached his position only because of unwavering loyalty to Mubarak is `running the military into the ground,’” a U.S. diplomat wrote, relaying the assessment of an unidentified professor in Egypt.

Tantawi reached out to the demonstrators Friday by visiting the square that has been the rallying point for Cairo’s protests. He held friendly but heated discussions, telling people that most of their demands have been met and they should go home. “The people and the army are one hand!” they chanted during Tantawi’s brief stop.

Anan is largely respected among U.S. officials. The cables spare him the harsh criticism doled out to Tantawi, who is lambasted in various memos as the chief impediment to modernizing Egypt’s military.

But the fear of American officials illustrated throughout the notes – and offered by the Mubarak government as its main excuse for resisting democracy – is the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood.

U.S. officials say there have been no contacts with the hardline Islamist movement. It has formed the most organized opposition to Mubarak’s three-decade autocracy but opposes much of the U.S. agenda in the region, such as Arab-Israeli peace efforts.

“The specter of an MB presidency haunts secular Egyptians,” a cable noted. Still, it said such a development was “highly unlikely” and that the military wouldn’t support an extremist takeover.

But avoiding talks with the group could be a mistake for the U.S., if it means a missed opportunity for some influence with a group that could become a dominant force in Egypt’s future.

The United States has confirmed discussions with ElBaradei, who has “captured the imagination of some section of the secular elite that wants democracy but is wary of the popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood,” according to a February 2010 cable.

ElBaradei’s biggest challenge would be mustering credibility among Egyptians on the streets, it predicted. The jury is still out on that question, even if the Muslim Brotherhood has expressed support for ElBaradei as an acceptable point-man for leading the pro-democracy movement. The military’s view of him hasn’t really been made clear.

Ultimately, the protests haven’t made Egypt’s post-Mubarak future any clearer. What’s obvious now is that neither Mubarak will run in September elections. But no one knows how the military will react to possibly months more of instability.

“In a messier succession scenario,” a 2008 cable noted, “it becomes more difficult to predict the military’s actions.”

“While midlevel officers do not necessarily share their superiors’ fealty to the regime,” it is “unlikely that these officers could independently install a new leader.”

They military won’t have to act alone, and no officials are warning of a military coup. But the military elite’s reticence for change could prove a hindrance to democratic transformation.

U.S. officials consistently have criticized the government’s response to the crisis, and officials say Suleiman’s outreach efforts have been too narrow and not credible enough to gain widespread support and usher in real democracy.

As for Mubarak, who said in an ABC interview Thursday that Egypt would slip into chaos if he didn’t serve out his remaining seven months, the cables suggest he never really had a succession plan – long “the elephant in the room of Egyptian politics.”

“Mubarak himself seems to be trusting to God and the inertia of the military and civilian security services to ensure an orderly transition,” a 2007 cable said.

—

Associated Press writer Douglas Birch contributed to this report.

US Senators Speak Out on Egypt

Cached:  http://www.voanews.com/english/news/usa/US-Senators-Speak-Out-on-Egypt-115104354.html

Michael Bowman | Capitol Hill, Washington  February 02, 2011

 

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., makes a statement on the crisis in Egypt, on Capitol Hill in Washington, February 02, 2011.

Even before Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s announcement that he will not seek reelection, U.S. senators were speaking of his departure from power as a given.  Senators from both major political parties said Tuesday that U.S. aid to Egypt has been money well spent, and showed no inclination to alter or cut off that aid – at least for now.

AP. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., right, and Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo. take part in a news conference,on Capitol Hill in Washington, February 02, 2011.

Hours beforeMr. Mubarak’s statement, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, John Kerry, said Egyptians have “moved beyond” their president. The Massachusetts Democrat said that declining to run for reelection should be but a first step for the Egyptian leader.

“To go even further – to move to put together a caretaker government over these next months in order to avoid violence and help transition Egypt to the future that its people want and deserve,” he said.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina echoed the call for a caretaker government, and urged continued U.S. engagement with Egypt.

“I think it would be wise for us [i.e., the United States] to be on the ground floor of helping this transition, rather than having a totally hands-off policy,” he said.

The Obama administration has applauded calls for change in Egypt, but says Egyptians must decide their country’s future.  For decades, Egypt has been one of the biggest recipients of U.S. foreign aid, totaling more than $1.5 billion a year during the past decade.

Connecticut Independent Senator Joseph Lieberman says it is money well spent.

“It did support a government which, over the years, has been very instrumental in maintaining stability in the Middle East,” said Lieberman. “The second thing is, a lot of the money goes to the Egyptian military.  And I think even in this moment of crisis, we see that the military is playing a critically important role in unifying the country.”

Lieberman says now is not the time to threaten Egyptians or their military with a cut-off of U.S. aid.

AP. Senate Foreign Relations Committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Richard Lugar (File Photo).

Indiana Senator Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, agrees.

“I think it would be inappropriate to be having that discussion while the Egyptians themselves are attempting to formulate appropriate governance,” said Lugar.

Fellow Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine also says U.S. aid to Egypt has been constructive for both nations and the Middle East as a whole.  But she hesitates when asked whether she would guarantee future American assistance to Egypt.

“I think it is premature to make that conclusion,” said Collins. “For example, if somehow the Muslim Brotherhood gained control of the country, then clearly we would not be giving any aid to Egypt.”

Founded in the 1920s to resist British control of Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood is a transnational Islamist political movement currently banned in the country.

Senator Lieberman says he does not assume that a new Egyptian leadership would be hostile to the United States or Israel. But he adds that President Mubarak can help assure the best possible outcome.

“He is a patriot, a nationalist,” said Lieberman. “And one of the great tests of a leader is how you end your time of leadership and transfer power to somebody else, hopefully in a way that is even better for the country. And the people of Egypt are obviously asking for change.”

U.S. senators are publicly backing that change and generally appear cautiously optimistic about what that change could bring.

Journalists Are Attacked in Cairo

Cached:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/world/middleeast/03journalists.html

By J. DAVID GOODMAN

Published: February 2, 2011

As chaos gripped Cairo’s central Tahrir square on Wednesday, journalists covering the scene on the ground found themselves the targets of violence and intimidation by demonstrators chanting slogans in favor of President Hosni Mubarak. One prominent American television correspondent, Anderson Cooper of CNN, was struck in the head repeatedly.

Reporters Without Borders said it had received dozens of confirmed reports of violence against local and international journalists in Egypt. Tala Dowlatshahi, a spokeswoman for the group, said “to expect more foreign journalists to be targeted” as violence continued.

The attacks against the news media were reported by Al Jazeera, CNN and Twitter users almost as soon as violent clashes began in the square, eliciting a swift reaction from the United States government.

“We are concerned about detentions and attacks on news media in Egypt,” said Philip J. Crowley, assistant secretary of state for public affairs, in a Twitter message. “The civil society that Egypt wants to build includes a free press.”

The targeting of reporters came as Internet access was restored in Egypt for the first time since last week and many Egyptian bloggers began posting in earnest.

At the same time, Egyptian state television also began showing images from Tahrir Square for the first time, focusing on supporters of Mr. Mubarak and scenes of pitched street battles. It appeared likely that both moves by the government were directed at painting a violent image of the antigovernment protesters.

“It’s clearly a media strategy that’s being implemented,” said Ms. Dowlatshahi. “State controlled television has been broadcasting soap operas and cooking shows for the past few days until today.”

The Egyptian government has sought to control information since large scale protests against Mr. Mubarak and his subordinates began last month, but overt harassment has been scattered and attempts to control the gripping images and narratives from Cairo have mostly failed. Wednesday’s attacks appeared to represent the most coordinated and widespread effort to stop international reporters from doing their jobs.A senior editor at CNN said that Mr. Cooper and his crew had been attacked while in the square. Mr. Cooper, the network’s marquee anchor, “was punched 10 times in the head as pro-Mubarak mob surrounded him and his crew trying to cover demonstration,” Steve Brusk wrote on Twitter. Mr. Cooper later recounted the incident in a live report and did not appear visibly injured.

Another CNN correspondent, Hala Gorani, told television viewers of being threatened by apparent supporters of the president.

At least one reporter had been arrested, according to Reporters Without Borders. The journalist, a Belgian named Serge Dumont, said he was hit in the face by men in plainclothes, accused of spying and brought to a military post.

“Protesters are hunting down Al Jazeera journos,” wrote Abbas Al Lawati of Gulf News in Dubai. “I keep having to clarify that I’m not one of them.”

An Australian television reporter, Hamish Macdonald, wrote that a colleague had seen one reporter badly beaten, and that their crew was unable to leave its hotel.

Christiane Amanpour of ABC News wrote in a dispatch from Cairo that she and her crew were surrounded by an angry mob and they tried to film on a bridge. “They kicked in the car doors and broke our windshield as we drove away,” she said. The crew members were forced to return to their hotel for safety.

Obama’s Risky Path in Egypt

Cached:  http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/30/obama-s-risky-path-in-egypt.html

EGYPT

by Leslie H. Gelb, January 30, 2011

Obama administration officials say they are not taking sides between President Hosni Mubarak, America’s key ally in the Arab world, and the street protesters who purportedly represent a path to democracy in authoritarian Egypt. These officials might even believe what they’re saying. But the very assertion of “not taking sides” is itself a tilt away from the all-out support traditionally given by Washington to this Egyptian strongman in recent decades.

The administration’s move is a slide toward the unknown. Senior officials have no idea of exactly who these street protesters are, whether the protesters are simply a mob force incapable of organized political action and rule, or if more sinister groups hover in the shadows, waiting to grab power and turn Egypt into an anti-Western, anti-Israeli bastion. The White House has called upon its intelligence agents and diplomats to provide answers, but only best guesses are forthcoming. No one, no matter how well informed about Egypt, can divine what will happen to power within Egypt if the protesters compel concessions from the Mubarak regime or, on the other hand, if Mubarak hangs onto power by using brutal force.

So, some administration officials are thinking that for all the risks of losing a good ally in Mubarak, it might well be better to get “on the right side of history.” Some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers have long harbored the view that corrupt, inept, and inefficient Arab friends simply cannot retain power forever. They believe President Carter should have trusted his initial instincts and pushed the Shah of Iran toward reforms. In this way, the shah might have become viable, or failing that, Washington could have allied with moderates who might have succeeded him.

But those officials who think this way forget their history. When President George W. Bush made his push for democracy in Arab lands, he ended up with Hamas terrorists winning a democratic election and ruling the Gaza Strip. And this “democratic” thinking also overlooks that Bush’s pressing for democracy in Lebanon helped open the doors to power for the radical Hezbollah group. And yes, the anti-shah revolution in 1979 started out with moderates in power, only to be pushed aside by the clerical radicals who still rule today. In rotten regimes that fall to street mobs, the historical pattern has been moderates followed by new dictators. Just remember the model of the Bolsheviks, a tiny group of extremely well-organized communists, wresting control away from the great majority of discontented and disorganized Russians in 1917.

Judge for yourself whether the Obama team is leaning toward the protesters. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs reiterated that Egypt remains “a strong ally,” but then stressed support for the “universal rights” of the Egyptian people. “This isn’t about support or opposition to leaders,” he said, “it’s about support for universal rights of assembly and expression. We criticize actions that restrict those values,” Gibbs told ABC News.

Also on Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters: “We support the universal rights of the Egyptian people including the rights to freedom of expression, association, and assembly. And we urge the Egyptian authorities not to prevent peaceful protests or block communications, including on social media sites.” She continued: “We believe strongly that the Egyptian government has an important opportunity at this moment in time, to implement political, economic, and social reforms to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people.”

In sum, she and the administration are saying to Mubarak: Don’t use brute power and force to stop the protesters, and don’t interfere with the protesters doing their protesting. This message is flat contrary to the position of the Mubarak government, which has outlawed such protests and appears to be blocking Twitter, Facebook, and other social media tools. In other words, the Obama team is urging conciliation and, de facto, concessions to those who may well end up advocating far more than simple political and economic reforms.

The stakes are sky high. Egypt is the linchpin to peace in the Middle East. So long as Egypt refrains from warring against Israel, other Arab states cannot take military action by themselves. So long as Cairo remains pro-Western, it serves as an anchor for other such friendly governments. It occupies a central economic position in the region and a vital transportation hub through the Suez Canal. Most certainly, most Arab governments friendly to Washington need to make reforms. But to do so at a moment of weakness, to be seen as bending to mobs, however peaceful and moderate they look now, could open up the floodgates—in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere.

The overriding point is that no knowledgeable diplomat, no secret agent or Harvard professor can speak with confidence about where turmoil will lead in poor and repressed countries like Egypt. This White House will have to be forgiven for not knowing whether to ride the tiger or help put him back in a cage—for a brief time at least.

Leslie H. Gelb, a former New York Times columnist and senior government official, is author of Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy (HarperCollins 2009), a book that shows how to think about and use power in the 21st century. He is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.

This originally appeared on the DailyBeast

–

–

Inside the White House’s Egypt Scramble

As protests erupted in Egypt, Washington struggled desperately to find the right response to the crisis.

Pete Souza / The White House. President Obama being briefed on the events in Egypt by his national security team in a meeting in the Situation Room of the White House.

EGYPT

by John BarryJanuary 30, 2011

For three days straight, as the Cairo crisis gathered momentum, they had hardly left their desks. Now, huddled in the big office of their boss—one of the administration policy-makers trying to calibrate the U.S. response to the unfolding drama—the advisers watched Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s first statement. Two television sets were running, one showing CNN and the other a satellite feed from Al Jazeera. Someone had popped popcorn in a microwave. In the old days, their boss reflected, he would have ordered in pizza, but since 9/11 the ever-expanding security precautions had shut down deliveries of take-out.

The mood was buoyant, as revealed by interviews with several officials involved in the ongoing administration debate that provide at least a preliminary glimpse of their concerns as Egypt spiraled toward chaos.

Had there been an office pool, the boss thought, the favored bet would have been that Mubarak was about to “do an LBJ” and repeat what President Lyndon Johnson did in 1968 in the face of a wave of protests: announce he would not stand in the upcoming presidential election. Certainly, Mubarak’s departure would present the U.S. with a new set of daunting challenges, but at least it would quiet the Egyptian streets and buy some time for mediation.

But as the Egyptian president spoke—a couple of the Arabic speakers in the room providing translation—the optimism died. Mubarak announced he was dismissing his government; he talked of reforms. But he also made clear his determination to stay on. There were groans, shaking of heads. This wasn’t going to be enough to halt the tumult in half of Egypt’s cities, and, more disconcertingly, Mubarak’s assertion that the demonstrations were “part of a bigger plot to shake the stability” of Egypt sounded ominous. The Egyptian president had called out the Army on Friday; now his speech sounded as if he was preparing to use it. President Obama’s Middle East advisers believed that if Egyptian security forces opened fire on demonstrators, the country would likely explode. As Mubarak ended his address, someone in the room voiced the thought on everyone’s mind: “Well, what do we do now?”

In the White House, that judgment was swiftly made. Mubarak’s speech was a climactic moment: It was time for President Obama to act.

Throughout the week, as the crisis gathered storm in Egypt, the administration had otherwise been slow to react, seemingly always one step behind events. This was partly because neither the U.S. intelligence community nor diplomats on the ground foresaw how swiftly the protests in Egypt would gather momentum—even if everyone realized that virtually the entire Arab world is a tinder box of pent-up frustration, with despotic regimes unable to meet the needs of, especially, their youth. As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton herself put it last month, in a speech in Doha that now seems uncannily prescient, Arab leaders would face growing unrest, extremism, and even rebellion unless they reformed “corrupt institutions and a stagnant political order.” It was the starkest warning ever delivered by a senior American official, and a message brought home a few days later when Tunisia erupted in revolt.

Yet, when it came to Egypt, the tone was different, and as the protests in Cairo gathered momentum, Clinton’s initial public comments were a mixture of fact and hopeful fiction. “Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people,” she said, an assessment that didn’t take long to be overtaken by events.

Whether Mubarak indeed was committed to responding to “the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people” remained an open question. Clinton’s statement, however, had been carefully calibrated, coming after the first round of what proved to be an exhausting week of discussions by President Obama and his top officials.

From the start, according to sources privy to the discussions, talks revolved around two objectives: how to cajole Mubarak to respond to the demonstrations, while, at the same time, not saying anything publicly that could be taken as American approval of the forcible overthrow of Arab regimes. But as the demonstrations grew in intensity, that balance became increasingly fraught. The demonstrators were, after all, demanding human and political rights to which the United States is committed, but which Mubarak showed no sign of granting.

After much discussion, it was decided that President Obama would not try to speak directly to Mubarak. According to an informed source, the assessment was that president-to-president intervention should be held in reserve as a last recourse. Besides, any exchange with Mubarak would require Obama to say whether he supported Mubarak’s continued rule. And the president was in a bind: He couldn’t bluntly say no. On the other hand, Egyptian authorities would instantly broadcast any expression of support as proof that Washington was backing Mubarak’s hold on power. (Shown this article for review, the White House said: “There’s nothing we’d comment on here at the moment.”)

So the administration tried to reach Mubarak by other means. The Cairo embassy reached out to his advisers. Other Arab leaders were enlisted. Across the region, the events in Cairo were viewed with mounting concern by other governments. The longer their television screens were filled with those scenes of protest, the likelier they were to trigger comparable uprisings in other capitals. The administration’s message was clear: for your own sake, persuade Mubarak he has to quell the revolt by offering concessions.

By Thursday, though, the Cairo embassy was reporting that Mubarak was mobilizing the Army. Everyone knew that Friday, the Muslim day of prayer, would see the biggest demonstrations yet. Mubarak’s mobilization of the military could only mean that he was set on suppression. There was a real risk of bloodshed—and the judgment both of analysts in Washington and of Arab leaders in other capitals was that killings on any scale could ignite a firestorm—not only in Egypt but across the region.

Taking advantage of a pre-arranged Q&A session on YouTube, Obama warned: “The government has to be careful about not resorting to violence.” Mubarak, he said, needed to be “moving ahead on reform—political reform, economic reform”.

Whether Obama’s warning influenced Mubarak’s actions is unclear. The Army did roll into the streets of Cairo and other cities on Friday. But it did not shoot; and, on Friday evening, Mubarak appeared on television for the first time in the crisis.

Meanwhile at the Pentagon, a high-powered delegation of Egyptian military leaders, including the armed forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Sami Hafez Enan, cut short a scheduled week-long visit after only a few hours, departing instead for the airport. Their Pentagon hosts wished them well, with careful expressions of hope that a peaceful resolution of the crisis in Egypt would permit the continuation of the U.S. military’s long-standing relationship with Egypt’s armed forces. (Since the U.S. funds the Egyptian military to the tune of $1.3 billion a year, the message was clear.)

Administration officials suspect—or, at any rate, hope—that Obama’s blunt declaration forced Mubarak’s hand, prompting the Egyptian president to address his nation. What Mubarak offered in his televised speech, however, was “too little, too late,” as someone at that popcorn-eating gathering said. There was no prospect, Obama’s advisers believed, that Mubarak’s vague promises of reform would pacify the streets.

At a meeting on Friday afternoon, Obama and his top officials, including Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden, and National Security Adviser Tom Donilon among them, concluded that the time had come for Obama to talk directly to Mubarak. And Mubarak’s address to the Egyptian people had given Obama the opening he wanted. The White House organized the call.

It was an intervention that dramatically—and publicly—escalated the American involvement in the Egyptian crisis. In an address from the White House, Obama outlined what he had told Mubarak, putting the administration unequivocally behind the demonstrators’ demands. “The people of Egypt have rights that are universal,” Obama said in his speech. “And the United States will stand up for them everywhere.” The president also warned both sides against violence but his message was clear: “When President Mubarak addressed the Egyptian people tonight, he pledged a better democracy and greater economic opportunity. I just spoke to him after his speech, and I told him he has a responsibility to give meaning to those words, to take concrete steps and actions that deliver on that promise.” And, said Obama, “we are committed to working with the Egyptian government and the Egyptian people—all quarters—to achieve” those goals.

It was a breath-taking pledge, with Obama coming close to making the U.S. the guarantor that Mubarak will act. In Egypt, his reference to “all quarters” will be taken to suggest that the U.S. will even reach out to the Muslim Brotherhood, an unprecedented step.

In the last week, the administration has come a long way.

This originally appeared on the Daily Beast.