If it seems as though the uprising in Egypt has confounded American policymakers, it is precisely because there are no easy answers. There is no quick fix, no all-star diplomat to consult, no obvious play for the United States.

Egypt is a country in chaos. Antigovernment protests have thrown President Hosni Mubarak’s autocratic regime on the brink of collapse.

Violence between protestors and the police has left over 100 dead and 2,000 wounded. Looters and vigilantes battle it out on the streets. The Egyptian government has cracked down on the Internet and cell phones in an unprecedented manner.

Needless to say, this is a critical moment for President Barack Obama’s foreign policy. Although the United States has backed Mubarak for the duration of his 30-year reign, he may not survive this insurrection.

Accordingly, the Obama administration must prepare for a transition of power. The top American priority should be to ensure something resembling a democratic group, as opposed to an Islamist organization, fills the power vacuum in Egypt.

Since there is little hope for a Western-style liberal democracy, the goal should be a popularly elected, legitimate government with democratic elements.

Historically, when an unpopular ruler is toppled, ideological extremists have attempted to exploit the instability and take over the government. An encore of 1917 Russia or 1979 Iran, for example, would be unacceptable to American interests.

To prevent a similar outcome from developing in Egypt, the United States must do everything in its power to undermine Islamist groups scrambling to take control. Fortunately, America has the ability to exert influence — thanks mostly to billions of dollars in annual military aid sent Egypt’s way.

It is regrettably inevitable a new Egyptian government will be more nationalistic and less in step with American interests and policies. But right now, the Obama administration is tasked with making the best of a thorny situation. Preventing the worst-case scenario may in fact be the best-case scenario for the U.S. government.

An Egypt ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood is exactly what must be avoided. Although this organization has not figured prominently in the protests — which have largely emphasized economic and political grievances — it will undoubtedly jockey for position in a post-Mubarak Egypt.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s bylaws make clear a desire to broadly impose Shariah law on an Islamic state. The Muslim Brotherhood enjoys a close relationship with Hamas, one of the most deadly terrorist organizations on the globe. In its own charter, Hamas defines itself as a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Now is not the time for the Obama administration to sit idly by as Egypt descends into the hands of extremists.

Nor is it the time to rethink 30 years of support for Mubarak. His reign was certainly no bastion of freedom or civil liberties, but the choice was made to support an autocrat over Islamic fundamentalists. In return, the United States was afforded a strong ally in a strategically crucial location. And let us not forget Egypt has generally acted as a positive force for peace in the region.

Ideally, U.S. foreign policy objectives would always overlap with the expansion of democracy. And although America proudly stands as the capital of the free world, there are times when cost-benefit calculations must win out. In these cases, the United States has rightly thrown its support behind authoritarian regimes.

At this point, however, Mubarak is a lost cause. His attempt to retain power — or pass it on to a subordinate — only makes matters worse for the long-term stability of Egypt.

The last week has presented a great foreign policy challenge for Obama. The president must walk a tightrope — ensuring a U.S.-friendly outcome without appearing overly meddlesome in Egyptian affairs.

Simply put, the Egyptian people must be afforded an alternative to the historical choice of a U.S.-backed dictator or Islamic fundamentalists. If the Obama administration can work with Egypt’s civil institutions to create a middle-ground governmental option, the best possible outcome — for all parties — may be attainable.

A free, democratic Egypt would be tremendous. A (more) oppressive, radical Egypt ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood would be disastrous.

The culmination to this struggle will likely fall somewhere in between. It is up to Obama to ensure the outcome is closer to the former than the latter.

Jimmy Paul is a senior political science major. His column appears every Tuesday, and he can be reached at jdpaul01@syr.edu.

Published on January 31, 2011 at 12:00 pm