A U.S. Treasury spokesperson was asked whether it would follow the Swiss government's lead and freeze fallen Egyptian military dictator Hosni Mubarak's ill gotten assets. The Treasury's answer was properly non-committal and evasive. It shouldn't be. The. U.S. has a strong case to make for forbidding Mubarak and his family from continuing to live the plush and lavish lifestyle that the known $5 billion in assets they've plundered the country of the past decade has allowed.
Their shakedown operation has been well documented. Companies must pay what amounts to a tribute of from a 5 to 20 percent commission to a company that was set up by one of Mubarak's sons. This is not a one-time pay-off. The companies must keep paying as long as they do business in the country. The Mubarak family badly abused and misused Egyptian law that requires foreign companies to give a majority stake in their Egyptian operations to fatten their bank accounts and holdings. The local partner or sponsor that the law requires for a foreign company to set up operations in the country was conveniently routed through the Mubarak family or one of his ruling party cronies.
The full extent of the state sanctioned family rip-off is not known. But it has been documented that a big chunk of the Mubarak booty is ploughed into real estate developments, properties and palatial homes in New York, Beverly Hills and European cities. The Mubarak illicit operation is neat, tidy, and wildly profitable, and has cost the Egyptian economy untold billions. Global Financial Integrity, a Washington DC based government financial watchdog group, did a comprehensive study of the drain on the Egyptian economy from the shakedown operation of Mubarak, his family and cronies. It found that the Egyptian economy has hemorrhaged to the tune of more than $6 billion per year. Over an eight year period from 2000 to 2008, the loss from the Mubarak shakedown operation totaled a staggering $57.2 billion flood of money to illicit financial activities and official government corruption. Egyptian activists have called this exactly what it is: a massive squandering of the resources of Egypt.The result of the theft is a staggering poverty rate, massive unemployment, chronic shortages, endemic waste, and fraud, and chronic stagnation in the country.
The U.S. has the power to freeze Mubarak's assets and the precedent for doing it. In 2001, the United States used the provisions of the Patriot Act to aggressively go after Saddam's Hussein's and his cronies assets in the U.S.. It took ownership of nearly $2 billion of Iraqi assets (Hussein related) and then transferred nearly $1 billion of the frozen monies to a fund for Iraq development. The U.S. also has a variety of legal and financial weapons it has used to combat money laundering and terrorist financing to recover foreign regimes' illicit gained assets.
The Swiss government in its statement announcing the freeze on Mubarak's assets was blunt. It said "The Federal Council is taking all the measures required to avoid any misappropriation of government assets." The US government should do know less than that with Mubarak and company's Egyptian loot.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. He hosts national Capitol Hill broadcast radio talk show on KTYM Radio Los Angeles and WFAX Radio Washington D.C. streamed on ktym.com and wfax.com and internet TV broadcast on thehutchinsonreportnews.com
Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/earlhutchinson
Tell you what. For maintaining the peace with Israel all this time, keep a billion. I'm sure you can manage to scrape by for your remaining days on Earth. But while in exile he could probably be a greeter at Wal-Mart
Instead, he encouraged them and protected them.
Why would the United States want to go after a former Egyptian leader that helped stabilize the region for 30 years? He provided more service to the U.S. than any Morgan Stanley banker?
Mubarak is out of office. He's gone. The Egyptian Army has taken over. We'll see how that goes.
What is the United States interest in punishing a former business partner that served us well?
He should be issued a Sweatsuit, Tennis Shoes and Tube socks from Walmart and $20 in cash and sent on his way.
All the rest should go to the people.
I mean, if the US actually was the champion of democracy and opponent of corruption that it likes to proclaim itself to be, wouldn't it have taken such an action long ago?