Did the U.S. give a green light for Gamal?

In a 50 minute press conference given to Egyptian journalists yesterday, Margaret Scobey, the US Ambassador to Egypt, stated that Washington “is not worried about the transfer of power in Egypt, or the effect it may have on stability in the country.”
Perhaps Scobey was shooting for diplomatic ambiguity in this statement, something that echoes Obama’s “we’re here to be partners not to interfere” soundbites, but, in Egyptian daily al-Shorouk’s report at least, there is a remarkable absence of any lines supporting Obama’s staunch pro-democracy stance, as outlined in his Cairo speech:
“I … have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.”
Is Scobey “not worried” because she has a strong belief that 2011’s presidential elections will be free and fair, that the people will “have a say in how you are governed”? (Notice here Obama’s clever use of the second person and not the third, speaking to both a Cairene and global audience) Unlikely.
We’re left, then, to assume that the Ambassador is saying that Washington isn’t too bothered that, as seems more probable, Gamal Mubarak will slip into the president’s seat via the back door. I’m all for the US not interfering in Egyptian politics, but a six month U-turn from “democracy is a human right” to “we’re not worried if power is inherited” shows an unacceptable hypocrisy. It is exactly this kind of U-turn that has led to Obama being dubbed “the president of talk”.
It would have been imprudent of Scobey to speak out against the inheritance of power, or the succession of Gamal Mubarak to the Egyptian presidential throne – that, to my mind, crosses the line between criticism and interference. But for the US Ambassador to Egypt fail to demand that there is at least a dash of democracy in the “transfer of power” in Egypt, regardless of stability (will Egypt explode if Gamal inherits power? Almost certainly not) shows that Obama’s Cairo speech, less than 6 months ago, was all talk and no trousers.
BM