Egypt: Staying the Course for Freedom

For far too long the Egyptians and the Arabs of the region have held themselves in contempt. The Arab people cowered under the tyranny of the nizam – the regimes. The regimes ruled by fear and favour. Eradicating opposition and dissidents while pouring out gratifications to supporters, fattening first families and cronies, and ensuring strong military support. The regimes kept a false facade of resistance and confronting imperialism in the guise of Western and Israeli designs but kept back channels open to enrich themselves and their cronies extending their life support system for their misrule. The poorer regimes were funded and sustained by funnels of money, aid and other means by those they declared as enemies of Arabs.

The military which should be safeguarding defences and borders were busy suppressing the population, deeply involved  in politics and enriching themselves.

The regimes stifle freedom, progress and creativity of their own nations. The intelligentsia ,  people possessing cultural and political influence are driven away migrating mostly to the West. They include professionals, academics, businessmen and clerics. These are welcomed by their host countries but are sadly rejected by their own regimes. The Arab people on the street could only grumble and murmur in their disappointment.

Every Arab knows the mukhabarat, the feared gruesome secret police, the state intelligence operatives who spy and spook their own citizens into submission. Their dark cells and dungeons are filled with those who oppose, who seek freedom, who question corruption and anyone the regime simply has suspicions. In these dark cells of Egypt many were tortured, which some believe to have led to those few emerging from them bringing radicalism and extremism to the fore. 

But out of these tormenting prisons also came the resilient Muslim Brotherhood, who persevered and maintained their principles and their moderation even under the most extreme provocations and persecution. They were driven underground but still managed to sustain their organization, their resolve and their commitment to the cause. They attracted a large pool of professionals as well as keeping in touch with people on the streets with their projects and their welfare. Their movement and their programs kept people aware, informed and above all, having hope, faith and belief in themselves,  and in a higher order of life much more distinct then living under a crooked regime.

When Morsi became president of Egypt, he immediately laid the gambit. He called for  parliament to convene. By doing so, he is establishing that he is not a stooge nor a stool pigeon of SCAF or the former regime. He is not double dealing with the intransigent military chiefs who have had good lives and all the privileges that common Egyptians never had. Detractors of Ikhwan would use doublespeak to accuse the parliament of being “stacked” with Ikhwan members but these were freely elected MPs who deserve to be in the assembly.

Every commentator on Egyptian affairs predicts a stand off between Morsi and Ikhwan vs SCAF and the old institutions packed with regime appointees. But it is actually the Egyptian people against all those who stand against freedom and liberation. It depends on whether more and more Egyptians are enlightened and liberated in sustaining the cause of freedom. After all these difficult months, whether the people are already tired of walking and demonstrating in Medan Tahrir, the freedom square. Whether they have the will to stay the cause, to overcome their own debilitating regard to determine their own lives and to shake off fully away from the clutches of the old decrepit regime.

EGYPT’S DEMOCRATIC TRIUMPH

Scott MacLeod, Cairo Review of Global Affairs

Mohammed Morsi's victory over Ahmed Shafik in the Egyptian presidential election is a political triumph for the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned organization for most of the years since the country became a republic in 1953. It is likewise an important victory for Egyptian and Middle East democracy. Having edged perilously close to the brink of political chaos in recent weeks, due to repeated bungling of the transition process, Egypt has taken a very significant stride forward.

Morsi and his group have earned a substantial role in Egyptian public life. The Muslim Brotherhood has borne the brunt of state repression throughout the regimes of Gamal Abdel Nasser, Anwar Sadat and Hosni Mubarak. Its leaders and members persevered against difficult odds. They managed to create a strong grassroots movement that provided social services and gave a voice to the voiceless. They provided some hope during long, dark years when Egyptian presidents offered none. In the face of intolerable state violence spanning decades, the Brothers remained tolerant. They eschewed violence and exhibited super human patience.

Thus, for Morsi, a U.S.-educated engineer, and the Brotherhood, the results are a spectacular political achievement, attached with profound symbolism. After 60 years of military rule upholding secular values, Egypt has elected the first civilian president in its history, and its first Islamist president, too. Morsi's victory is testimony to the Brotherhood's ability to mobilize Egyptians against a deeply entrenched political system, and to convince Egyptians that its candidate was the most capable of taking the helm after Mubarak's removal from power. If it rises to its responsibilities, the Brotherhood can be the hope of Egypt and of the Arab Spring.

The reason why Morsi's win is also a triumph for Egyptian and Arab democracy is because of the critical, historic choice it represents. When Egyptians went to the polls in the June 16-17 runoff election, they were not primarily voting between a military candidate and an Islamist candidate. They were choosing between the past and the future: a continuation of the 60-year-old Egyptian military regime, or a new system built on genuine democratic participation.

Shafik is a man of doubtless abilities, having served as air force commander, minister of civil aviation, and, finally, as Mubarak's last prime minister. Yet, Shafik's resume was more a liability than an asset in a country raising thundering demands for change. The millions who chose Shafik wished that his iron fist and close ties to the military could restore stability. His supporters are disappointed by the results, but that is nothing compared to the rage that would have been expressed by millions of Egyptians demanding an end to six decades of military rule if Shafik had won. At worst, the perception of an election stolen by the military might have edged Egypt toward an Algeria scenario; that country experienced a terrible civil war triggered in 1991 when the military abruptly canceled elections Islamists were poised to win.

By contrast, the Morsi victory is the kind of outcome that elections in a democracy are supposed to produce-a winner who finds himself in a political arena that promotes and requires negotiation, compromise, concession and conciliation for the greater good of the nation. During the previous era, when Mubarak regularly received 90 percent of the votes, elections were nothing more than a farcical means of legitimizing the continuation of a state security regime. Any negotiation with other sectors of society- it occurred rarely-was on the regime's terms. That is what led to the absolute ossification of Egyptian life, and, eventually, a revolution.

Instead, Morsi and the Brotherhood will find themselves in perpetual negotiation with all of Egypt's players-with the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, Salafists, Coptic Christians, liberals, and even with Shafik and his supporters. The process formally began last week, when Morsi announced the formation of a national political front and proposed the establishment of a national unity government. These moves underline the Brotherhood's understanding of democratic concepts like consensus building and inclusiveness.

It is clear to most Egyptians that Morsi is doomed to fail if he turns out to be a president who represents only the Brothers.  Or, if he thinks the Brotherhood could or should somehow hijack a revolution that involves a wide cross section of Egyptians. Many Egyptians have serious and valid questions about the Brotherhood's abilities, policies, and intentions-on issues from women's rights and the role of religion in the state to readiness for foreign investment and other forms of cooperation with outsiders. (Let's not forget, though, the problems Egyptians had with the former regime that led them to revolt last year-political repression, police torture, corruption, appalling medical care, horrendous education system, the list goes on.)

The importance of representing all Egyptians can't be lost on Morsi or his group's strategists. In the parliamentary elections earlier this year, the Brotherhood's political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party, garnered an impressive 10.1 million votes. In the first round of presidential balloting just five months later, however, Morsi, the Brotherhood candidate, won only 5.7 million-a downward slump indicating strong disillusionment with the Islamists' performance in office. If we suppose that those 5.7 million voters constitute the Brotherhood's core of diehard support, then Morsi's 13.2 million total in the runoff election means that he gained the backing of 7.7 million Egyptians who can easily desert the Brotherhood and vote for an alternative the next time.

Morsi will need all the negotiating and consensus building skills he can muster in the weeks and months ahead. Despite Morsi's victory-and  SCAF's evident and necessary acquiescence in allowing it to stand-Egypt's revolution is hardly finished. The ruling generals are showing extreme reluctance to hand over power to elected civilians by July 1 as they once pledged to do. In the midst of the presidential campaigning, SCAF enforced a court ruling dissolving the Islamist-controlled parliament, issued a decree granting the military executive powers and sharply curbing the authority of the new president, and gave itself a central role in approving a new constitution being drafted by a 100-member constituent assembly. Morsi's challenge is to use his powerful mandate as Egypt's first popularly elected leader to guide all Egyptians, including the reluctant generals, into a democratic future.

Scott MacLeod is managing editor of the Cairo Review of Global Affairs and is a professor in the School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the American University in Cairo

Farewell to the Pharaoh - what comes after?

Again as usual, my youngest son asks about what the mufti of Egypt and Al Azhar were doing about the situation. Actually, Egypt's mufti supports Mubarak's position and even made calls to the protesters to leave and return to their homes. Al Azhar as many other universities facing similar predicaments with power, keeps low profile as always academics subdue knowledge often sacrificing truth and justice for the sake of expediency and pragmatism.

In 2003, there was once a Maghrib lecture by a local scholar who declares he subscribes to the Asharite-Matrudi school of thought. He blamed uprisings and people's defiance of their leaders as the cause for the Iraq invasion and the malaise in the Muslim lands. During question time, we asked how can it be so when there were unjust leaders such as Saddam who was clearly oppressive, tyrannical and autocratic. We also pointed out that even Imam Ibn Hanbal defied and challenged the Khalifah of the time. The scholar avoided the issue of tyranny but only said that Imam Ibn Hanbal was an individual and the protest did not involve the masses.

Meanwhile Washington and Israel are working overtime to sponsor Mubarak's dismissal so that they can put in power a military led transition government with Egypt's intelligence chief, the feared mukhabarat - the notorious secret police, still in charge. The US is underwriting Egypt's military with USD 1.5 billion of aid. How shall the Egyptian people react to this. Will they be fooled and fooled again?

They represent what is called the Arab street. The Arab people who have begun to free themselves from holding themselves in contempt. They have allowed a regime to breed and spread cancerous corruption throughout the Arab lands. Egypt started off in the same league as South Korea but it is far behind in any measure except abject poverty, corruption and pollution.

Will the Arab masses overcome such conspiracies hatched in the US and Israel as well as their well financed lackeys holding the reins of power and force? Mubarak tried a Mossadegh styled mob along the lines of the redshirts against yellow shirts but it was too apparent.

They should settle for nothing less than a democratic transition government free from any of Mubarak's or US/ Israeli sanctioned favourites.