Habeas corpus ad subjiciendum: Nour, El-Bastawisi and Mekki
Yesterday, the Egyptian government’s show of force again found its way in to the streets of Cairo. Plainclothes police arrested demonstrators outside the High Court, where the fate of Ayman Nour and the two judges Hesham El-Bastawisi and Mahmoud Mekki were to be decided.
These demonstrations were primarily in support of the judges who were accused of speaking ill about the Egyptian government and about how the elections were rigged last September. Nour, who came at a distant second during last September’s elections, was accused of forging documents to establish his Ghad party. The pro-government thugs and Egyptian security forces used inhumane techniques to ‘control’ the crowd and arrested about 400 members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) including Essam Eryan and Mohammad Mursi, two prominent ‘head’ figures – a seemingly strategic ‘top-down’ move from the government itself.
The court decided to reprimand El-Bastawisi, clear Mekki and sentence Nour to a five year imprisonment
The demonstrations have come to symbolize a nouveaux pro-reform movement in Egypt representing a search for independence of the judiciary and a simple request of freedom of speech. Simple, it might seem in the eyes of Western observers, the tenets of democracy rest on choice, freedom and civility.
Unfortunately, it is not simple in Egypt.
Such ideals will not permeate Egyptian society overnight and will not be allowed if they weaken the National Democratic Party’s (NDP) control over the country. The oxymoron in the NDP’s name is quite amusing given that they claim to bring democratic reforms to the country yet prove to the world (through the phenomenal conduit of the media) that they do the exact opposite. In fact, the constant clash between demonstrators and Egyptian police only reveals the weakness of the administration and its fear of losing power and instigating change. Hosni Mubarak will not last forever and nor will his NDP party (the way it is run right now, even if his son Gamal Mubarak will eventually take over), however they are attempting to cling to every last inch of power they could.
Egypt has been facing peculiar changes over the last few years. The upper echelons of society have become more Americanized and secular while the lower echelons have become anti-Western (especially anti-American), more religious and spiritually oriented. This has constantly increased the cleavages between the two niveau. While there is political apathy from the rich, there is incredible political zeal for change from the poor. Naturally, those with money and connections have political power yet they care less about living in an oppressive regime since they are not touched. So who should help Egypt reform, modernize and progress?
The United States?
As argued in my previous posts, the United States has taken a soft approach towards Egypt. While the $2.3 billion annual package (since the 1970s) was meant to modernize, democratize and augment Egypt’s military and economy, it seems that it has done quite the opposite. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican recently stated that “the time has come to seek greater returns from our investment in Egypt.” The United States has its own ulterior agenda in Egypt and it cannot be fully relied on to help instigate change in the country. In fact, the US is seeing that it is in their benefit to keep Egypt at a certain level of backwardness.
This might seem counter to what the US initially sought to do. However, their agenda has changed recently with a realization that democracy (i.e. open elections and freedom of speech) can lead to disastrous consequences – for example the election of Hamas (an organization the US considers a harbor and instigator of terrorism). As it is still quite controversial how the potential rise of the MB in Egypt would affect the country, the US is cautiously weighing the pros and cons – on the one hand having a buffer against al-Qaeda or potentially having an extremist, anti-secular society prone to fanaticism.
In essence, I realized quite some time ago that the US is not Egypt’s savior and in light of the recent events, my recent arguments and postings and the interesting discussions I’ve had about the role of Western influence in Egypt, change needs to come from within.
Demonstrators need to continue to demonstrate, protesters need to continue to protest and a country-wide realization requesting change needs to occur. Mobilizing the masses will be Egypt’s only chance for a revolutionary metamorphosis. Until then the sporadic clashes between the police and the protestors will gain Western attention and they will continue to spill out their rhetoric in retaliation, however there will be no further action.
These demonstrations were primarily in support of the judges who were accused of speaking ill about the Egyptian government and about how the elections were rigged last September. Nour, who came at a distant second during last September’s elections, was accused of forging documents to establish his Ghad party. The pro-government thugs and Egyptian security forces used inhumane techniques to ‘control’ the crowd and arrested about 400 members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) including Essam Eryan and Mohammad Mursi, two prominent ‘head’ figures – a seemingly strategic ‘top-down’ move from the government itself.
The court decided to reprimand El-Bastawisi, clear Mekki and sentence Nour to a five year imprisonment
The demonstrations have come to symbolize a nouveaux pro-reform movement in Egypt representing a search for independence of the judiciary and a simple request of freedom of speech. Simple, it might seem in the eyes of Western observers, the tenets of democracy rest on choice, freedom and civility.
Unfortunately, it is not simple in Egypt.
Such ideals will not permeate Egyptian society overnight and will not be allowed if they weaken the National Democratic Party’s (NDP) control over the country. The oxymoron in the NDP’s name is quite amusing given that they claim to bring democratic reforms to the country yet prove to the world (through the phenomenal conduit of the media) that they do the exact opposite. In fact, the constant clash between demonstrators and Egyptian police only reveals the weakness of the administration and its fear of losing power and instigating change. Hosni Mubarak will not last forever and nor will his NDP party (the way it is run right now, even if his son Gamal Mubarak will eventually take over), however they are attempting to cling to every last inch of power they could.
Egypt has been facing peculiar changes over the last few years. The upper echelons of society have become more Americanized and secular while the lower echelons have become anti-Western (especially anti-American), more religious and spiritually oriented. This has constantly increased the cleavages between the two niveau. While there is political apathy from the rich, there is incredible political zeal for change from the poor. Naturally, those with money and connections have political power yet they care less about living in an oppressive regime since they are not touched. So who should help Egypt reform, modernize and progress?
The United States?
As argued in my previous posts, the United States has taken a soft approach towards Egypt. While the $2.3 billion annual package (since the 1970s) was meant to modernize, democratize and augment Egypt’s military and economy, it seems that it has done quite the opposite. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Florida Republican recently stated that “the time has come to seek greater returns from our investment in Egypt.” The United States has its own ulterior agenda in Egypt and it cannot be fully relied on to help instigate change in the country. In fact, the US is seeing that it is in their benefit to keep Egypt at a certain level of backwardness.
This might seem counter to what the US initially sought to do. However, their agenda has changed recently with a realization that democracy (i.e. open elections and freedom of speech) can lead to disastrous consequences – for example the election of Hamas (an organization the US considers a harbor and instigator of terrorism). As it is still quite controversial how the potential rise of the MB in Egypt would affect the country, the US is cautiously weighing the pros and cons – on the one hand having a buffer against al-Qaeda or potentially having an extremist, anti-secular society prone to fanaticism.
In essence, I realized quite some time ago that the US is not Egypt’s savior and in light of the recent events, my recent arguments and postings and the interesting discussions I’ve had about the role of Western influence in Egypt, change needs to come from within.
Demonstrators need to continue to demonstrate, protesters need to continue to protest and a country-wide realization requesting change needs to occur. Mobilizing the masses will be Egypt’s only chance for a revolutionary metamorphosis. Until then the sporadic clashes between the police and the protestors will gain Western attention and they will continue to spill out their rhetoric in retaliation, however there will be no further action.
posted by The Egyptian Observer at 12:44 PM
2 Comments:
Well-discussed article and analysis, but I find myself disagreeing with you on one point.
First, you mentioned that there is "political apathy from the rich" whilst there is "incredible political zeal for change from the poor". I do not believe that the difference can be this clearly and obviously made. Whilst it is true that most of the rich are, in fact, apathetic, the situation does not apply to all.
And, although it is the poor who have more to complain and lament when it comes to this regime's decisions, it is in fact the movements that have sprung up that generally mobilize the people. Now, I know by saying this, I do not contradict your statement, but I have another angle on it:
The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) is the largest, single 'mobilizer' of people in Egypt. They are, as is known to everyone, the most organized and systematic. Other movements, like Kifaya, Youth/Artists/Lawyers/etc for Change, and the other political parties, have also been able to rally people (with Kifaya and its offshoots being the most successful, in my opinion). The thing is, the MB is the largest 'rallier' of the poor amongst these movements/parties.
Contary to modern political economic theory, I do believe there is a significant middle class in Egypt; a sect of people that are definitely not poor but cannot be placed within the upper echelons of society (even were you to divide these echelons into groups). It is this class that forms the majority of the body of the protestors and demonstrators.
Poor people do complain and suffer the most but, as a taxi driver rightfully commented to me yesterday, they care a lot more about "akl el aaish" than protesting or demanding their rights. The man had started his comment by saying that most of Egypt, since it is poor, are cowards (e7na balad mesh shoga3a. Khawafeen ya3nee ya bey. Olee 7adretak meen 3awez yenzel el share3 fel mozahrat ghair el kam meet wa7ed, ool 7atta kam alf, el beyenzelo kol marra). I couldn't agree with him more, even though the final round of protests/demonstrations has (I believe) increased the number of 'active protestors' considerably.
On the other hand, there a number of points you mentioned that seem, to me, to be the clearest and most accurate represntation and forecast of the situation;
"In essence, I realized quite some time ago that the US is not Egypt’s savior..."
"Such ideals will not permeate Egyptian society overnight and will not be allowed if they weaken the National Democratic Party’s (NDP) control over the country."
and the litarary coup de grace:
"Mobilizing the masses will be Egypt’s only chance for a revolutionary metamorphosis. Until then the sporadic clashes between the police and the protestors will gain Western attention and they will continue to spill out their rhetoric in retaliation, however there will be no further action."
I could not have imagined a better summation of the events than your conclusion.
Thank you for a well-written, clear article.
@faisal. Thank you for applause and comments.
Like you, I do believe there is a large bourgeoisie in Egypt, in fact this group is growing larger and larger. The statement I mentioned above did not intend to polarize Egyptian society in two different sects. In fact, Egypt's most recent Gini coefficient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality) places the country miles above the US and other developed nations. Income inequality is certainly a problem but not as grave as it might seem to observers.
What does this tells us? In essence, the remnants of Nasser's era have not yet subsided. Nasser's Robin-Hood-style methods of income redistribution have prevailed and continued to maintain a pseudo-socialist presence in Egypt. The bourgeoisie would not exist if it hadn't been for Nasser's efforts. Otherwise, corruption would have allowed the rich to feed off the poor and the classic cliche to hold, "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer."
Whenever I go back to Egypt, I always like to strike discussions with cab drivers. In a way, their opinions are quite symbolic of large faction of the population. An experience in a cab is microcosmic.
In fact, my post 'A Moment of Epiphany,'http://egyptianobserver.blogspot.com/2006/02/moment-of-epiphany.html describes my experience with a cab driver last December. I would tell him, 'ya basha ana ba2aly sana bara el walad, masr wa7ashetny awi walahi' and he would respond 'ana ba2olak mafeesh zay masr, heya fe3lan om el donya.' Immediately after I would tell him, 'da ana ya brince bafakar arga3 kaman sana, arga3 balady we aseeb america,' and then out of the blue he responded 'aly enta eganenet?? deih balad bent metanaka we mafeesh el kheer we hokoma weskha we sha3b ibn weskha.'
I was literally stunned as I had to try to comprehend his schizophrenic thoughts - it just didn't make any sense to me. Egyptians love their country but they hate how it has turned out to become. They are patriotic yet despise the current administration. They are confused and need enlightenment.
I believe the country needs a charismatic figure, a la Nasser, who is progessive, liberal, well-educated and calls for a transformation of society. Until then, the people will be treaded upon and fooled - all at the expense of the upper echelons.
Post a Comment
<< Home