It would be naive to think that Morsi will not fight back to regain some (or perhaps all) of the powers denied to him by the SCAF. However, the question is when and how? It seems that the relationship between the MB and SCAF is calm for the moment, but the tension is definitely on the rise. Thousands of Egyptians are gathered in Tahrir Square calling for the complete transfer of power from the SCAF to Morsi; they have vowed to stay in Tahrir Square until that happens on June 30th.Today on a satellite TV show, the MB spokesman mentioned that president Morsi has the right to veto any decision made by the SCAF; even though he said it in a subtle manner, it still carried a hint of arrogance in it. Egyptians overall feel that the SCAF have hijacked the revolution (assuming it really was one) and have been calling the shots. The MB knows the people's frustrations and will make sure to use them against the SCAF at the appropriate time. The MB have been working underground for more than 80 years and they know a big deal about picking their battles. For the time being, it seems crucial for them to maintain a stable relationship with the SCAF since they need time to infiltrate and secure all the country's agencies. However, I believe at a specific time, the MB will retaliate against the SCAF and will mobilize the people to overthrow the current Generals. The SCAF is definitely expecting such an incident, but how is it planning to react remains elusive. Will they use force? Will they re-instate some powers to Morsi to satisfy the people? Will they create some sort of a 'distraction' to avoid the issue all together?
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Morsy the declawed tiger
Please read my previous article, 'Are we back to where we started?' before reading this one.
As expected, Morsy is the first democratically elected (fair and square) president of Egypt. This event came as a shock to many, especially Copts, who spent most of their day wailing the newly elected president. And I wonder, how is it that they still fail to understand that having Morsy is better off than having Shafik. Morsy is just the new facade of the SCAF and his powers have been drastically reduced. He is even required to swear the presidential oath infront of SCAF on June 30th and not the parliment (since it has been dissolved). The SCAF is in full control and this is the reality of Egypt today! I even suspect that the new parliment will NOT have an islamic majority, and the constitutional council will be led by supporters of SCAF and will draft a constitution that further limits the powers of the president. These people will probably come from the ~49% that voted Shafik. Unless an uprise of MB supporters, from within the military, otherthrows non-MB military Generals, then there is nothing to worry about.
The MB will also want to prove to Egyptians (especially at the beginning) that they are worthy of ruling. They will attempt to improve infrastructure, build schools and hospitals, provide more youth-oriented services, reduce commodity prices, etc... This is not new to them, they have been doing this since their inception in 1928 to attract public support. In addition, they will play the pan-arabism card; they already started rallying Egyptians around the idea of liberating Palestine and having Jerusalem as the capital of the new islamic state. Even though I am pretty sure this will not happen, but nontheless the pan-arabism card will attract a lot of support from muslim Egyptians.
Copts should be glad that Shafik did not win this run-off race. His victory could have sent waves of violence across Egypt and further destabilized the country. A ruling declawed tiger is safer than a caged one.
As expected, Morsy is the first democratically elected (fair and square) president of Egypt. This event came as a shock to many, especially Copts, who spent most of their day wailing the newly elected president. And I wonder, how is it that they still fail to understand that having Morsy is better off than having Shafik. Morsy is just the new facade of the SCAF and his powers have been drastically reduced. He is even required to swear the presidential oath infront of SCAF on June 30th and not the parliment (since it has been dissolved). The SCAF is in full control and this is the reality of Egypt today! I even suspect that the new parliment will NOT have an islamic majority, and the constitutional council will be led by supporters of SCAF and will draft a constitution that further limits the powers of the president. These people will probably come from the ~49% that voted Shafik. Unless an uprise of MB supporters, from within the military, otherthrows non-MB military Generals, then there is nothing to worry about.
The MB will also want to prove to Egyptians (especially at the beginning) that they are worthy of ruling. They will attempt to improve infrastructure, build schools and hospitals, provide more youth-oriented services, reduce commodity prices, etc... This is not new to them, they have been doing this since their inception in 1928 to attract public support. In addition, they will play the pan-arabism card; they already started rallying Egyptians around the idea of liberating Palestine and having Jerusalem as the capital of the new islamic state. Even though I am pretty sure this will not happen, but nontheless the pan-arabism card will attract a lot of support from muslim Egyptians.
Copts should be glad that Shafik did not win this run-off race. His victory could have sent waves of violence across Egypt and further destabilized the country. A ruling declawed tiger is safer than a caged one.
Sunday, June 17, 2012
And we are back to where we started?
The recent developments in Egypt have been, to say the least, disturbing. A few days away from the run off election, the Parliament was dissolved and Shafik was allowed to run for presidency. Was that a coincidence? Well, anyone in his right mind would disagree. A strategic move by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCF) that have confirmed to all Egyptians that they (SCF) are in control.
How will this theatrical play end? Are we going back to where we started? Did the revolution actually accomplish what we thought it did? or was the SCF planning every event after the ousting of Mubarak to take the whole Egyptian population back in a U-turn? Is Egypt a military state undercover, and will it remain to be so?
Here is what I think based on the events currently unfolding...
The SCF has always been in control. The islamists were given the chance to form Parliament, with the blessing of the SCF, to show Egyptians nothing would get done. SCF allowed a democratic presidential election to take place with 2 of its men, one to be intentionally disqualified and the other to make it to the run off stage. Parliament is dissolved at a crucial time to get rid of the islamists and a new SCF-controlled Parliament will be formed. Meanwhile, as they know this will backfire and more people will vote for Morsy in retaliation, they are happy with that and encourage it. The reason being, they want Morsy to win the elections, giving the impression of a fair election (which it will be), and then limiting the powers of the president after forming a SCF-controlled constitutional council. This means that within 4 years Morsy will be out and another SCF-appointed president will be president. This brings back the Egyptian people to the pre-revolution status, and people will welcome it.
How will this theatrical play end? Are we going back to where we started? Did the revolution actually accomplish what we thought it did? or was the SCF planning every event after the ousting of Mubarak to take the whole Egyptian population back in a U-turn? Is Egypt a military state undercover, and will it remain to be so?
Here is what I think based on the events currently unfolding...
The SCF has always been in control. The islamists were given the chance to form Parliament, with the blessing of the SCF, to show Egyptians nothing would get done. SCF allowed a democratic presidential election to take place with 2 of its men, one to be intentionally disqualified and the other to make it to the run off stage. Parliament is dissolved at a crucial time to get rid of the islamists and a new SCF-controlled Parliament will be formed. Meanwhile, as they know this will backfire and more people will vote for Morsy in retaliation, they are happy with that and encourage it. The reason being, they want Morsy to win the elections, giving the impression of a fair election (which it will be), and then limiting the powers of the president after forming a SCF-controlled constitutional council. This means that within 4 years Morsy will be out and another SCF-appointed president will be president. This brings back the Egyptian people to the pre-revolution status, and people will welcome it.
Sunday, June 10, 2012
AtaMasr - The Ataturk of Egypt
By early July Egyptians will (not) welcome their first democratically-elected president. This is the first time in our 5000 years of civilization we as a people elect our own leader, what a victory for the revolution. Or is it really?
While the revolution was peaceful in its opposition, powerful in its approach and persistent in its demands, it lacked something essential, an AtaMasr. AtaMasr,like Ataturk, is a nationalist that foresees Egypt as a modern, highly educated nation with a secular constitution. A constitution that is not based on any religious law, but allows from freedom, justice and equality. AtaMasr is a true visionary that knows the importance of education and a free market economy. He knows that before introducing Egypt to democracy he needs to fulfill the people's basic needs, namely: freedom, shelter, health care, safety and nutrition. He knows that by satisfying Maslow's basic needs, people will be a step closer to comprehending the gift of democracy. However, like a toddler, the nation needs to grow intellectually once basic needs are provided. AtaMasr knows that this can only be done by eradicating illiteracy, and creating a generation that is ready to lead. People with all their differences have two things in common and these are curiosity and a purpose. It is curiosity that drives some to study sciences and others to study arts. It is curiosity that drives research, innovation and prosperity. Curiosity directed by nationalistic purpose breeds patriots, inventors and visionaries. This is the kind of generation AtaMasr raises over a period of eight years. The nation by then is considered mature enough to rightly choose their president.
This Utopian image of AtaMasr is unfortunately far from real at the moment. However, from history, we know that such leaders rose in times of need and transformed nations that were crippled by religious regimes. We live in the hope of an AtaMasr, one that will grant the revolution its long-lost objectives.
While the revolution was peaceful in its opposition, powerful in its approach and persistent in its demands, it lacked something essential, an AtaMasr. AtaMasr,like Ataturk, is a nationalist that foresees Egypt as a modern, highly educated nation with a secular constitution. A constitution that is not based on any religious law, but allows from freedom, justice and equality. AtaMasr is a true visionary that knows the importance of education and a free market economy. He knows that before introducing Egypt to democracy he needs to fulfill the people's basic needs, namely: freedom, shelter, health care, safety and nutrition. He knows that by satisfying Maslow's basic needs, people will be a step closer to comprehending the gift of democracy. However, like a toddler, the nation needs to grow intellectually once basic needs are provided. AtaMasr knows that this can only be done by eradicating illiteracy, and creating a generation that is ready to lead. People with all their differences have two things in common and these are curiosity and a purpose. It is curiosity that drives some to study sciences and others to study arts. It is curiosity that drives research, innovation and prosperity. Curiosity directed by nationalistic purpose breeds patriots, inventors and visionaries. This is the kind of generation AtaMasr raises over a period of eight years. The nation by then is considered mature enough to rightly choose their president.
This Utopian image of AtaMasr is unfortunately far from real at the moment. However, from history, we know that such leaders rose in times of need and transformed nations that were crippled by religious regimes. We live in the hope of an AtaMasr, one that will grant the revolution its long-lost objectives.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
Copts are in a pickle
The latest court ruling, one of the most important events of modern Egyptian history, was both baffling and provoking. After the judge's divine opening remarks about the noble Egyptian revolution, the sentences delivered to Mubarak, Adly, Gamal, Alaa, and others, was nothing but a disappointment. It was dubbed in the Egyptian media as a theatrical play, where the Egyptian people were lead into the illusion of a democracy and new beginnings. This point in particular is emphasized by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), where they claim that since Shafik is part of the old regime, whoever votes for him is betraying the Egyptian revolution. As if the Egyptian people needed to be more polarized!Also, by elimination, that makes Morsy the 'candidate of the revolution'. Now, the Copts are in a pickle. There are very very few Copts that will vote Morsy and the majority, if not all, will vote for Shafik. If Shafik wins, then Copts will be betrayers of the revolution, and if Morsy wins then they will be persecuted since they supported the previous regime.
This frustrating reality, which is already taking place in Egypt, shows that we are far from a democracy! In a true democracy, the supporters of the losing party are not persecuted against and called betrayers. The minority are respected and are even given the chance to become the opposition. A secular democracy does not impose the will of God but the will of the people. A secular democracy will not pass divinely-inspired judgements but will be tolerant of all and supporting of all. This is not the impression I get with the MB. These are people that lied before and will continue to do so. What guarantees do we have to avoid turning into a theocracy?! Don't people know that a religious state is bound to fail; history has shown it time and time over.
As part of a minority group, I am worried about the Copts in Egypt. However, I am consoled by the fact that we as a people have been through countless periods of persecution in the past, and we have manged to survive.
This frustrating reality, which is already taking place in Egypt, shows that we are far from a democracy! In a true democracy, the supporters of the losing party are not persecuted against and called betrayers. The minority are respected and are even given the chance to become the opposition. A secular democracy does not impose the will of God but the will of the people. A secular democracy will not pass divinely-inspired judgements but will be tolerant of all and supporting of all. This is not the impression I get with the MB. These are people that lied before and will continue to do so. What guarantees do we have to avoid turning into a theocracy?! Don't people know that a religious state is bound to fail; history has shown it time and time over.
As part of a minority group, I am worried about the Copts in Egypt. However, I am consoled by the fact that we as a people have been through countless periods of persecution in the past, and we have manged to survive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)