Follow this link to see the original article
by ESAM AL-AMIN
Every coup d’état in history
begins with a military General announcing the overthrow and arrest of the
country’s leader, the suspension of the constitution, and the dissolution of
the legislature. If people resist, it turns bloody. Egypt is no exception.
As the dust settles and the fog over
the events unfolding across Egypt dissipates, the political scene becomes much
clearer. Regardless of how one dresses the situation on the ground, the
political and ideological battle that has been raging for over a year between
the Islamist parties and their liberal and secular counterparts was decided
because of a single decisive factor: military intervention by Egypt’s generals
on behalf of the latter.
As I argued before in several
of my articles (as have others), there is no doubt that
President Mohammad Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) committed political
miscalculations and made numerous mistakes, especially by ignoring the demands
of many of the revolutionary youth groups and abandoning their former
opposition partners. They frequently behaved in a naïve and arrogant manner.
But in any civilized and democratic society, the price of incompetence or
narcissism is exacted politically at the ballot box.
Elections
and Obstructionism: Do Elections Matter?
To their frustration, the liberal
and secular opposition failed time and again to win the trust of the people as
the Egyptian electorate exercised its free will when tens of millions went
to the polls six times in two years. After overthrowing the Mubarak regime a
month earlier, they voted in March 2011 by seventy seven percent for a
referendum, favored by the Islamists that charted the future political roadmap.
Between November 2011 and January 2012, they voted for the Islamist parties
with overwhelming majorities in the lower (seventy three percent) and upper
(eighty percent) houses of parliament. In June 2012, they elected, albeit
narrowly, for the first time in their history, the civilian Muslim Brotherhood
candidate as president in a free and fair election. Finally, last December the
Egyptian people ratified by a sixty four percent majority the country’s new
constitution. The next parliamentary elections were scheduled for this summer
had not the Mubarak-appointed Supreme Constitutional Court
(SCC) intervened yet again and invalidated the new election laws.
From the standpoint of the MB and
its Islamist allies the SCC played an obstructionist role throughout this
process. To their consternation, in June 2012 the court dissolved the lower
house of parliament within four months of its election on technical grounds. It
was also aiming to dissolve the upper house of parliament as well as the
Constitutional Constituent Assembly (CCA) – the body charged with writing the
new constitution – days before it was to finish its work. This forced Morsi to
intervene and issue his ill-fated constitutional decree on November 22, 2012,
in order to protect the CCA from judicial nullification. In an attempt to force
its collapse, all secular members of the CCA resigned en masse even though its
formation and the parameters of the process were agreed upon in advance, as
evidenced by an opposition member who
announced it in April 2012.
However, Morsi’s declaration proved
to be a watershed moment that galvanized the opposition, which predictably
accused him of an authoritarian power grab. In turn, Morsi argued that his
decree was necessary to build the democratic institutions of the state that
were being dismantled by the SCC one by one. Under intense public pressure he
backtracked and cancelled the decree within three weeks, but only after he
ensured that the new constitution would be put to a referendum.
After a vigorous public campaign by
the opposition to reject the constitution, it was approved by the public by
almost two to one. The next constitutional step would have been parliamentary
elections within sixty days. But even though the election laws were similar to
the laws agreed upon by all parties in the 2012 elections, the opposition
complained that the laws favored the Islamist parties and threatened to boycott
the elections. Within four months, the SCC twice rejected and halted the
elections on technical grounds, thus further solidifying the perception in the
eyes of the Islamists that the Mubarak-appointed court continues to thwart the
country’s budding democratic institutions.
Strange
Bedfellows: The Unholy Trinity of Gulf Sheikhdoms, the Fulool, and
Egypt’s Secular Opposition
On April 22, 2011, UAE Crown Prince
Mohammed Bin Zayed brought his intelligence and security chiefs to meet with
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and his security officials to discuss the
ramifications of the Arab Spring. Bin Zayed warned that unless the GCC
countries developed a proactive policy to preempt the wave of popular uprisings
sweeping the Arab World at the time, none of the region’s monarchs would
survive. Three weeks later in an emergency summit meeting in Riyadh he
delivered the same message to all the GCC heads of state. While Qatar remained
indifferent to his message, the other five countries were receptive. Bin Zayed
and Prince Bandar Bin Sultan, the Saudi intelligence chief, were tasked with
submitting an effective plan to counter the Arab Spring phenomenon in the
region. Subsequently, King Abdullah solicited and received the help of King
Abdullah II of Jordan to join this effort while Qatar was excluded from all
future meetings.
For decades, the UAE had been very
close to Mubarak and his cronies. Billions of dollars of ill-gotten fortunes
looted from the country were deposited in banks in Abu Dhabi and Dubai. After
the overthrow of Mubarak, dozens of security officials and corrupt businessmen
quietly left Egypt and relocated to the UAE. When Mubarak’s last Prime
Minister, Ahmad Shafiq lost the presidential elections to Morsi in June 2012,
he also moved to the UAE. By the fall of 2012, it became evident that the UAE
hosted a web of individuals who were plotting the overthrow of Morsi and the
MB.
Within a few weeks of the formation
of the new government, Shafiq supporter and spokesman for his political
party Mohammad Abu Hamid, announced on
August 21, 2012, fifteen demands culminating in the goal of toppling the
“Muslim Brotherhood or Ikhwan Government.” He warned against
the “ikhwanization” of the state, i.e. the appointments of MB members in
crucial state positions, and blamed them for the lack of basic services to the
public. Abu Hamid also called for subsequent mass protests in Tahrir Square as
he accused Morsi of power grab, dictatorship, and judicial interference, long
before the president issued his hapless constitutional decree three months
later. He further demanded the banning of the MB and its political affiliate,
as well as the arrest of its leaders, who he accused of treason. All of his
demands would subsequently become the talking points of every opposition party
and anti-Morsi media outlet.
Even though Morsi took the reins of
powers in the country and was able to force the retirement of the most senior
army generals in early August, his authority was thin. Instead of purging the
most entrenched elements of Mubarak’s centers of power, namely, the army, the
intelligence services, the security apparatus, and the police, he naïvely
thought that he could appease them. He was lulled into believing that he had
earned their loyalty. In fact, these agencies, along with the judiciary, the
public and private secular media outlets, as well as most of the bureaucracy,
represented the interests of the “deep state,” a decades-old web of corruption
and special interests entrenched within the state’s institutions.
One way corruption proliferated
during the days of Mubarak was by appeasing each critical segment in society,
such as the judiciary or the police, at times through the distribution of vast
parcels of land at hugely discounted prices to their constituents, who in turn
sold them to the public for millions of pounds. For example, when Shafiq was in
charge of the Military Pilots Association in the 1990s, he sold Mubarak’s sons
over 40,000 acres of prime land in the Nile Delta for a dollar per acre, while
the actual value for each acre was in the tens of thousands. This sale was
subsequently called the ‘Scandal of the Lands of the Pilots’ after it was
exposed last year, and where Shafiq was charged with embezzlement and public
corruption in connection with the scandal. But despite the overwhelming
evidence to the contrary, the corrupt judicial system earlier this year
absolved Shafiq of any wrongdoing.
Slowly but surely remnants of the
Mubarak regime and related corrupt businessmen, better known as the fulool,
regrouped and coalesced around the elements of the deep state. Meanwhile, the
secular opposition, which was in disarray, formed for the first time a united
movement called the National Salvation Front (NSF) after Morsi issued his
decree in late November. It included most of the failed presidential candidates
and several dozen secular parties, which combined did not receive more than
twenty five percent in the parliamentary elections. Its leaders included Amr
Moussa, Hamdein Sabbahi, Elsayed AlBadawi, Mohammad Abul Ghar, and billionaire
Naguib Sawiris. The NSF chose former IAEA head, Mohammed ElBaradei, to be its
spokesperson.
In November 2012, Prince Bandar
presented two detailed plans to the Americans through the CIA. Plan A was a
quick plot to topple Morsi in early December while Plan B was a long term plan
that involved two tracks. One track was a series of destabilizing protests that
would culminate in Morsi’s ouster, while another track included uniting the
opposition to form one coalition to defeat the MB at the polls if the first
track failed. While the CIA was fully aware of the plan it neither endorsed nor
objected to it because the Obama administration, playing both sides, was also
pursuing dialogue with the Morsi government.
The plan to topple the MB was built around a plot to assassinate
Morsi in his residence on December 5. However, it was exposed by a loyal
mid-level presidential guard hours before it was to take place. With the help
of the MB, Morsi was able to thwart the plot, though he declined to expose it
or discuss it publicly.
In March 2013, NSF leader ElBaradei
met with Shafiq and Bin Zayed in the UAE. They all agreed that the only way to
dislodge Morsi and the MB from power was by undermining his rule and the
stability of the country internally and convincing Western governments,
particularly the U.S., the U.K., France, and Germany, to back a military
takeover. According to a recent WSJ report, a series of
meetings took place in the Naval Officers Club between senior military
officers, fulool representatives including the attorney of billionaire and
Mubarak crony, Ahmed Ezz, the architect of the 2010 fraudulent parliamentary
elections, and opposition leaders including ElBaradei. According to this
report, which was not refuted or denied by any side, the army generals told the
opposition that they would not move to oust Morsi unless millions of people
take to the streets on their side.
The
Plot Thickens
While the opposition was sending
mixed messages about whether or not it would participate in the upcoming
parliamentary elections, the MB and its Islamist allies were preparing for the
impending contests. Meanwhile, many of the youth and revolutionary groups,
which spearheaded the 2011 uprising, were frustrated with the political scene:
A regime that ignored their demands and an ineffective opposition bent on
obstructionism. Suddenly, a new youth movement came to the fore in late April
2013. Its previously obscure leaders called it Tamarrud or
Rebellion. Their stated reason for launching the movement was to collect 15
million signatures from the public, a million more than Morsi received in his
presidential bid, to demand early presidential elections.
Opposition groups immediately embraced Tamarrud and
promised to help it reach its goal. Billionaire businessman and severe MB
critic Sawiris claimed in early July that he gave millions of dollars worth
of publicity and support to the
group. Moreover, the machinery of the former National Democratic Party (NDP),
Mubarak’s political party, was in full force, as many of its former officials
led the efforts in providing resources and collecting signatures across Egypt.
Meanwhile, private media outlets started a vicious vilification campaign against
Morsi and the MB. For several months, over a dozen satellite channels were
devoted to the demonization of Morsi and his group. They were accused of every
crime and blamed for every problem the country faced. At times even the public
media, which is supposed to be neutral, joined in this campaign. In addition,
the pan-Arab, Saudi-financed, and headquartered in the UAE, Al-Arabiyya
satellite channel, joined the campaign in earnest by repeatedly promoting Tamarrud activities
and featuring opposition figures. In one instance a famous host was
inadvertently taped while holding a paper with the answers to his questions as
he was interviewing a Tamarrud spokesman.
Strikingly, not only was the MB ill-equipped
to deal with this propaganda warfare, but also to its detriment, it did not
take it seriously. Even when their Islamist allies warned the MB leadership
about the impending potential overthrow a week before Morsi was toppled, they
dismissively answered that, “they (the opposition) had previously held
twenty-five feeble demonstrations, and this one would just be their
twenty-sixth.”
There are two major reasons why
Morsi and the MB were not worried about the impending demonstrations. First,
army chief Gen. Abdel Fattah Sisi repeatedly assured Morsi that the army would
not topple the government and would stay loyal to the democratic process. Even
when Sisi issued a call for compromise a week before the fateful day of June 30th,
he told the president that he had nothing to worry about and that he had to
issue this warning in order to mollify some of his military
generals. The second reason was that Morsi and the MB were regularly
assured by U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson that the U.S. would not support any
move by the military to depose a democratically elected president.
Meanwhile, ElBaradei was fully
engaged in contacting world leaders to convince them that the only way out for
Egypt was the dismissal andoverthrow of Morsi. In early
July he proudly admitted, “I spoke with both of them (Obama and Kerry)
extensively and tried to convince them of the need to depose Morsi.”
Furthermore, the leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait pressed the U.S.
to support the impending military intervention in Egypt. Ironically, during May
and June, Western leaders, including Obama and Kerry, pressured Morsi and the
MB leadership to appoint ElBaradei as Prime Minister while
the latter was arguing for Morsi’s overthrow.
As part of the demonization campaign
to convince the West that the popularity of the MB was dwindling, the Arab
American Institute (AAI) in Washington D.C. was commissioned to conduct a poll about the
declining popularity of Morsi and the MB. AAI president and UAE lackey, James
Zogby, called for a press conference on June 28 to announce that “Morsi
heads a minority government whose public support is now limited to its own
party,” and that, “Egyptians have lost confidence in President Morsi and the
Muslim Brotherhood’s ability to govern.” He further predicted that, “millions
of Egyptians would demonstrate in the streets against Morsi and the MB
government.” No one in the press conference bothered to ask who actually
commissioned and paid for the survey that claimed to poll more than five
thousand people across Egypt.
Unpacking the lies
All Democracies do it: America,
France, Argentina, Brazil
By mid-June, the campaign was in
full force. Many political science professors and public intellectuals
from the opposition including Waheed Abdelmagid and Hasan Naf’ah, as well as
constitutional law professors such as Noor Farahat and Husam Issa, were arguing
across several television networks that the call for “early presidential
elections” was not only an acceptable mechanism available in all democracies,
but that it had been used many times before. As examples, they cited Nixon’s
resignation in 1974, France’s Charles de Gaulle in 1969, Argentina’s Raúl
Alfonsín in 1989, and Brazil’s Fernando Collor de Mello in 1992.
The intellectual dishonesty of these
liberal elites is appalling, since none of the examples they cited were actual
calls for “early presidential elections,” let alone the deposing of a
democratically elected president by a military coup. Nixon resigned the
presidency on the eve of his impeachment by Congress. Gerald Ford, his vice
president was sworn in as president. No early elections. De Gaulle voluntarily
resigned the presidency after more than 10 years in power after promising that
he would do so if the public did not endorse his reforms of the Senate and
local governments. When the public rejected his referendum, he kept his promise
although he was not obligated to do so constitutionally. After six years in
power, Alfonsín was not even on the ballot for the 1989 presidential
elections. However, both parliamentary and presidential elections were held
simultaneously in the summer of 1989. The new president was supposed to be
inaugurated five months later, but when his party’s candidate was defeated by
the opposition, Alfonsín stepped down early to allow the new president from the
opposition to assume power. No early elections. After two years in power, De
Mello was impeached by the legislature for corruption in a constitutional
proceeding and resigned. The fact that no constitutional mechanism in the world
allows for a removal by popular protests did not bother these liberal figures
who were intent on removing a freely elected president by the military
regardless of the dangerous precedent it sets.
Noted author Alaa Al-Aswani not only
cited some of the above examples as valid precedents to depose and overthrow
Morsi, but he did not miss a beat or see the irony when he showered the military with accolades before ending his weekly
column with his usual declaration “Democracy is the Solution.” It is a fact
that some democracies have a constitutional mechanism to recall a head of
state. Although there is no such mechanism for the U.S. president, many state
constitutions allow the recall of their governors. In 2003, the people of
California recalled Gov. Gray Davis. But that recall was not the result of
street protests and the intervention of the National Guard. Rather, it was a
constitutional process that involved the signing and authentication of millions
of petitions by the State Supreme Court that authorized the recall process.
Although the 2012 Egyptian constitution allows for the impeachment of the
president by parliament, it did not allow for a recall.
Enough is Enough: End Electricity
Cuts and Fuel Shortages
Throughout the month of June the
media onslaught on Morsi’s government not only continued to blame it for all
the ills afflicting Egyptian society, but also intensified as three particular
problems were highlighted: the deterioration in security, frequent power
outages that lasted hours and affected not only residential but also industrial
areas, and shortages of fuel, causing hours long lines at gas stations.
Egypt has 2480 gas stations, with
about 400 stations run by the government. The other two thousand sations are
owned privately by business tycoons who were given these licenses during the
Mubarak era because they were close to the regime and considered very loyal.
Morsi’s government asserted that each station received its share and that there
was no reason for the shortages. In fact, a few days before he was deposed
Morsi warned gas station owners he’d revoke their licences if they refused to
provide their customers with fuel. Khalid Al-Shami, a youth activist who was with the
opposition until the military coup, exposed the plot when he announced in
public that the handful of owners of the privately-run gas stations conspired
to create the manufactured fuel shortage crisis in order to build public
discontent against Morsi. The best evidence that the problem of fuel shortage
was manufactured is that it evaporated overnight. Since the moment Morsi was
deposed there has been no fuel shortage.
As for the security detrioration and
electricity cuts, the conspiracy was deeper. The police which refused to
protect entire neighborhoods during Morsi’s rule has returned back in full
force. Criminals and thugs who terrorized people in the streets are back under
control by the same Mubarak-era security apparatus, except for the areas where
Morsi’s supporters demonstrate. Electricity outages that lasted for hours every
day in almost every neighborhood have disappeared overnight. The mystery of
solving these two intractable problems were uncovered this week. Out of the
thirty-five member cabinet chosen by the military, eight were retained
including the Interior Minister in charge of the police and the Minister of
Electricity. One would assume that the first ministers to be sacked by the
post-coup government would be those whom the public complained about their
incompetence. The opposition who called for dismissing these ministers were now
hailing them and cheering their retention. In short, many public officials who
professed loyalty to the hapless president were actually undermining his rule
all along, while the opposition accused him of packing the government with MB
loyalists.
Numbers Game: If you tell a lie loud
and long enough, people will eventually believe it
By the second week of June, Tamarrud
announced that it had collected more than 10 million signatures within six
weeks. Just ten days later, that number had risen to 22 million
signatures. Shortly thereafter, Tamarrud’s spokesman Mahmoud Badr
announced that the goal of the June 30 demonstration had shifted. It was no
longer calling for early presidential elections, but now demanded the overthrow
of Morsi, replacing him with the head of the SCC, the annulment of the
constitution, the banning of the MB and the arrest and trials of its leaders.
For the next few days the media kept up the drumbeat until the fateful day
arrived.
By June 30, every actor knew his
part. By mid-afternoon Tamarrud announced that the number on the streets were
over 10 million. Soon the number became 14 then 17 then 22 million. Eventually
the media claimed that the June 30 demonstrations across Egypt were the biggest in the history of mankind with as many as 33
million people in the streets. Military planes flew in formations entertaining
the crowds in the skies above Tahrir Square throwing Egyptian flags and bottled
water, and drawing hearts as a show of love and affection to the demonstrators.
The army even provided a military helicopter to Khalid Yousef, a famous movie
director known for his support of the opposition and hostility to the MB.
Yousef recorded the crowd and produced a film that was immediately shown not only
in every anti-Morsi TV network across Egypt but also on state television.
Within hours, every media outlet claimed that the numbers were in the tens of
millions with people in Tahrir Square alone reaching between 5 and 8 million.
On the day of the coup, fireworks, laser shows, and festivities were on full
display.
As I have argued before there is
no doubt that there was a huge public outcry and anger against
Morsi and the MB. But were the numbers as high as claimed? In October 1995,
hundreds of thousands descended on the National Mall in Washington D.C. for
what was promoted as the Million Man March that filled the entire area. The
organizers claimed to have reached one million while the DC Park Police
estimated the crowd to be four hundred thousand. The area of the national mall
is about 146 acres. Thus, there were between 2750 people (police estimate) to
6750 people per acre (organizers’ estimate). In other words, there were 0.7-1.7
people per square meter.
In contrast, the area of Tahrir
Square is 12.3 acres. As Amjad Almonzer, a communication engineer and a Google Earth Expert, conclusively proves: even if all
side streets to Tahrir Square were included, the area would not exceed 25
acres. Even if four people were counted per square meter and dozens of
surrounding buildings were removed, there would be no more than 400 thousand
people on that day. If the 5-6 million number promoted by the proponents of the
military coup were to be believed, it means that there were 50-60 people per
square meter (5-6 per sq. ft.), clearly a physical impossibility. Even if one
million were at every inch in Tahrir Square and all the surrounding streets,
there would have to be 10 people per square meter, another impossibility. Even
BBC eventually questioned these inflated numbers.
So at best there were less than half
a million people in Tahrir Square at the peak of the demonstration and there
were probably an equal number across Egypt. Therefore, the will of the Egyptian
electorate was sacrificed when one or two million people protested for a day or
two.
Can You Keep A Secret? The
Anti-Morsi Media spells it out
Even before a single demonstrator
went to Tahrir, Okaz, a Saudi daily newspaper
preemptively published the details of the
scenario that unfolded three days later when the military took over. The
following day, Al-Ahram, an official newspaper and Egypt’s largest
circulated publication, had the headline “Either Resign or Be Overthrown.” This
report foretold in frightening details how the
events would unfold, including the military ultimatum, the overthrow of Morsi,
the arrest of the MB leaders, and the suspension of the constitution. By July 3
nightfall, Gen. Sisi announced the overthrow of Morsi, the suspension of the
constitution, and the beginning of a political roadmap. It was exactly the same
roadmap President Morsi announced earlier, and the opposition rejected. The
only difference was his ouster.
The Americans Fold their Hands
Throughout the crisis, U.S.
Ambassador Patterson played the role of defending the democratic process and
the rule of law. When Gen. Sisi issued his ultimatum to the president on July
1, the U.S. adminstration showed its true colors as National Security Advisor
Susan Rice told Morsi’s foreign policy advisor, Essam al-Haddad, that it was over:
either Morsi should resign or he would be overthrown. She advised that he
should resign which Morsi summarily rejected. Once told by Rice of the
impending coup Morsi videotaped a 22 minute
speech on a smart phone vowing not to resign or submit to the impending coup.
His aid quickly emailed the impromtu speech to his supporters. Within the hour
he was taken into custody not to be seen or heard from again.
Meanwhile, Secretary of Defense
Chuck Hagel spoke to the coup leader Gen. Sisi at least five times during the
crisis. He advised that they announce the elections would be held as soon as
possible. In addition, he assured Sisi that the administration would maintain
its military aid. Within days, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns went to
Egypt and met with the coup leaders and
their civilian enablers. While in Cairo he ignored all the facts surrounding
the overthrow of an elected president. In essence, his message was to support
the coup and its aftermath, as he stated, “The United States is firmly
committed to helping Egypt succeed in this second chance to realize the promise
of the revolution.”
As far back as March 2012, Burns met
with MB General Guide Mohammad Badie and his deputy Khayrat Al-Shater. He
offered that if the MB maintains the peace treaty with Israel the U.S. would
help secure $20 Billion from the GCC countries to help Egypt’s economy. But
Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Kuwait declined to offer any real help when Morsi
was in power. However, within two days of the military coup, Burns’s promise
was fulfilled, but to the coup leaders. The leaders of the three countries
congratulated Gen. Sisi (not the puppet president installed by the military)
for deposing Morsi and pledged to send a $12 Billion aid package as a gift to
help stabilize the economy.
Furthermore, Burns promised the coup
leader that the US military aid will continue and that the stalled IMF loan
that has been languishing for over two years would be promptly approved. In
rejecting to call the overthrow of a freely elected president by the military a
coup, the U.S. administration demonstrated, yet again, that lofty ideals and
rhetoric are sacrificed at the alter of misplaced short term national
interests.
Perhaps one measure to assess the
regional ramifications of the latest events is the reaction by Israel and the
Palestinians. When Mubarak was deposed on February 11, 2011, the Palestinians
were jubilant and dancing in the streets, while Israel was in mourning. But
when Morsi was overthrown by the military on July 3 the roles were reversed.
Remember Human Rights? Free Speech?
Freedom of Assembly?
By the time the assembled speakers
behind Gen. Sisi led by ElBaradei, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, and the Coptic
Pope finished their blessings of the military coup, the security forces were in
full force as hundreds of MB supporters including senior leaders were rounded
up on the flimsy charge of instigating violence. Their assets were frozen and
their buildings seized. Morsi was detained as Mubarak-era prosecutors
threatened to charge him with “escaping prison” when he was illegally arrested
by Mubarak security officers on January 27, 2011 during the early days of the
2011 revolution. Astonishingly, the prosecutors also announced that they would
investigate the president for “contacting and communicating with foreign
elements,” such as Western leaders during his tenure. More than a dozen
pro-Morsi media outlets including TV channels, websites, and newspapers were
raided and closed. By July 8, the army killed over 80 pro-Morsi demonstrators
and injured over 1000 when they were praying and protesting peacefully in front
of the Presidential Guards Club, where Morsi is believed to be detained. So
far, more than 270 people have been killed and thousands injured by the army
and security forces across Egypt.
With overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the military claimed
that its soldiers were attacked. Liberal elites and human rights advocates as
well as the media mouthpieces echoed the military’s claims and blamed the
protesters for being near a military installation. But the Presidential Guards
Club is no such thing. Though owned by the Presidential Guards, it is a social
and sports club, where officers and their families go for recreational
purposes. Since the miltary coup, the Egyptian people have been subjected to
a military propaganda unseen
since the Nasser era. While Morsi did not shut down a single media outlet
despite the demonization campaign against him, all pro-Morsi channels and websites
have been shut down or severely curtailed.
Double Standards: No to Morsi’s
Decree and Prosecutor. But Yes to the Military’s
The liberal opposition was outraged
and went into overdrive when Morsi issued his Nov. 2012 constitutional
declaration and sacked the corrupt Mubarak-appointed general prosecutor, a
major demand by the revolutionary and youth groups. Despite his good intentions
of accelerating the establishment of the democratic institutions that were
dismantled by the SCC, Morsi was accused of authoritarianism and
heavyhandedness. Yet, most liberals and secularists praised the constitutional
decree of the puppet president who was installed by the military shortly after
the coup. I will discuss the details of this decree in a subsequent article but
suffice it to say that it bestowed on a president chosen by the military powers
that Morsi, the democratically-elected president, did not have, since much of
his powers were transferred to the Prime Minister in the 2012 constitiution.
Moreover, the liberal opposition was in an uproar when Morsi unilaterally
appointed a general prosecutor with unquestionable integrity, to the point that
corrupt judges and prosecutors harrassed him and surrounded his office for days
demanding his resignation. Yet, when a new prosecutor was also unilaterally
appointed by the new interim president, not a single judge, prosecutor, or
opposition leader objected. Upon assuming office, the first order of business
for this new general prosecutor was to freeze the assets of Islamist leaders
and order their arrests.
If it walks like a duck, and quacks
like a duck, you shouldn’t call it a chicken
ElBaradei, who was elected to
nothing, is now Egypt’s Vice President, while Morsi, who was freely and
democratically elected by the Egyptian electorate, is detained and his
whereabouts are unknown. Both of these outcomes were determined by the will of
military generals and cheered on by their civilian enablers. The deceit and
lies demonstrated by the Egyptian liberal and secular elites are astounding.
For years, they taunted the Islamists to respect democratic principles, the
rule of law, and submit to the will of the people. They warned against
dictatorships, military rule, or sacrificing democractic principles, human
rights, personal freedoms, and minority protections. Believing in
democratic principles, human rights, and the rule of law is a lifetime
commitment. One cannot say, “I will only have these values on Mondays,
Tuesdays, and Wednesdays. But for the rest of the week, I will look the other
way.” That is called hypocrisy.
Esam
Al-Amin is the author of The Arab Awakening Unveiled: Understanding
Transformations and Revolutions in the Middle East. He can be contacted
at alamin1919@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment