EGYPT: In Egypt, democracy has taken on a new meaning...

If a revolution aimed at fostering democracy is obliged to ultimately rely on the army’s bayonets in order to achieve its aims, the army will now have to convince everyone that military rule really reflects the popular will.

By Zvi Bar'el | Jul.04, 2013 | 5:48 AM

Egypt has avoided a military coup in the usual sense of the word. Mohammed Morsi is no longer president, and the country will now be governed by the head of the Constitutional Court. The Court will appoint a government of technocrats, who will rule until presidential and parliamentary elections are held. 

The country will embark once again on its first steps toward democracy, as if no presidential or parliamentary elections had taken place and as if no constitution had been formulated and ratified by referendum. It’s as if the Egyptian revolution only started yesterday. From now on, the country will be managed and supervised by the army, through a civilian representative of its choosing. 

Affairs will be conducted following a timetable set by the defense minister, until the army is satisfied that a civilian leadership is capable of assuming the reins of power. 

However, this arrangement is not final. The new arrangement was agreed upon by the army and the secular political parties, as well as some of the Salafist movements who opposed Morsi’s rule. The Muslim Brotherhood has yet to give its approval. 

The party's representatives rejected calls to join the discussions. They view the army’s intervention and the acceptance of demands by the protest movement as a military coup. The Brotherhood could pose a serious challenge to the newly appointed council, just as the protest movements did for Morsi. Constitutionally, the president is not bound to agree to the army’s blueprint for the future. Morsi may hold on to his office, requiring the army to oust him, even by force. This would prove to strengthen his legitimacy, and make the opposition look as though it is resorting to former President Hosni Mubarak’s tactics in order to seize power. 

The army’s blueprint for the future poses serious challenges to the opposition forces as well. If a revolution aimed at fostering democracy is obliged to ultimately rely on the army’s bayonets in order to achieve its aims, a new meaning of democracy will have to be coined. They will have to worry about when and if they will be able to persuade the military to return to its barracks, letting civilians govern the country. Furthermore, they now have to convince everyone that military rule really reflects the popular will. 

The army’s decisions, based on consultations with representatives from most of the political and religious movements in Egypt (except the Muslim Brotherhood) do not clarify whether new parliamentary elections will depend on the formulation of a new constitution, or whether these can be held in parallel to the formulation of a new constitution. This constitution will be drawn up by a committee of experts, and its composition will no doubt be the subject of bitter struggles. Mohammed ElBaradei, who took part in the discussions with the military, stated that a new constitution will precede the elections. If true, ‘early’ elections will not happen anytime soon. The army’s decision also does not set a date for, or name the the legal constitutional underpinnings of new presidential elections. The constitutional basis for any decisions taken by interim president Adli Mansour, nominated by Morsi a few days ago, is also not clear. These are questions of principle, which the Muslim Brotherhood may demand be addressed by an intervention of the Constitutional Court. However, with the suspension of the constitution, it is not clear how the authority of this court will be viewed. 

In the meantime, the protest movements can register a large ideological and political victory. The opposition to Morsi was based on strong ideological grounds and on a political assessment of the election results. Formally, the elections gave the Muslim Brotherhood a victory, but in fact a majority of voters gave the secular parties a majority in the first round of voting. Only in the second round did Morsi beat his rival by 3 percentage points.

In this space, between the formal results and public sentiment, a protest movement and opposition to the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood has developed over the past year.

The secular parties have only themselves to blame for losing the presidential elections. They failed to unite and put forward a commonly accepted candidate. Their candidates were mainly politicians from the old guard such as Amr Moussa and Hamdeen Sabahi. The younger generation’s protest movement had no acceptable and commonly acclaimed candidate who could represent the principles of the revolution. These movements never resigned themselves to losing the elections. The initial euphoric days in which the army, the liberals and the Muslim Brotherhood collaborated, quickly evaporated. The common struggle to depose Mubarak which culminated with success on February 11, 2011 quickly split up into rivalries within the secular movements, as well as between them and the religious movements. 

One theme unified all these movements for the first post-revolutionary year. None of them wanted long-term military rule and they all (except Mubarak loyalists) wanted the supreme military council to give up the reins following parliamentary elections. “The people and the army stand together” was a slogan chanted by the demonstrators previously, using the army as a protective shield despite the fact that it had been part of the oppressive machinery of the Mubarak regime. This apparent partnership quickly dissolved. Some of the protest movements congratulated Morsi for firing the former Defense Minister El-Tantawi and the former Chief of Staff Sami Anan. In those days of August 2012, Morsi seemed a determined leader, a copy of Turkish leader Erdogan, who could stand up to the army, clean its ranks and lead Egypt into a new era. His opponents, as well as his own conduct, have now brought the army back to power. 

Morsi was in too much of a rush to fully wield his powers, as if he too was convinced that his rule was only a dream that needed to be acted upon as quickly as possible, before he woke up. After removing the military from politics and cancelling the addendum to the constitution which was imposed by the supreme military council, allowing the army to veto any legislation dealing with security matters, Morsi rushed forward with a new constitution that would mold Egypt’s new religious character. This gave the protest and opposition movements their chance to make up for their electoral defeat and to at least save some of their secular ideology. However, they found themselves facing a two-fold opposition. They were in a minority at the committee which was formulating the new constitution, which was dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists.

Power struggles developed within the secular movements, leading some to seek compromise with the Brotherhood and others to withdraw from the process. Morsi, who was galloping ahead in an effort to consolidate his rule, claimed excessive powers to himself, placing his decisions above the law and the constitutional court. He subsequently forced the committee drawing up the constitution to terminate discussions and called for a referendum on the constitution. This was the turning point which alarmed the protest movements, who now realized that they were about to lose the ideological struggle as well. The squares of Cairo and Alexandria erupted again, violence flared and the numbers of dead protesters started to rise. Morsi, who also replaced many newspaper editors and made changes in the Ministry of Culture, preferred a dialogue with extreme Salafist elements in Sinai against the wishes of the army. He could not present a suitable economic program that would give hope to millions of unemployed Egyptians, and ended up being a dictator just like Mubarak. 

The fragmented secular opposition again found a common enemy, managing to unite by forming a “Salvation Front” which focused on legal action, without being able to galvanize the masses. Only with the appearance of the hitherto unknown “Tamrud” movement, which overnight became a mass protest movement with its smart initiative of organizing signatures in a petition to remove Morsi, did the political opposition join and lead the street movement. However, just as in the elections for Parliament, this joint movement lacks a commonly accepted leadership, and finds itself yet again requiring the support of the military as the “defenders of democracy”. 

 Long Live, Egypt!

Egypt: 2 Related Articles and other News Updates

Celebration of verdict in Cairo 

Egypt football: Death sentences over Port Said stadium violence

 

An Egyptian court has sentenced 21 people to death over football riots that killed 74 last year, with the verdict sparking fresh deadly violence.

The riots - Egypt's worst-ever football disaster - began after a top-league game at Port Said stadium. The ruling caused anger in Port Said, where eight people died as supporters of the defendants clashed with police. The new violence comes after a day of unrest on the second anniversary of the uprising that ousted Hosni Mubarak.

Thousands of people took to the streets on Friday to voice their opposition to Islamist President Mohammed Morsi, accusing him of betraying the revolution. At least seven people were killed and more than 450 wounded in unrest across Egypt.

Last year's football riots led to the suspension of the league.They began minutes after the game in Port Said. Fans of local side al-Masry invaded the pitch, hurling stones and fireworks at visiting supporters from Cairo club al-Ahly. The violence in Port Said sparked riots in Cairo during which a further 16 people died.

A section of al-Ahly supporters, known as the "ultras", played a prominent role in the protests against ex-President Mubarak.Some accused supporters of the toppled leader of instigating the Port Said violence. They also accused them of doing little to prevent it. All 21 defendants sentenced to death on Saturday were al-Masry fans. When the verdicts were announced by a judge in the Cairo court, relatives of victims cheered. However, the ruling sparked violence in Port Said, Supporters and relatives of those sentenced tried to storm the prison where the defendants are held. The eight people who died in the clash included two policemen, officials say. Army units were deployed on the city's streets following the violence. Families of those give death sentences were seen weeping and fleeing tear gas outside Port Said jail. Seventy-three people, including nine policemen, were tried over the stadium clashes. None are al-Ahly fans.The judge said he would announce verdicts for the remaining defendants on 9 March.

Economic 'collapse'

Friday saw a big anti-government rally in Cairo's Tahrir Square, with opposition supporters clashing with police. There was also unrest in 12 out of 27 of Egypt's provinces. At least six of the deaths occurred in Suez. In Ismailia, protesters set fire to the headquarters of the Freedom and Justice Party, the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. The city's governorate headquarters was later also stormed.

The liberal opposition accuses Mr Morsi of being autocratic and driving through a new constitution that does not protect adequately freedom of expression or religion. The government is also being blamed for a deepening economic crisis. One of the demonstrators at Cairo's Tahrir Square, Momen Asour, said he had come to demand an end to President Morsi's rule.

"We have not seen anything, Neither freedom, nor social justice, or any solution to unemployment, or any investment," he said. "On the contrary, the economy has collapsed."

President Morsi and his allies have dismissed the claim, saying they have a democratic mandate following recent elections. The constitution, drawn up by an Islamist-dominated body, was approved by referendum last month.

Women shout during a protest in Tahrir Square in Cairo, Friday. Protesters clashed with police across Egypt on Friday on the second anniversary of the revolt that toppled Hosni Mubarak, taking to the streets against President Mohamed Morsi who they accuse of betraying the revolution. (Mohamed Abd El Ghany/Reuters)

Time to build, not protest? On revolution anniversary, Egyptians disagree

  

While many Egyptians returned to Tahrir Square on the revolution's two-year anniversary, the Muslim Brotherhood performed charity work, arguing that was a better way to honor the revolution.

By Kristen Chick, Correspondent / January 25, 2013

Women shout during a protest in Tahrir Square in Cairo, Friday. Protesters clashed with police across Egypt on Friday on the second anniversary of the revolt that toppled Hosni Mubarak, taking to the streets against President Mohamed Morsi who they accuse of betraying the revolution.

Mohamed Abd El Ghany/Reuters

Cairo - For a video of an Egyptian activist describing his own experience of the revolution and the two years since, please scroll to bottom of the story.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to reflect the deaths in today's clashes.

Thousands of people gathered in Tahrir Square today to protest against Egypt's president on the second anniversary of the uprising that swept his predecessor from power, even as violence flared in some protest across the country, with hundreds wounded and at least four dead in clashes with police. Meanwhile, the president's supporters spent the day offering cheap food and much-needed services to Egypt's needy.

Filled with disappointment over the unmet demands of the 2011 uprising, and anger toward President Mohamed Morsi for what they say is his failure to represent all Egyptians, protesters filled the square once again, chanting slogans familiar from the days of demonstrating against former President Hosni Mubarak and his regime. A banner strung on palm trees in the square proclaimed the familiar slogan: “The people want the downfall of the regime.”

The anniversary also brought violence, as protesters clashed with police and each other in cities across the country, wounding hundreds of people and killing several in Suez, according to state television in the city. In Tahrir, mostly young men traded barrages of rocks and tear gas over a wall of cement blocks. Ambulances waited nearby to carry away the injured, sirens wailing as they crawled through the flag-waving crowd. As night fell, skirmishes with police around the city became more intense, and several offices of the Muslim Brotherhood's political party were reportedly attacked.

Many of the changes protesters sought in January 2011 remain unfulfilled – one sign in Tahrir read: “Where is social justice? Where is police reform?” Egyptians are bitterly divided between supporters of the Islamist president, and those who feel he is consolidating power and building a government that excludes his non-Islamist opponents. The protesters sought to capitalize on swelling anger at the president and the Brotherhood since they rushed a vote last month on a controversial constitution draft against an outcry from the opposition.

“This is just the start of our struggle against the Muslim Brotherhood,” says Elhamy Helal, standing next to the smoldering remains of some tires as youth threw rocks at police nearby. “I think it will be a long struggle.”

Mr. Helal, who participated in the revolution and most of the demonstrations since, says the protesters now want Mr. Morsi to step down and a new constitution to be written. The constitution passed in a referendum with 64 percent of the vote, although turnout was only 33 percent of the voting population. A large sign in Tahrir called the document a “constitution of the Ikhwan,” or Muslim Brotherhood.

The document put up for a vote by the Islamist-dominated committee will make Egypt a religious country in the long run, Helal says.

“Morsi is not a president for all of Egypt. He's just a president for the Muslim Brothers and the salafis,” says Helal, repeating a common refrain of protesters. “He has also failed in managing the economy and state institutions.... Why should he stay? He hasn't accomplished any of the goals of the revolution.”

Zucchini softens frustrations

But while those in Tahrir used the anniversary of the uprising to protest, the Muslim Brotherhood and its political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party, chose to commemorate the day with a countrywide service project dubbed “Together We Build Egypt.” Local branches of the organizations painted schools, planted trees, and sold food and other goods at cheap prices in needy neighborhoods, a deliberate contrast to the protests in the square. For decades before it came to power, the Muslim Brotherhood built support among Egyptians with similar charity work.

In Ezbet el Nakhl, a simple neighborhood far from the din of Tahrir, several men selling vegetables, pasta, and cooking oil at reduced prices outside a mosque did a brisk business with area residents. Zucchini, which cost six Egyptian pounds (about $0.90) per kilogram at normal vegetable stalls in the neighborhood, were only 2-1/2 pounds at the Brotherhood stand. Tomatoes were one pound per kilogram, instead of 1-1/2 elsewhere.

The Brotherhood and FJP bought the vegetables wholesale, and sold them for nearly the same price. Yousuf Kamal, a Brotherhood member from the neighborhood, says the money to buy the goods came from the pockets of local members.

Abeer, a mother of five wearing a full-face veil, or niqab, carried bulging bags of tomatoes, onions, and zucchini as she stepped away from the table. She says life is getting harder as prices rise, but efforts like this make it more more bearable. “It's a good service for the people,” she says, adding that the Muslim Brotherhood is the only organization providing such services in the neighborhood. Helping people is more useful than protesting, she adds, referencing those in Tahrir. “We don't need to do that,” she says. “Morsi hasn't had a chance yet to show what he can do. We have to give him a chance before we judge his performance.”

Don't protest, build

Many of the Brotherhood's opponents have accused the FJP of vote buying by running such charity drives in the runup to elections. Indeed, new parliamentary elections are scheduled to be held by April. But Abeer scoffed at the notion that her vote could be bought for the few pounds she saved on tomatoes and onions, and pointed out that the Brotherhood has a long history of social work. But the sale did show that the FJP has the people's interests at heart, she says.

Nearby, Brotherhood women were selling new and used clothes at greatly reduced prices. The clothes were piled on tables in a ground-floor room filled with voices of women and children as they shopped for their families. On one table, children's clothes were sold for 1 to 2-1/2 pounds per item. New men's shirts, still in the packaging, were sold for seven to ten.

“The Brotherhood are those who feel the pain of the people who are lower, and they help them to bring them up,” says Eman Fouda, one of the Brotherhood members helping to sell the clothes. “The country doesn't need protests. We need to build our country.”

Back in Tahrir Square, there was little talk about upcoming elections. “If they forged the constitutional referendum, they will forge the parliamentary elections,” says Helal, explaining why he would rather protest than help an opposition party prepare for the vote. “What should we wait for? For Morsi to make all the government institutions under his control?”

Most Reviewed…

1. Lego Racism? Muslim Turks complain about Jabba the Hut
2. The 'stupid party': Is GOP's concern what's said or how it's said?
3. Woman sues Match.com: Match calls the $10M suit 'absurd' (+video)
4. Could North Korea hit the US with a missile?
5. Opinion: North Korea threatens US ? what about its own people?
6. Russia's Vladimir Putin says West is fomenting jihadi 'blowback'
7. North Korea lashes out at the US and South. How big a threat?
8. For French troops nearing rebel ground, Mali fight is no ordinary mission
9. As Mexico's traffickers ship drugs north, they leave addicts in their wake
10. On North Africa's western flank, long-simmering conflict causes unease
11. Social Security and Medicare: Do you get back what you pay in?
12. The 'stupid party': Is GOP's concern what's said or how it's said?
13. Senator Feinstein's assault-weapon ban: How would it work? (+video)
14. Super Bowl commercials 2013: The 4 best sneak previews
15. 'Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters': What are the reviews saying?
16. Foreign adoptions by Americans fall, number of worldwide orphans rises

EGYPT: Egyptian Regime Change News

Egyptian Regime Change News

Posted on December 11, 2012 by willyloman

by Scott Creighton

1. William Engdahl went on RT and tried to push his “it’s the same thing as Iran” propaganda about what is happening in Egypt right now. He repeats the claim that the constitution is an “Islamist” construct which will crush liberal and secular progress in the country. Nothing could be farther from the truth. When asked about Morsi reversing his unconstitutional mandate protecting the constitutional assembly and the remaining house of parliament from the Mubarak supporting judiciary, Engdahl dismisses it just like the opposition does claiming it was all a “feign” by the clever Morsi to distract from the real issue, the constitution. Of course, he doesn’t actually READ the constitution or cite any quotes from it to prove his point. Then he has the nerve to claim that by putting it to the people for a vote, Morsi is circumventing the will of the people. Engdahl and Tarpley have been undermining the Egyptian revolution from day one, long before the election brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power. While they were claiming the Tahrir Sq uprising was the work of the State Department, Hillary Clinton was still going on for months standing firmly beside our dictator in that country Hosni Mubarak if that tells you anything.

http://youtu.be/Ex0UQQuBu80

2. The freely elected government of Egypt has given the judiciary an important role to play as overseers of the upcoming national referendum on the new constitution but just like the Syrian “opposition” did when the reforms put to the people by Assad were laid out, they are refusing to take part in them. Again, this is ALL about forcing regime change and stopping an anti-neoliberal constitution from being approved by the people. Truth be told, there are many Egyptian judges who don’t stand with the Mubarak supporting judiciary so the only thing the opposition can do now they know the constitution will be put to the people is to set up the narrative to discredit it in the future.

“The head of Egypt’s key association of judges says 90 percent of its members have voted not to oversee Saturday’s nationwide referendum on the country’s contentious draft constitution.

Ahmed el-Zind, the chairman of the Judges’ Club, announced the decision on Tuesday.

The move is unlikely to stop the referendum from taking place, but it casts further doubt on the legitimacy of the constitutional drafting process.” AP

3. Flashbacks to the violence in Venezuela. Opposition members camped out in tents in the center of Tahrir Sq. have been attacked by “masked gunmen” obviously designed to make it look like Morsi is attacking the opposition. This is a cheap stunt and obviously so. While the so-called “opposition” has killed at least 5 government supporters during the last two weeks, these attacks used bird shot… that’s right… bird shot… to injure the protesters. Clearly someone didn’t want to hurt them too much.

Masked gunmen attacked opposition protesters camped out at Cairo’s Tahrir Square early on Tuesday, firing birdshot at them and wounding nine people, security officials said. The attack stoked tensions just hours ahead of rival mass rallies in the Egyptian capital by supporters and opponents of the country’s Islamist president over a disputed draft constitution.” AP

Please read the following for information 

regarding this destabilization campaign in Egypt.

National Salvation Front in Egypt is a CIA/Saudi Construct – Like it was in Libya and Syria

Morsi Aide: Businessmen and For-Profit Media Firms Behind Opposition

Globalist Influence Peddling Rag Promotes New Egyptian Propaganda: Muslim Brotherhood Torture Chambers

Protesters in Egypt Plan to Turn into Yet Another Terrorist Regime Change Operation

Opponents of Morsi shooting At Muslim Brotherhood Supporters (Raw footage)

Egyptian Color Revolution Continues: Efforts to Block New Anti-neoliberal Constitution Failing

Translation of Proposed Egyptian Constitution

Judge Napolitano Shows his True Colors: Shills on Studio B for Regime Change in Egypt

Jason Ditz of AntiWar is at it Again – Supporting State Department Destabilization Propaganda

Egypt’s (Mubarak supporting) constitutional court puts off ruling on Assembly legitimacy surrounded by pro-Morsi protesters

LIBYA: Reality not NATO's. Wake up Arabs!

Mocked and ridiculed in the Middle East specially by corrupt monarchy and corrupt leader in the Middle East, Muammar Gaddafi never stopped being critical of Arabs and Muslims, or being blunt whenever the truth is involved. Wild stories have been told about him: he is half Jew half Roman...he has amassed a big fortune and his assets are all scattered allover Europe...he is crazy, and so on.

Is Gaddafi really a lunatic? Does it really matter if he is half Jew half Roman?

It is said, "Man is known by the company he keeps". Expanding this saying and applying it on leaders of the nations, I would say, "A leader of nation is known by the condition of the people he leads". Or should I say, "A nation is known by the leader they choose"?

I am not an admirer of Gaddafi, but if he is considered to be bad, he is not any worse that many other leaders, kings and emirs in the Middle East who succumbed to the Western influence, not caring one iota for the interest of their people, their culture and their religion. Qaddafi did not and that stands well in his defense. 

EYEWITNESS Dedon Kamathi Returns from Libya and Reports

NATO mission in LibyaNews Analysis-06-10-2011-(Part1)

NATO mission in LibyaNews Analysis-06-10-2011-(Part2)

Ghaddafi on Kennedy, Obama and Zionist Madness

EGYPT: All or nothing...

If the pragmatism of the Muslim Brotherhood is becoming popular, it is only because more radical revolutionary forces have failed to put forward a credible programme of change

Ibrahim El-Houdaiby

Some of the challenges encountering Egypt’s revolution are clearer than others. Of the clearer ones is the necessity and priority of dismantling the power base of the ousted regime, while the means of dismantling remain problematic.

Mubarak’s regime rested on three institutions. First is the security institution, comprised of thousands of officers, over one million conscripts, a gigantic intelligence apparatus with long-reaching arms, and thousands of thugs operating under officer supervision. Over the 18 days of uprising that started Egypt’s revolution, the institution was temporarily paralysed, and partially disempowered.

The regime also relied heavily on its gigantic media institution. State-owned media (TV, radio and newspapers) was used as propaganda for the ousted president and his regime. Private media was (and remains) highly undemocratic, being controlled by a handful of business elites. Cosmetic changes have been introduced to state-owned media, replacing notorious leadership with a less unpopular one, while absolutely no structural changes have been introduced, to neither the private nor public sector media, and both retains its undemocratic structure.

The third pillar on which the regime rested was the National Democratic Party (NDP) —the party that ruled the country since the 1970s. But the NDP was never a real political party with a platform or support base. Rather, it was the conglomeration of the interests of senior statesmen close to Mubarak and businessmen close to his younger son Gamal. The top tier of these corrupt interest groups has been paralysed and, in some cases, imprisoned. Nonetheless, the power structure remains insufficiently challenged as a new political and business elite is now emerging, representing the very same orientations and interests of their predecessors, only with a revolutionary façade. Nonetheless, this institution was the one most harmed by the revolution, with the NDP and the municipal councils being officially dissolved.

The success of the revolution will be determined primarily by its ability to dismantle these institutions. Domestic and foreign policies that provoked Egyptians and led to the breakout of the revolution were only the outcome of this power structure. A change of faces or even a partial change of policy is therefore insufficient and unsustainable, and would eventually lead Egypt to where it was on 24 January 2011. Only a sweeping change of people and policy could lead to the emergence of the new independent Egypt the revolution has promised.

Gradual change is not exactly useful, particularly in revolutionary moments. The ousted regime’s interest groups were willing to take a few steps back and to be patient until the revolution loses a bit of momentum and then fight back viciously for their interests. The clashes of 28 June only prove that the institutions of oppression (the police and thugs) that had killed at least 800 Egyptians five months earlier still enjoyed enormous strength, and even more disrespect for the country’s citizens and political activists, despite all attempts to reorient the police and restructure the Ministry of Interior.

Revolutionists are increasingly complaining about the media, which has replaced one pharaoh with another, and is evidently biased to the interests of the country’s business cronies who criticise protests and strikes aiming at altering the economic power structure. Attempts to “radically” dismantle the ousted regime’s power structure (most significantly through dissolving municipal councils) were met by rather strong reactions, which the caretaker government —with its “reformist” soft outlook —failed to firmly contain. These incidents and others suggest that Egypt should capitalise on its revolutionary moment to bring radical change that dismantles this structure.

Ironically, however, Egypt’s largest organised revolutionary force is, by definition, non-revolutionary. For over 80 years, the Muslim Brotherhood has adopted a reformist stance, seeking gradual change that does not challenge the very foundations of the political system. This reformist outlook has prevented the radicalisation of many young Islamists, and led to the marginalisation of the terrorist Islamist threat in the 1980s and 1990s. It has provided the group with pragmatism and doctrinal flexibility that allowed for its survival under oppression for long decades. It has also, to a great extent, tamed the group, which became more willing to reach compromises and search for common ground. While these traits might be useful in politics, they are not what a revolution needs. Caution, patience and too much political calculation are harmful at moments when radical acute decisions are due. On the latter type of decisions, the Brotherhood is incapable of delivering.

So why did the Brotherhood participate in the 18 days of protests that started Egypt’s revolution? Because the protests were led and organised by other groups, and the demands, albeit radical, were clear and rational. Mobilising the Brotherhood requires more than developing a clear vision of what needs to be done. That is, they know what ought to be done, but could still use guidance on how to do it. During the earlier days of the revolution, the clear demand of ousting the regime was clear, and so was the means: protesting. Because the alternative was not exactly clear, the Muslim Brotherhood was willing to negotiate different ways out. The Brotherhood, and the vast majority of Egyptians, voted in favour of the proposed constitutional amendments because those who opposed it failed to present a clear, practical alternative that is not full of landmines.

Being the primary target of Mubarak’s regime, the Muslim Brotherhood was more harmed by crackdowns of the institutions of oppression than other opposition groups. It is therefore farfetched to assume that they don’t have a clear interest in dismantling this institution. Their adoption of a gradual approach of reforming the Ministry of Interior rather than a radical approach that calls for dismantling it is best explained as an outcome of the failure of other less popular yet more radical revolutionary groups to present a rational applicable scheme for change. Putting forward such a plan would facilitate the reintegration of the Brotherhood with revolutionists calling for dismantling the Ministry of Interior.

The success of Egypt’s revolution is highly dependent on the unity of revolutionists, because only then will they have enough power to challenge the long-existing institutions of the ousted regime. This, in turn, requires that different groups exert serious effort in understanding one another, and in capitalising on the strengths of each group through synchronising efforts and finding excuses instead of pointing fingers. Otherwise, the revolution will fail to dismantle these institutions, and Egypt will —for some time —suffer the consequences in terms of its security, economy and polity.

_______________________________________________ 

The writer is a freelance columnist, and a researcher focusing on Islamic movements and democratization.