|
08 May 2012 By
Mshari al-Zaydi The comrades in Egypt
are confused. By "comrades" here I mean the
"Brotherhood", which is supposed to be a brotherhood
in terms of its Islamic "fraternalism". However, the
word "Islamic" here does not signify Islam in terms of
faith, history or civilization. It does reflect a
religion that spans more than 14 centuries of time,
humanity, geography and demography. The word "Islamic"
here pertains to a period of historical and political
mobility, with transient and temporal roots, and is
not religious by definition. After the Muslim
Brotherhood "group" announced its nomination of Deputy
General Guide Khairat El-Shater, along with another
official contender Mohammed Mursi, for the 2012
presidential elections, many changes have taken place;
changes within the Brotherhood, the Freedom and
Justice Party, and the Islamic current in general,
from which there is certainly more than one
"independent" presidential candidate running in the
elections. The nomination of El-Shater
and then Mursi came as an attempt to detract support
from the former Brotherhood leader Abdel Moneim Aboul
Fotouh, the famous Islamic symbol Mohammad Salim
Al-Awa, and not to mention the dark Islamic horse
Hazem Abu Ismail, the son of the renowned
parliamentary magnate Sheikh Salah Abu Ismail.
The conflict right now
is not between the Islamists and secularists, not
between the Islamists and the remnants of the former
National Democratic Party, and not between the
Islamists and the ordinary people who have become sick
and tired of the current state of anxiety and chaos,
or even between the Islamists and the traditional
social leaderships in villages, rural areas and
hamlets. The dispute right now is between the
Islamists themselves. Those set to lose out
most from the nominations of Khairat El-Shater and
Mohammed Mursi in the presidential elections are the
Islamists themselves. Is Mohammad Salim Al-Awa or
Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh or even Hazem Abu Ismail
happy about these latest developments? What does this mean in
the language of politics and interests? It means that
when interests, practical benefits and realistic
interpretations come to the fore, then idealistic
rhetoric, originally used to mobilize the masses,
begins to fade away. Nothing rises above
the voice of interests or the voice of personal
opinion. We saw the "expatriate" Kamal El-Helbawy
tendering his resignation from the Muslim Brotherhood,
because they had "betrayed" their earlier pledge not
to nominate a presidential candidate. Then we saw
another famous expatriate Brotherhood member, cleric
Wagdi Ghoneim, giving several angry speeches on
YouTube. According to Ghoneim's words, he was vexed by
the Brotherhood's decision to compete with "virtuous
brother" Hazem Abu Ismail. Then we heard and watched
Mohammad Salim Al-Awa grumbling, albeit in a soft
tone, about the recent Brotherhood turnabout. This was
evident in his latest interview on the Egyptian
satellite television station "Al-Tahrir", with
journalist Mohammed Salah. In the end, this leads
us to a clear simple fact: The exquisite rhetoric of
ideals and slogans ultimately melts under the rays of
reality. Indeed, it even melts under the whims of
individuals. A Saudi journalist and expert on Islamic movements and Islamic fundamentalism as well as Saudi affairs. Mshari is Asharq Al-Awsat's opinion page Editor, where he also contributes a weekly column. Has worked for the local Saudi press occupying several posts at Al -Madina newspaper amongst others. He has been a guest on numerous news and current affairs programs as an expert on Islamic extremism |
Add Comments