|
08 June 2012 By Osman Mirghani How one wishes that Dr. Mahmoud Hussein, Secretary
General of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, did not
issue his recent statement. He said that with the
announcement of Dr. Mohammed Mursi's victory in the
presidential elections, Mursi had ended his
organizational relationship with the Muslim
Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party, and
that he had already tendered his resignation,
presenting it to the Brotherhood and the party
immediately after his victory was declared. Statements
like these not only seem unconvincing, but they give
an excuse to accuse the Brotherhood of continuing its
policy of circumvention, or even worse, a policy of
ridiculing the people by issuing words that are far
from the reality that they see in front of them. I
cannot imagine that this statement will convince
anyone that with a stroke of a pen, Mursi's
relationship with the Brotherhood group and its party
has come to an end, especially as Hussein's words
originally came while the Brotherhood was mobilizing
its supporters and staging protests in Tahrir Square.
These moves were intended as a means of pressure and
intimidation before and during the announcement of the
election results, threatening further confrontations
if the Brotherhood's candidate was not announced as
the winner, prompting many to wonder what would have
happened if Mohammed Mursi had not been declared
victorious. The statement brings to mind what was earlier
echoed by the Brotherhood's first candidate, Khairat
el-Shater, who was quick to say that he had resigned
from his position within the group because he wanted
to be a president for all Egyptians and would not
follow the will of the General Guide or members of the
Brotherhood's political party. It is strange that el-Shater
said those words during the same press conference that
his candidacy for the presidency was declared,
announced by the General Guide who sat next to him,
whilst on the other side sat the president of the
Freedom and Justice Party, Mohammed Mursi, before he
was put forward to run as the Brotherhood's substitute
candidate, fearing that appeals would overturn its
first choice nomination, which is what exactly
happened. That day, el-Shater's words did not seem
convincing to the people either, rather they seemed
like a blatant attempt at circumvention. This was
followed by another attempt when the Brotherhood
declared that it would focus entirely on its Dawa
work(the Islamic equivalent of a missionary work), and
that there would be no organizational links between
the group and the Freedom and Justice Party, whilst in
reality all the party's officials come from the
Brotherhood's leadership. Indeed, it is a tall order
to convince anyone with a mere announcement that the
Freedom and Justice Party will have no organizational
or membership links with the Muslim Brotherhood. These statements increase rather than dispel
people's doubts towards the way the Brotherhood works
in the political arena. They suggest that the
Brotherhood is practicing hypocrisy in politics, and
trying to hide even what cannot be hidden because it
is obvious and well known, and because there are many
interlaced statements between officials of the group
and officials of its party, when it comes to political
matters. In recent times it has been difficult to
separate between the statements of the Brotherhood's
officials and the leaders of the Freedom and Justice
Party. Indeed, the media is full of statements in
which Brotherhood officials talk about the affairs of
the Freedom and Justice Party, sometimes even
appearing to be official spokespeople fighting battles
on the party's behalf. They do not shy away from
politics in spite of the recent talk about dedicating
themselves to their Dawa work and leaving politics to
the party itself. Take for example the statements of
Medhat al-Haddad, a member of the Brotherhood's Shura
Council and director of its administrative office in
Alexandria, who was quoted in Asharq al-Awsat
following the announcement of Mohammed Mursi's victory
as saying: "The revolutionary forces will remain in
every square to emphasize the popular demand to repeal
all decisions issued last week by the sole will of
SCAF, most notably the supplementary constitutional
declaration, which gives broad powers to the
military". Al-Haddad threatened not to leave the
squares until Mursi had obtained all his powers as
President of the Republic. This ambiguous situation, which could have been
justified when the Muslim Brotherhood was a secret
organization, cannot be understood at a time when it
has begun to move freely, with representatives of the
Brotherhood's party winning the majority in the
parliamentary elections, and the head of its party
being elected President of the Republic. Trying to
deny or cover up the relationship between the two
entities with elastic statements only strengthens the
lingering doubts and suspicions that many hold against
the Brotherhood, and leads to accusations of double
standards and a lack of clarity. If Egypt has changed after the revolution and the
elections, then the Muslim Brotherhood also needs to
change and end the confusion and ambiguity. It must
make up its mind whether it is a Dawa movement
dedicated to this role, thereby distancing itself from
politics and disputes, or it must tell people clearly
that it wants to engage in political work because that
is its right, and because it has a program that it
wants to implement. In the latter case, the
Brotherhood must dissolve and merge with its political
party as a single entity working clearly and publicly
on one project. In the region today there are many
examples of Islamic movements operating as political
parties without ambiguity or duplicity, such as the
Ennahda movement in Tunisia, the Justice and
Development Party of Morocco, or the AKP in Turkey. In
these cases, the voter does find themselves confused
about who they are dealing with, there is no question
about whether they are voting for the candidate they
see before them, or a mere proxy for the General
Guide, whose name does not appear on the ballot box.
The Muslim Brotherhood will be under the microscope
in the coming period because many people want to put
its intentions to the test and find out how it will
act on several issues, especially the anticipated
battle over the constitution, the battle to dissolve
parliament, the relationship with the military and its
role in the coming period, and the issues of
citizenship rights and the rights of women. In
addition to all of this there is the economic
situation that needs to be rescued quickly because
people are waiting for programs to provide them with
housing, employment, medical treatment, education and
all the necessary services. Egypt has passed the
obstacle of the presidential elections and has
succeeded in nullifying many of the mines that
surround it, but it is still facing many challenges,
one of which is the Muslim Brotherhood and how it
adapts to new situations and deals with them
politically. The question remains as to whether the
Brotherhood will change and openly engage in political
action as one entity, or will it continue to be
ambiguous and hypocritical, and maintain its
double-sided policies? |