The Collapse Of Egypt: A Terrifying Idea - Why Egypt Remained Under The Tyranny Of One Party For 30 Years

27 January 2013

By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed

Nobody would have put forward this idea, namely the collapse of the Egyptian state, if the most senior Egyptian military official, Defense Minister Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, had not sounded the alarm bell, warning that the continuation of conflict between the country's various political factions could lead to ?the collapse of the state.? Neither the Egyptians, nor the Arabs, nor indeed the world at large could bear such a terrifying idea. Regardless of their different positions, the Egyptian people must never allow total chaos to take hold and for the state of Egypt-which the people laud as being one of the oldest in the world, with roots dating back seven thousand years-to collapse. The Defense Minister's statement contains numerous connotations.

In addition to alerting Egypt's blinded politicians regarding the reality of the situation, this also represents a warning that the army will not stand idly by while the country burns, and will therefore intervene, not just to impose a curfew-as requested by President Mohamed Mursi—but possibly go further than this and declare martial rule, establishing military rule that could last for years in a repetition of the Algerian experience.

Prime responsibility for preventing the collapse of the state, and subsequent military rule, falls on the shoulders of President Mohamed Mursi If he is not able to bring opposing factions together and convince them to work under his leadership-by reaching common ground on controversial issues-then we may truly be witnessing the collapse of the second republic of Egypt.

As for why Mursi should be personally held accountable for the collapse of state, this is because he is the only one capable of redressing the mistakes his government and party have made over the past few months. It is clear that Mursi is not the sole president, for he is sharing this post with Muslim Brotherhood leadership figures, particularly de facto Supreme Guide Khairat al-Shater. This can be clearly seen in the contradictions between the president's speeches and rhetoric and his actual decisions. With the exception of Mursi's recent speech imposing a curfew on the Egyptian cities hit by unrest, the president's rhetoric is usually reconciliatory. As for the presidency's actual decisions on the ground, these have all been hostile.

The battle over the constitution exposed this contradiction, ending with the imposition of a draft constitution that broke all the promises and pledges that had previously been made by the president. This draft constitution was then put to a public referendum against the people's will, while also undermining the independence of the Constitutional Court and the judiciary in general. These are all factors that eventually led to the current crisis which might trigger the collapse of civilian rule.

Mursi is now facing two choices: reconciliation or confrontation. Through reconciliation, he can build a state for everyone and return the rights stripped from the Egyptians in this constitution that was predominately drafted by his supporters in violation of the principles of democracy. He should also approve an election law in which issues such as candidacy, vote count, and legal disputes are not under his authority, but rather fully supervised and administered by genuinely independent judicial institutions. The opposition rose against the Muslim Brotherhood's attempts to control the Constitutional Court and the prosecutor general because if these two institutions are under the president's authority, Egypt will be nothing more than a replica of Iran. The ruling party would have the final say as to who runs and who wins, which is exactly why Egypt remained under the tyranny of one party for a period of 30 years.

While if Mursi rejects reconciliation, we might wake up one day, perhaps within the next few months, to military rule. Should this happen, Egypt and the entire Arab world will have wasted the most important change to have taken place over the past 100 years.

Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs. He is currently based in Dubai. From Consul To Terrorist: The Only Faction Active oOn The Scene Because Everybody Else Has Left The Arena :: EsinIslam The Muslim World Portal For Islamic News And Opinions

 
From Consul To Terrorist: The Only Faction Active oOn The Scene Because Everybody Else Has Left The Arena

14 January 2013

By Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed

As soon as I heard the name Iyad Ag Ghaly in relation to the events in Mali I began to wonder if this could be the same man from the same country? Could it really be him? Iyad Ag Ghaly heads up the military operations of armed terrorist groups in northern Mali; whilst there was a man with the same name who served as Mali's consul in Jeddah. I called some friends and confirmed that Iyad Ag Ghaly is indeed the same man that I met at Jeddah's Hilton hotel less than three years ago.

We are facing a truly strange world where those who are legitimate today could be fugitives tomorrow.

At the time, I knew-from those who had dealt with Ghaly as a Tuareg tribal chief and diplomatic consul-that he was the best source to find intermediaries to negotiate the release of hostages taken in the Azawad region. Now, he is said to be commander of the Ansar Dine movement fighting the Malian army, as well as international French and African forces.

When I read a profile about him in yesterday's Asharq al-Awsat newspaper, I was even more confused, for this stated that he was close to Libyan dictator Muammar Qadhafi who reportedly sent him to fight in Lebanon. Yet, Ghaly only recently displayed extremist tendencies.

This kind of confusion and uncertainty has become quite common as shown by the emergence of extremists like Tarek al-Zomor and Mohamed al-Zawahiri on Egypt's political scene. So how did a man like Iyad Ag Ghaly turn from being a moderate Sunni Muslim to an extremist armed fighter? Is it rational to suppose that a man in his fifties, like Ghaly, should suddenly become radicalized? This is truly hard to believe. I sense that this may be some kind of political maneuver where politicians have pretended to adopt extremist ideologies in order to recruit impulsive youths. These politicians provide these youth with funding under the pretext of ?religious duty?, convincing them to sacrifice their lives for a false cause in return for a place in heaven! Since there is a general international lack of will to fight anywhere in the world, the French-alongside a few African states-will fight this war on their own before realizing that desert wars never end and withdraw. What makes matters more complicated is that conflicts that involve religious slogans and tribal powers can last for decades without any side being defeated.

Our problem with those who are keen on fighting these extremists, like the French today and the Americans yesterday in Afghanistan and perhaps tomorrow in Syria, is their inability to understand the fundamental nature of the problem. These extremist groups represent the smallest part of the equation; rather the greatest and most important challenge is to confront extremist ideologies. Had the West, as well as the Arab countries involved and other relevant parties invested their money and effort in fighting extremist ideologies, this crisis might have come to an end. Instead they spent billions of dollars on tens of thousands of soldiers, advanced weaponry, and combat drones managing to eliminate a number of Al Qaeda's leaders; however Al Qaeda's ideology remains the same and in fact continues to spread like a disease. Most people find it easier to jump to easy conclusions by laying the blame on one group or another like Sunnis, Shi'ites, clerics, or even religion as a whole; however all these groups were present prior to this and were never a source of trouble.

We are living in a different world in which political powers are establishing and nourishing extremist ideologies and generations. These politicians have the project, the expertise, and the will to propagate such extremist ideology and they are practically immune to punishment because the wrong parties are always held accountable. Who could have imagined that Mali would become an international battlefield after Afghanistan? The West is repeating the same mistake in Syria by allowing it to fall prey to extremists who are emotionally manipulate the general public under the pretext that they are their only source of salvation from the tyranny of the Assad regime. In reality, they are the only faction active on the scene because everybody else has left the arena.

Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya television. He is also the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in the daily newspapers of Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is a US post-graduate degree in mass communications. He has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs. He is currently based in Dubai.

 

©  EsinIslam.Com

Add Comments






© EsinIslam.Com Designed & produced by The Awqaf London. Please pray for us