After the Pharaoh

Who, or what, will replace Hosni Mubarak? Some say democracy, others chaos. It’s the question all Egyptians are now asking. No one has an answer. 

By Christopher Dickey

With Stephen Glain and Vivian Salama in Cairo

Newsweek International

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13530553/site/newsweek/page/3/

 

July 3-10, 2006 issue – During his recent weeks in prison, one of Egypt’s best-known bloggers, Alaa Abdel Fateh, had a terrible fantasy. What would happen to him if Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, 78, the man he loves to hate, passed away while Abdel Fateh was in the slammer? “I’m sure millions are actively praying for his sudden death,” he wrote in one of several postings that were smuggled out. “Normally I’d be happy. But now that I’m in jail it’s a scary thought.”

 

His nightmare scenario? That it would take months for order to be established, with who knows what result. The 24-year-old blogger wrote from the four- by six-meter cell he shared with five other prisoners: “Most likely no one but our immediate family will remember us until it is over. In my mind most people will continue living their lives normally. The huge bureaucracy will chug along, but all security organs will be paralyzed. No officer will wake up the next day and head for his post. Which means [the] prison will be abandoned.” What might follow, he dared not imagine.

The irony of Egypt today is that many people, even those who detest Mubarak, share Abdel Fateh’s misgivings about a future without the man who has been their ruler, their protector and some would say their jailer for almost 25 years. No matter how much they want to be rid of him, they cannot imagine, quite, who will be in charge and how order will be maintained. Will they be liberated? Or locked down even tighter than they were before? Will power pass from the father to the son, the suave 42-year-old Gamal Mubarak, as many expect? Or to the military? Or to the Islamists? Or will the country descend into chaos as all the contenders compete? The stability of the region, and what’s left of the fragile U.S. policy there, depends on an orderly transition. But so much political dust has gathered in Egypt that, once it’s kicked up, years could pass before it settles.

 

Just last summer, a contagious excitement about democratic change was sweeping the Middle East, encouraged and sometimes inspired by Bush administration policies and rhetoric. There had been a massive turnout for Iraq’s first elections, then huge protests that drove Syria’s troops out of Lebanon. In Egypt, Mubarak decided to allow opposition candidates to run against him for the first time in presidential elections.

But since then, the Iraqi quagmire has deepened. Lebanese politicians now live in terror after a long string of assassinations. Mubarak’s leading opponent in last year’s vote, Ayman Nour, languishes in prison with no further chance of appeal; Egyptian parliamentary elections were cut short and the results shamelessly rejiggered to limit the gains of the Muslim Brotherhood; new municipal elections have been postponed. Judges who rebelled at being forced to endorse the parliamentary fraud were prosecuted, reprimanded or reined in. The opposition has not been silenced, but fear hangs heavy in the air.

 

At the slightest hint of street protest, cohorts of riot police seal off whole sections of Cairo. Hired thugs with police protection are let loose on the dissidents. Mahmoud Hamza, a judge who tried to film one such crackdown in April, was left with internal bleeding and a broken arm. “I believe I am under surveillance and my phone is tapped,” he says, adding that his cell phone was taken and the calls on it traced. Hundreds have been arrested. Most are members of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is outlawed but also tolerated as a useful political enemy by a government that wants the threat of Islamism to be the only alternative. The Brothers are now the second largest party in Parliament, with 20 percent of the seats.

For many in egypt, lastyear’s dreams, this year’s bare-knuckled beatings, and the coming years’ growing uncertainties resemble the magical realism of Colombian novelist Gabriel García Márquez, whose works are popular throughout the Middle East. In his “Autumn of the Patriarch,” a decaying dictator has an “irrepressible passion to endure,” but dies just the same.

 

So now for Cairenes. “You feel like you are walking in its pages,” says Ibrahim Issa, an outspoken columnist in the daily Al Dustour. “There is a political culture of uncertainty.” Ghada Shahbender, an English teacher who cofounded the dissident Web site Shayfeen.com last year, worries about who, or what, might replace Mubarak. “If there is ‘divine intervention’,” she asks, employing a euphemism for the dictator’s death, “what can we fall back on? Will it be the military? The judicial system? Or chaos?”

 

Searching for a road map to the post-Hosni Mubarak future, intellectuals and businessmen in Cairo are talking about models that might guide Egypt’s course. As they mull over the China model, the Turkey model, the Algeria model, the Mexico model and so on, they sometimes sound like blind men trying to describe an elephant, each touching some separate part and coming up with a wildly different picture of the beast as a whole. Yet, from each description one learns something significant about the elephant—about Egypt and about the whole notion of democratic experiments in the Middle East.

 

“The Chinese model,” for example, is shorthand for a system in which the government remains strongly authoritarian while opening up its economy and profiting from free markets. With a little well-polished discourse about a “process” of political reform, this is essentially the design put forward by Gamal Mubarak, who now heads up the politburo of his father’s National Democratic Party. The reformist cabinet he helped install two years ago has won praise from the international financial community, and the numbers look good. The economy is growing at almost 6 percent a year. Foreign investment has tripled to $6 billion in three years. Tourist facilities have improved. A recent conference of the World Economic Forum in Sharm el-Sheikh was a showcase for Egyptian modernity and efficiency.

 

But there’s a major problem with the Chinese analogy: Egypt is not China. On the one hand—and this is good—even with the crackdowns in Cairo, the Egyptians allow more freedom of speech than Beijing. On the other hand, while Egypt may be a big market in the Arab world, it’s puny compared with the powerhouses of the East. The United States and Europe are not going to excuse Egypt’s political repression, as they basically do China’s, because of the potential to make enormous riches in the world’s biggest market. In fact, there’s a joke, repeated often in Cairo’s financial circles, about Mubarak chatting with Chinese President Hu Jintao before a state visit to Beijing. Hu asks him how many people he has. Mubarak replies: “70 million.” “Ah, well, then,” says Hu. “Bring them along!” The bitter truth for Egyptians is that the world economy has not discovered any pressing need for what they have to offer. “In America there are Chinese goods everywhere you look,” says Issa. “Do you see any Egyptian goods?”

 

Many members of the Egyptian elite hope (indeed, some pray) that the military will be the great stabilizing force in Egyptian life if politics takes a sharp turn toward Islamism or chaos after Hosni Mubarak dies—especially if Gamal tries, and fails, to succeed him. “Gamal is weak, he has no credentials,” says Hisham Kassem, editor of the independent daily Al Masri al Yom. “A civilian cannot run Egypt right now.”

 

The military analogy many people talk about is Turkey, where the uniformed services form what’s been called “the deep state,” the bedrock of stability. But there are problems with this model, too. For starters, even if you accept such a role for the brass, Turkey’s generals are wedded to a secular ideology, while the Egyptian military has no central idea to hold it together. (There are also concerns that the ranks may have been penetrated by Islamists like the ones who killed Mubarak’s predecessor, Anwar Sadat, during a parade in October 1981.) Moreover, the jealous rule of Hosni Mubarak, an Air Force general, has badly weakened the officer corps. There is no known equivalent of Pakistan’s Gen. Pervez Musharraf ready or able to step forward, and almost any Egyptian general who starts to look popular finds himself retired to a governorship, or worse. Field Marshal Abdul Halim Abu Ghazala, who saved the regime 20 years ago by rolling tanks into the streets to stop a mutiny by the riot police (yes, the riot police, who burned several hotels near the pyramids), has spent most of his time since then under what some of his friends describe as virtual (if comfortable) house arrest.

 

In the Algerian precedent, political liberalization was embraced by a would-be reformer at the top in the early 1990s, then crushed by the generals when Islamists scored massive victories at the polls. The civil war that followed cost hundreds of thousands of lives: not a very happy prospect for Egypt, but not a completely implausible one, either. As in Algeria, the military and security leadership might try to keep a low profile, pushing various civilians to the foreground. In Algeria during the worst fighting, people wouldn’t even name top generals. They referred to them collectively as “le pouvoir,” the power.

 

A few people make analogies between Egypt’s developing party dictatorship, based as it is less on ideology than on patronage, and the long-running rule of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) in Mexico. From the 1930s to the 1990s, all Mexican political life, such as it was, took place within the party. Any external threat, like the far left in the 1960s, was quite literally slaughtered. But one saving grace of the Mexican system was the commitment to one and only one term for any given president. That kept the political dynamic inside the party, at least, from becoming fatally rigid. Egypt has no such provision. Far from it.

 

Ultimately, of course, Egypt is Egypt, where the model of the pharaohs’ dynastic rule goes back 5,000 years. The machine is getting ready to put Gamal in power if Hosni can ever be persuaded to give up his throne. Yet Gamal, like most young pharaohs, has been guarded by the palace priests for so long that he may have very little idea how the Egyptian people live or act or think. His entourage is a nomenklatura of consumerism, comfortable in and with the West, but deeply unpopular on the street. His National Democratic Party (NDP) is a tired machine bereft of ideas that bases its power on thuggish coercion and shameless patronage. A party ought to have structured cadres, training, discipline, loyalty and a good feel for the grass roots, says American researcher Joshua Stacher: “The NDP is as legal as it gets, and the Muslim Brotherhood is about as illegal as it gets, but the NDP has none of these things and the Muslim Brothers have all these things.”

 

While Gamal Mubarak continues to cultivate his image in the West as a business-friendly leader, the opposition forces are discovering and cultivating each other—in prison. Soon after the long-haired, leftist Alaa Abdel Fateh was released on June 22 he told NEWSWEEK that he’d developed a great rapport with his fellow inmates, the Muslim Brothers. “It was a really incredible thing for me—the solidarity we experienced,” he said. “We were all arrested together supporting the same cause.” No longer willing—or able—to depend on Hosni Mubarak’s irrepressible passion to endure, Egyptians are, by design and default, shaping their own model for the future. Whatever that may turn out to be.

 

Hamas TV: Palestinian Media in Transition

From the TBS Academic Journal 

By Vivian Salama

EXCERPT: In late January 2006, the Fatah-controlled Palestinian government announced the closure of Hamas’ new Al Aqsa television network. The station’s demise after only a few weeks on air came as no surprise to those familiar with the tug-of-war that is Palestinian politics. Named in honor of the famous Jerusalem mosque of the same name, Al Aqsa TV had sought to reflect a softer, more civilly responsible side of Hamas, the militant Islamist group that is considered a terrorist organization by the US and Israel. In the months leading up to its January 9 launch, Al Aqsa TV already had sparked considerable controversy, and the Fatah-led government’s move to silence Al Aqsa after less than three weeks on the air ignited a firestorm of anger among Islamists in the West Bank and Gaza. Rael Abu Deir, head of the controversial network, admitted the station did not have a license but complained that he had not been notified of the decision prior to the announcement. “We have been trying for a year (to receive a license),” he told Al Jazeera. “But the information minister told us he was not yet taking applications.” With just three days left before the Palestinian territories’ first parliamentary election in a decade, it seemed that Hamas and the future of Al Aqsa were at the mercy of the ruling Fatah party.

Investors hesitate to put money into Gaza Strip

Vivian Salama
Middle East Times
February 2, 2006

 RAMALLAH, West Bank –  In the shanty villages of the West Bank and Gaza, since    

 well before talk of elections or Hamas were making headlines, Palestinians have been faced with a crisis more threatening than war or fundamentalism. “I worry every day about how I am going to feed my four children,” says Ragad Al Shawey, a taxi driver in Ramallah. “It is so difficult to find a job – I am lucky, but some people here stay months and years without working. This is why Hamas won, I think, because they will give people some new opportunities.”

While community services provided by a number of domestic groups, Hamas included, are welcomed by the poorest of Palestinians, they do not meet the demand for daily basic needs, especially in Gaza.

The Gaza Strip is one of the most densely populated areas in the world with an estimated 25,400 persons per kilometer, according to the Israeli ministry of planning, and so the pressure is on to rebuild both the infrastructure and the lives of its residents.

“Gaza has its own unique environment, circumstances and players,” explains Khaled Dozdar, head of the Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information in Jerusalem. “Violence will be concentrated in Gaza, because there, everyone is armed now. That said, entrance into Gaza, politically or economically, is equally a challenge.”

Experts agree that foreign direct investment in the Gaza Strip is crucial for ensuring the revitalization of the territory. According to Palestine’s former minister of economy, Mazen Sonnoqrot, $1.5 billion to $2 billion is needed annually for the first three years following Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza last August.

Sonnoqrot added that the Palestinian Authority (PA) was willing to give complete ownership rights to foreign firms looking to invest, emphasizing its commitment to eliminate any red tape that might interfere in the process.

“Certainly, there are advantages of investing in Gaza,” explains Ashraf Gamal, a senior advisor to Egypt’s minister of investment. “Being the first into a virgin market, improving relations between the two peoples.”

While eager to assist in the economic rebuilding of Gaza, Egyptian officials are trepid to encourage their nationals to put money in the war-torn territory, given the skyrocketing costs.

In Washington last November, just ahead of the annual World Bank and International Monetary Fund conference, Egyptian minister of finance Youssef Boutros-Ghali said that Egypt faced a continuous challenge convincing investors to set their sights on Gaza.

“The costs are higher than in India,” Ghali said. “Anyone who wants to invest there faces this problem. We have difficulties to convince investors because the costs of business are too high and the market is too small.”

“I do not think that Egyptians will start to invest in Gaza seriously now,” says Gamal. “First, the Egyptian market now is very lucrative and promising. The lack of stability, both political and militarily in Gaza is another reason. Capital usually flies away from such high risks. So, despite the high emotions by many Egyptians, this will not be enough to invest a lot of money, maybe small investments either for trial purposes or for emotional reasons.”

Further, economists stress that progress – or lack thereof – in redeveloping some of the major passages for goods, services and people in Gaza is not encouraging to investors who will desire a safe and efficient portal in and out of the territory.

Prior to the withdrawal, this had been a major point of contention for Palestinian authorities who constantly condemned what they considered suppressive security from the Israelis preventing both laborers and goods from flowing freely between Egypt and Gaza, particularly following the closure of Ashdod Harbor and Yasser Arafat International Airport.

Now, Israel says that it is willing to invest millions of dollars to reinforce border stability and promote easy accessibility for developing industries on both sides.

However, with last week’s resignation of Palestinian prime minister Ahmed Qurei and his administration, the lives of Gazans struggling to make ends-meet and rebuild their tiny territory will ultimately be put on hold for the time being.

“We are trying to find a solution for everyone, but most important are the Palestinians,” says an Egyptian delegate in Ramallah who requested anonymity. “As much as Egyptians can benefit from investing in Gaza, I don’t think we can even discuss this seriously until there is a safe passage in and out of Gaza, a free passage to the West Bank and the marina and airport is fully functional.”

“People in Gaza have to have something that they want to keep – that they will be afraid to lose,” adds Mohammed Assem Ibrahim, Egypt’s ambassador to Israel. “But they don’t want it to be destroyed again. In this regard, I will venture to say Israel has interests to do the same, not necessarily to invest directly, but to facilitate and encourage the international community to come and to take part.”

Islam is the Solution

Hamas gains ground in historic Palestinian vote

By Vivian Salama

Daily Star Egypt

January 26, 2006

EAST JERUSALEM:  Across from the Damascus Wall on Salah El Din Street in East Jerusalem – the city’s Arab section – journalists and television cameras surround a young man as he professes in broken English his desire for peace, and greater opportunity for the Palestinians. 

            “I hope one day we live together – peace, no killing,” said Atef Badran, 22, outside the main polling station in East Jerusalem. 

            After getting their soundbite, the cameras leave.  Realizing that I speak Arabic, Badran looks around as though to ensure that they’d all gone away.  Then he continues.

            “The only answer for peace, for change for the Palestinians, is for Hamas to take control,” he says, almost whispering.  “They are not criminals.  They are not warriors.  We’ve seen what Fatah can and cannot do.  Hamas is the best representation of the Palestinians and the only ones who can make a difference in the lives of those who need in the most.”     

            Early opinion polls leading up to yesterday’s historic election – the first in which Hamas participates – indicated that the militant Islamic group might walk away with as much as 40 percent of the newly-expanded 132-seat legislature, on the tail of the ruling Fatah party, under Abbas.  Concerns are high among Israelis, as well as neighboring countries with moderate, secular governments – such as Egypt and Jordan – that an Islamic stronghold in the Palestinian parliament might further aggravate decades of tension. 

            Voting in East Jerusalem has been a point of contention between Palestinian and Israeli authorities as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas threatened to postpone elections should the city’s 3 million Palestinians be barred from voting.  Last week, Israel’s cabinet, under acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, voted unanimously to allow voting in East Jerusalem, though Hamas was banned from campaigning there. 

“Don’t think that just because they prohibited Hamas from campaigning here that they have no representation – on the contrary, the Arabs of Jerusalem support Hamas,” added Badran.  “People around the Arab world are realizing the benefits of having Islamists in control.”   

            Indeed, the campaign slogan “Islam is the Solution” has gained ground outside of the Palestinian territories as well.  Just over a month ago, Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood saw unprecedented gains in parliamentary elections, winning 88 of Egypt’s 144-elected seats.  Running under the slogan “Islam is the solution,” independent candidates supported by a reformed Muslim Brotherhood, relied less on touting Islamic ideologies of shar’ia law, and more on the basic principles of government and humanity. 

            “The major concern now is that the gains of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the first time participation by Hamas might enhance other Islamic movements,” explains Khaled Dozdar, head of the Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information in Jerusalem.  “The whole region is experiencing this.  They are bringing dogmatism to the region via another form of tyranny – dogma, not just to the peace process, but to the socio-economic level.  The only side to blame for this is the authorities because this is the complete result of years of neglect and misuse of power.”

            “For me, it isn’t about voting for Hamas, it’s about a change of power,” says Adel Adwayat, a native of Jerusalem.  “I think that just like the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas will grow in strength because they are working a real political campaign, not a campaign of fear as they have done in the past.”

            During the first intifadad, Hamas was founded in the Gaza Strip in 1987 as a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.  The group’s military wing dedicated itself to the destruction of the State of Israel.  When the group rejected the Oslo Accords, however, it opened the door for Fatah to engage in dialogue with the West.  It is the rejection of the Oslo Accords and firm stance against Israel that some experts believed actually boosted Hamas’s support in the region.

            “The people are comforted knowing that Hamas is political active,” says Muslim Brotherhood spokesman, Essam Al-Arian.  “We support all the Palestinian people.  This is not an ordinary election because it will decide the fate of this conflict.  Everyone will see that the Palestinians support the Resistance Group, not the corrupted one.  The people are comforted knowing that Hamas is politically active.” 

            Despite their reputation for militant activity, Hamas is active on the community level, running preschools, youth clubs, and health clinics.  It has regularly provided financial assistance to the needy people of Palestine.  Despite their civic contributions, however, Egyptian officials have adamantly supported the ruling Fatah party as some fear Hamas might benefit from the vulnerability of the Gaza Strip following the withdrawal of the Israeli military last August. 

“Total chaos will equally affect the two neighboring countries – Egypt and Jordan, as well as Israel,” says Dozdar.

“Hamas was not born yesterday – Israel is showing they are afraid for nothing,” insists Mohammed Asem Ibrahim, Egypt’s Ambassador to Israel.  “At the same time, if Hamas does interfere in the process taking place these coming days, then of course, Israel has a point to say that there are no partners for peace here.  And it is the responsibility of Egypt and Jordan, given their peace treaties with Israel, that they play a role in this process.”

More than 35 delegates have been sent from Egypt to monitor the electoral process in the West Bank and Gaza.  Last year, some 500 international monitors traveled to the Palestinian territories to monitor the first presidential elections since the death of longtime leader, Yasser Arafat.  Egyptians hold a stake in overseeing the withdrawal and rebuilding of the Gaza Strip, as lax security and governing could expose the Sinai to exported fundamentalism.  Still, with poverty and lagging revitalization in Gaza, many believe it will boost Hamas’s reputation among Palestinians as the people’s party.          

“Remember, the enemy of our enemy is our friend,” notes Al-Arian.  “I think Israel’s restriction against Hamas will only add to their power and popularity.”

      

           

Muslim Brotherhood Leader Akef Spells Out His Ideas for Democracy

By Vivian Salama

Daily Star Egypt

 

CAIRO: Just as an opposition meeting at the Journalists’ Syndicate was winding down last week, a very different type of gathering was commencing at the Lawyers’ Syndicate next door.  From around the corner, one could hear the thunderous call by hundreds of male voices repeatedly chanting, “God is great.”  There was no mistaking this group’s affiliation. 

For whatever image the Muslim Brotherhood (Akhwan El Muslimeen) may project, history reveals the Brotherhood of today may in fact be a gentler, more tolerant organization, whose political agenda preaching for peaceful democracy has often overshadowed its more commonly known push for a rigorous Islamic government.  At age 77, with risk of losing support to some of the younger, more liberal movements which have spurred up in recent years, the Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood has gotten a face lift so to find its place in this age of reform.  With a presence in 70 countries, a target audience of the fastest growing religion in the world – some 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide – and dozens of Islamic organizations spawned off of it, the Muslim Brotherhood has a choice.  It can stay true to his age-old ideologies, or evolve with the times. 

Maybe it has done both.  The group’s soon-to-be 77 year old leader, Mohammed Mahdi Akef, whose soft-spoken, no-nonsense rhetoric has won him mixed reviews on the world stage since being elected into his role in January 2004, says it is the group’s long history and experience that has kept it in touch with the needs of the Egyptian people.  “We have a role in the Egyptian society,” he says.  “By the confession of all people, the Muslim Brotherhood is the biggest community that exists on the Egyptian streets.  There is no democracy in Egypt but it is a dictatorship that is coming from the roots.  There is no democracy of any sort in Egypt.”

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 at the climax of British colonialism in Egypt.  A young school teacher by the name Hassan Al-Banna, angered by what he considered British thievery of Arab culture and ideals, called for Muslims to reject all Western influences.  Their mission would expand as an effort to prepare society to spread Islamic culture through any means possible, be it in the media, at mosques, through public organizations, at universities, or through the government. 

As time elapsed, colonialism ended, and the Brotherhood was not satisfied with the direction Egyptian politics was headed.  Egypt went from being a monarchy to a police state.  The Muslim Brotherhood felt that Egypt’s government violated the laws of Islam and Shari’ah through means of corruption.  On the flipside, the government, fearing they would be overthrow by the Brotherhood, played the defense.  There were assassination attempts on government officials, including President Gamal Abdel Nasser.  In response, there were thousands of Brotherhood members arrested across the Arab world. 

It would be long before the government and Muslim Brotherhood would find it in their power to carry on a somewhat harmonious existence – albeit superficially.  The group has remained vocal about several key issues – particularly the imprisonment of hundreds of their members, a move they call unjust, and their restriction from running for government positions on an official platform.  Sitting as independents, Brotherhood supporters now hold 13 seats in Egypt’s 454-seat legislature.

“The tyrannical countries that depend on the security forces, they can’t achieve reform by themselves,” presses Akef.  “They must first communicate with the people for reform to exist.  Good steps toward reform must come from the presidency in order to avoid bloodshed.”

In recent weeks, reformist movements in Egypt have become more outspoken than ever – particularly following the May 25 referendum vote where nearly a dozen people – mostly women and journalists – reported being abused by plain-clothes police and National Democratic Party (NDP) supporters.  “The people are tired.  They are in pain.  They are against tyranny,” says Akef.  “[The government] must call out to the people and see what they need first.  Without this initiative, maybe there will be reform, but not for a very long time.”

It is imperative, opposition movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Kafaya (Enough) stress that the government refrains from obstructing the public’s right to free speech and demonstration.  The government maintains that the Egyptian people are free to do so – Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif emphasizing the point on a recent visit to Washington.  Akef laughs, saying he has yet to see even the most peaceful, symbolic protests received without hostility. 

“We decided to make a public convention and say our opinions, but [Mubarak] actually refused,” says Akef.  “We asked to make marches in the streets, and he also refused.  It was all just symbolic, but he refused.”

In a recent interview with the Daily Star Egypt, Kafaya leader George Ishaq emphasized the importance of all opposition groups – including the Muslim Brotherhood – to work together, saying “there will never be change if we don’t stand together against the oppression.”  Akef downplayed the notion of any partnership, as Kafaya pushes for a more secular rule than the Muslim Brotherhood would support.  Akef’s response simply was “I work with all people that want reform.  We want reform and we support it.  We support [Ishaq].”

To stress the Brotherhood’s political agenda, Akef in recent weeks called out to all the brothers to refrain from raising the Quran at protests, saying that the demonstrations are open to all people, not just members of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Recently, Al-Azhar issued a fatwa calling protests “haram,” as they interfere in the general order of society.    Akef is quick to brush it off, saying that he himself is an active protestor. 

Still, this group which spawned Hamas, planted the root for Al-Qaida and now publicly endorses peaceful reform and democracy is facing a greater challenge than ever.  Despite it’s diverse appeal worldwide, the struggle remains in their effort to be viewed primarily on the basis of their political agenda, and less so on their religious ideologies, as the Islamic world continues to combat stereotypes of terrorism and violence. 

A suicide bombing in Cairo’s Khan El-Khalili bazaar in early April which killed two French tourists and an American, an injured 18 others, instilled a fear in many of a revived Islamic movement in Egypt.  The attack came months following terrorist attacks in two Sinai resort towns.  Two more attacks would follow in Cairo.  The Muslim Brotherhood was quick to condemn the attacks, calling them “cowardly.”  However, they would add that the attacks were a “reaction to the injustice” of President Mubarak’s cap on the opposition. 

In the United States, a report released by the national commission investigating the attacks on New York and Washington on September 11th 2001 revealed that the architect of the attacks, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, confessed to having roots with the Muslim Brotherhood.  In the report, Mohammed told interrogators that his inspiration to carry out a jihad came from his days as a member of Kuwait’s Muslim Brotherhood, attending desert youth camps at age 16.

Akef stresses that it is the duty of Muslims worldwide to carry out a jihad appropriately against those who look to rob them of their homeland.  He says only in such circumstances will he condone violence.  “Jihad for Muslims starts with a personal jihad,” he explains.  “It’s not only Islam, it’s the entire world.  To invade another’s land is a crime. When Israel invades another land, it’s a crime.  When America does it, it’s a crime.  When the French went to Algeria it was a crime. We fight them until they flee.”

The Muslim Brotherhood, according to Akef, has no intention of making peace with Israel at any time, saying that any Arab country that does is serving the interests of the United States.  “We will never acknowledge Israel because it is a group of people coming from around the world to invade a land that is not theirs and to kick out the people who live there,” he says.  “[The Arab countries] are agents of the United States.  All of the Arab countries are submitting to America.”

Acknowledging that Egypt does receive some $2.2 billion in economic assistance from the United States annually – second only to Israel – Akef insists that the Arab countries, Egypt especially, should learn to properly utilize its own natural wealth and resources.  “Why should we take money?  Why can’t we rely on ourselves?  We’ve got resources like petroleum, the Suez Canal, agricultural, we’re one of the wealthiest countries in the world but the tyrannical people made it one of the poorest countries.”  The Muslim Brotherhood is an example, he says, as it receives funding only through its own supporters.

Still, Akef stands strong against his critics.  “I don’t care what anybody says – the agents, external or internal.  There are people in Egypt that are getting money from outside just to stand against the Muslim Brotherhood.  The Muslim Brotherhood is a mature community existing in the Egyptian streets.  It’s got its weight and its trust and they are scared from this.”

In a country which has remained comparatively liberal, critics of the Muslim Brotherhood fear that should they come to power, adoption of Islamic rule will result in the backward motion of society.  A recent editorial in the Washington Times makes a comparison between Akef and the Muslim Brotherhood with Khomeini and the Islamic regime of Iran.  Akef strongly opposes this, saying that the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime have stark differences.  “Our code is on peaceful guidelines,” he says.  “The violence is only under one condition – when our land and our countries are occupied.  When someone tries to get our land and our country, we are against it.  Any other situation, we never use it.”

Still he is quick to dismiss that any nation – be it Iran or America – has got the right idea when it comes to governing its people.  The missing factor, he says, is true democracy.  “The government that works right must respect the people’s opinion.  There is no government that respects the people’s opinions.”

Akef looks to the future with great optimism that one day a member of the Muslim Brotherhood will be chosen by the people to lead this nation.  “We won’t go ahead unless the people choose him,” he notes.  “In this time, the people will be convinced with the codes and ideologies of the Muslim Brotherhood.  And when the Brotherhood says something, the people will agree.”

In the meantime, Akef is not encouraged by talks of referendum changes and multi-candidate elections, a move he calls an attempt to “confuse the people.”  He even brushes off questions surrounding the use of international election monitors.  “America has eyes on Egypt more than the Egyptian government.  USA knows about Egypt more than Hosni Mubarak knows Egypt,” says Akef. 

Whatever the future holds for the Egyptian people, Akef communicates that the Muslim Brotherhood is there to support them through their struggle toward a democratic existence.  “Egyptians have been under this forcible burden,” he says.  “But at the same time, the Egyptian people are good, wise people.  I myself am optimistic about a good future.”

(Me Interviewing Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mahdi Akef, Courtesy of Daina Moussa)

NDP WORKS TO “GET OUT THE VOTE”

By Vivian Salama

Daily Star Staff

CAIRO:  Imagine a tent the size of a football stadium housing hundreds of campaign workers.  Everywhere you look, people dressed in business casual attire manning phones; evaluating incoming poll results; and entering data into computers.  Along side them, politicians monitored television sets, did live telephone interviews, and reviewed data.  This wasn’t Florida.  It wasn’t London or Paris.  This was Heliopolis – home to the National Democratic Party’s (NDP) “Get Out the Vote” campaign tent. 

Some 500 campaign volunteers, organized in groups to monitor Egyptian election results by governorate, worked some 17 hours to determine Hosni Mubarak’s progress in the polls during this, the first ever multi-candidate election in Egypt’s history.  The ambiance was calm yesterday afternoon as volunteers chatted with their fellow supporters and sipped on cold beverages.  As the clock struck the top of the hour, the scene quickly transformed into a more casino-like air.  Bells rang as membership secretariat Ahmed Ez took to the microphone to address volunteers.

“Call your governorate’s polling station representatives,” announced Ez.  “Ask them how they’re doing, how many votes they have received at their station.”

Suddenly the race was on.  Party representatives grabbed their pencils and dashed to the phones.  Noses sunk into notebooks as workers quickly scribbled down numbers.  They passed the notebooks on to men at a computer – one at every table – who would register the information into a campaign database. 

“We’ve developed a special software program,” a senior NDP official, who asked not to be identified, explained to the Daily Star.  “We have people in each polling station to facilitate the movement at the polling station.  On an hourly basis, the group will be reporting in.  A table representing each governorate will be working to track the people, through phone calls and input into computers.  Our computer software has a program built in to monitor voting patterns.”

Experts say the president’s success is a virtual guarantee.  NDP officials seem confident, saying they don’t expect the final results for at least three days from Election Day.  President Mubarak voted early Wednesday along with his wife Suzanne and son, Gamal.    

“There have been a good number of people voting,” explained Ahmed Hamouda, a party representative monitoring the Assuit governorate, who says he couldn’t vote himself since he reported for duty at 7am and expected to stay past midnight.  “We have seen no problems out of the ordinary.  Once in a while we have people who aren’t finding their names on the lists, but that’s about it.”

 

 “We’ve had little problems here and there,” explained a representative at the Port Said table who asked to remain anonymous.  “There were problems with the telephone signals, getting through to our representatives at each station.  Also we had some people who were not finding their names.  These are normal problems.”

The Daily Star spoke to one man who says his name was written improperly on the list at the Mohammed Farid School for boys in Shoubra.  “There was a letter missing from my name on the list, so they told me I cannot vote.  I am not really upset by it because I don’t know if my vote would have made a big difference anyway,” explained Ezzet Saleb, an Ayman Nour supporter. 

“The government and the people of Egypt are intent on having a free and fair election before the world and show the world that this country of 7000 years of civilization is capable of coming up with its own process, it’s own democratic process and going ahead with the political reform plan it has promised to have in place,” explained Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif in a press conference Tuesday.  The Prime Minister himself voted early Wednesday then carried on with his day, business as usual.  He did not engage in campaign activities, according to his spokesman.

Yesterday, Gamal Mubarak was front and center in the campaign tent along with party leaders, Kamal El-Shazli, Minister of State for the People’s Assembly Affairs, and Minister of Investment, Mahmoud Mohieldin – all of whom have played an instrumental role in the 19-day campaign. 

A majority of the volunteers making up the “Get Out the Vote” team consist of university students who have, over the past few weeks, been recruited by NDP officials to take part in this momentous event.  NDP officials say the team would not monitor the results of the opposition.  Despite the tent’s impressive appearance, complete with air conditioners, television sets, speaker system, computers and more, party officials say the facility still falls within the LE 10 million budget cap that all campaigns must abide by. 

“The campaign budget will be reviewed by the General Accounting office and released at some point next week,” the official explained.  “This is a new experience for all of us.  The president has set up an ambitious program and has set up very clear priorities if he is elected.”

The Future of the Muslim Brotherhood

PART II

The youngest members of Egypt’s largest – but banned – party talk politics and more

 The Daily Star Egypt continues its talk with the youngest members of Egypt’s largest, but banned, party about politics, jihad, and life in general in the second and final part of this series. 

Click here to read Part I. 

(to read the PDF version of this story, click here-pdf-ikhwan-youth-part-2.pdf) By Vivian Salama 

CAIRO – With a presence in 70 countries, and a following soon to outnumber any religion, – some 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide today – the Egyptian based Muslim Brotherhood (El-Ikhwan El-Muslimeen) – outlawed; feared; followed; the root of dozens of Islamic organizations – faces a dilemma.  Famed for its orthodox disciplines and fierce stance on a number of issues, both political and religious, the group has recently revealed a tamer, more tolerant and more political side as it looks to hop on the bandwagon of reform.  The question remains, in the face off between politics and Islam, can the group maintain its overwhelming global influence?  

               “If you go to the street and you ask people their political views, without even mentioning Muslim Brotherhood, you will find people saying the exact views as us and agreeing with our position on most issues,” says Asmaa Gamal, 20, studying commerce at Cairo University.  “Once you bring up the Muslim Brotherhood’s name, you will find that the people get scared.  The word alone scares people – it’s outlawed by the government.”“There is a big problem facing the Islamic movements,” insists Ibrahim El-Houdaiby, 22, a senior at the American University in Cairo (AUC) studying political science.  “People in the West teach from their understanding – especially when talking about fundamentalism – the root of the word.  The meaning in the West differs completely from the meaning here.”

              So when discussing Jihad, Islamic holy war, members of the Muslim Brotherhood agree that there is a stark difference in the way it is interpreted versus the way it is taught.  In an interview with the Daily Star Egypt last June, the Brotherhood’s Supreme Guide, Madhi Akef explained, “Jihad for Muslims starts with a personal jihad,” he said.  “Jihad is against the enemy.  The infidels, when they come after our land, we must jihad against them.  When the Americans come into Iraq, I must jihad against them.  When the Americans go into Afghanistan I go after them.  To invade another’s land is a crime.”

“This doesn’t mean we’ll say, ‘America, do what you want and we’ll keep quiet,’” adds Ibrahim.  “We will not hit cities when it is haram to hit them.  It is haram to kill civilians to have nothing to do with the situation.”

            

             This group, which underpinned Hamas, planted the root for Al-Qaida and now publicly endorses ideologies of peaceful reform and democracy, has combated negative publicity in this era of a global war on terrorism.  In Egypt, a series of deadly bombings – in Sinai, the Khan El-Khalili market and most recently, in Sharm El-Sheikh has instilled fears in the minds of Egyptian authorities of a revived Islamic Movement.  Even prior to that,  a report released by the United States commission investigating the attacks on New York and Washington on September 11^th 2001 revealed that the architect of the attacks, Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, confessed to ties with the Muslim Brotherhood.  

           

              “As for whether jihad is understood by those abroad, my opinion is it is our role to make them understand,” explains Ahmed Ibrahim, 24, a medical student at Cairo University.  “We should at least clear the picture, although the fact that it is misunderstood is not a mistake of Muslims.”

     “There is a difference between jihad and war,” says Lubna Mohamed, 20, a political-science major at Cairo University.  “Violence is different than jihad.  If someone hits a place, you want to do something about it, think of strategies.  But I can’t say its purpose is violence or its purpose is terrorism.  Our lives aren’t about that.”

           

                       The young men and women gave details of different situations where they felt the deadly acts of a small group bared negative impact on the image of Islam worldwide.  Incidents such as the July bombings on the London Underground and last year, bombings to the Madrid Metro – all acts, the group insists, which were violations against the core teachings of Islam. 

           

                    “If they were Muslims, should their actions speak for all Muslims?” asks Osama Ghobish, 21, who studies electrical engineering at Cairo University.  “We are Muslims trying to promote the message of Islam in the correct light.”

                  

                   The group generally supports the actions of Arabs in Palestine and Iraq who are – in their words – defending their roots and homeland, not instigating violence and hatred as in the attacks on New York and Washington or to London and Madrid, or even to Sharm El-Sheikh last month.  This week, as the world watched the last of 8,500 Israeli settlers withdraw from Gaza, many of them by force, these young members of the Muslim Brotherhood shake their heads in pity, calling it merely a song and dance by Israel’s Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon.

                    “The history of this issue is as if we are all just running around after one another,” says Lubna, the others agreeing.  “In a few years you’ll see, [Sharon] will reenter Gaza.  I am sure of this.  This is the pattern throughout the history of Israel.  He wants to give them something to make them drop their guard a little bit.”

                     “This is the biggest change and the biggest steps taken in our region so far, is that the Jews withdraw from Gaza,” says Mahmoud Moustafa, 19, a commerce student at Cairo University, optimistically. 

                    “Sharon did this withdrawal but from start to finish, he’s doing this for his own benefit,” rebuttals Ibrahim.  “People shouldn’t believe that this is done for the benefit of the Palestinians – Sharon killed the roots of the Palestinians.  This is known.  Sharon is the opposite of peace.”           

                   “The photos of Israelis crying and clinging to each other, and the image of the Palestinians celebrating, it is sending to the foreigners an incorrect picture of what is happening,” Ahmed adds. 

                    The group is more moderate in their criticism of America, admitting that just as Americans view the Arabs in a certain light, the Arabs too will view them in their own perspective.  Still, where politics is concerned, there is skepticism among the youngsters toward the unadulterated actions of US President George W. Bush and his motives for intervening in Arab affairs.  With no evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and a maintained affirmed ties with Israel, anti-American sentiment will only continue to grow, says the group. 

                  “America wants to take over Iraq for their own benefits, whether it be oil or reasons yet to surface,” exclaims Ibrahim.  “[Bush] wants to take over Syria. In Jordan as well, he’s got King Abdullah in his pocket.  He wants to keep Israel close as well.”            Osama jumps in.  “There is one aspect we don’t focus on, and it’s an important one.  Is [Bush] really moving in on the basis of true information or intelligence?  Maybe they have convinced Americans that he has a point or that he knows what he is doing.”            “Of course it needs to be pointed out that our views on American politics will likely differ completely from the views of the American citizens on their own domestic and foreign relations,” says Ahmed. 

               Politics isn’t the only area of varying perspectives.  Even among Egyptian citizens, the degree to which Islam should play in government affairs is an issue of sharp debate.  In a country which has remained comparatively liberal, critics of the Muslim Brotherhood fear that should they come to power, adoption of Islamic rule will result in the backward motion of society.  It’s no secret – since the Iranian Revolution in the late 1970s, a new ideology spread.  Egypt became considerably more conservative, many Muslims abandoning their European fashions for a more modest and traditional garb.  Young men began to grow their beards in a show of unpretentiousness; more women began veiling their hair.  Is it because people have become more religious, or has religion becoming more open? 

                 “I think it is a simple progression of time,” speculates Ahmed.  “The ideas [of Islam] spread.  The ideas were always there, but we repeated its teachings and we spread its blessings to people, and the people in turn adopted the message.  Islam does not focus on an external or outer image, for example the tarha or beard.”           

               “The details of religion that have begun to surface,” adds Lubna.  “People might say bad things about mohagabat (veiled women), but your image should reflect on the way you think.”           

             “Islam says a young person should educate himself well, respectful in his life, and pray,” adds Osama.           

             “A lot of people were afraid at firsts but when the idea was spread a little bit then the people really started to be interested and respect the idea,” says Mahmoud.  “And it is a personal thing before anything.  Just as a man would hope for a woman to wear higab and stay modest, he too should make sure to take care of himself and make sure he looks good.  This is the idea of Islam.”           

           The message this group is communicating is that they are no different than anyone else.  They have very set political and religious beliefs, but in their words, it makes them no greater or lesser threat than a communist, for example.  The young men are witty and mischievous; they talk of football.  The women are intelligent and polite; they discuss clothes and gossip quietly about boys.  They all share dreams of having a family and living a productive life in which they might one day make a difference.

            “You won’t find our dreams different from other people’s dreams,” concludes Ibrahim.  “In our movement, we dream to move the people.  We need to get them involved.  We shouldn’t wait for someone to change things.  We need to change it ourselves first to create a real difference.”

The Future of the Muslim Brotherhood

The youngest members of Egypt’s largest – but banned – party talk politics and more

The Daily Star Egypt talks to the youngest members of Egypt’s largest, but banned, party about politics, religion, and life in general in a two part series.  Click here for Part Two.

(to read the PDF version of this story, click here-pdf-ikhwan-youth-part-1.pdf) 

 

by Vivian Salama

 

CAIRO – They are feared and outlawed equally as much as they are supported and renown worldwide.  The Muslim Brotherhood (El-Ikhwan El-Muslimeen), perhaps the most misunderstood political movement in existence, arguably has the greatest number of supporters in Egypt, and possibly, across the Arab world.  With a presence in 70 countries, a target audience of the fastest growing religion in the world – some 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide – and dozens of Islamic organizations spawned off of it, its influence is far beyond the reaches of Egypt’s government and any other.  Yet for decades, they have attached to their name the leprous image of political bad boys, their candidates for office banned from the election ballot should they bare the party’s name. 

            In this era of political transition, as weathered generals sit in their offices and engaging solely in a war of words, their soldiers – young, passionate, in some cases, naïve – head to the frontlines day in and day out defending their cause.  Perhaps they are the most accurate depiction of a party and their views – honest, refreshing, and unacquainted with the politics behind the politics.  This week, four young men and two young women of the Muslim Brotherhood came together for a discussion held exclusively with the Daily Star Egypt, to talk politics, religion and life in general.  While certain topics riled them up more than others, they look to communicate that they are just average young adults who hold politics and religion close to their hearts. 

            Most surprisingly, as strong-minded as each is about their political views, of the six, two of them have not told their parents they are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, a third says his parents do not know to what degree he is involved.  The reason across the board is fear.  Those whose parents are not aware of their involvement say they hide it simply because they don’t want their parents to worry. 

            “They would not refuse it, but I do not like to make them worried,” admits Lubna Mohamed, 20, a political-science major at Cairo University.  “Generally here in Egypt, even if you’re a communist, the idea of getting involved in politics, holding a political stand on anything is not easy, it comes with consequences.”

            “The idea is that maybe the father and mother will support the movement with their heart, but they don’t want their son or daughter to be involved,” explains Osama Ghobish, 21, who studies electrical engineering at Cairo University.  “My parents know I am in the Muslim Brotherhood, but I’m not sure they realize how much I am with them.” 

            Even those who have told their parents say it is a tough thing for any parent to accept.  As opposition movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Kafaya grow more outspoken by the day, the government’s grip equally tightens in the face of growing resistance.  In recent months, sweeping arrests of members of the Muslim Brotherhood have shaken the group out of a period of surveillance and reflection, and into active-duty, only this time, with a slightly different edge.  Under the leadership of Supreme Guide Mahdi Akef, today’s Muslim Brotherhood appears gentler, more peaceful, and placing greater emphasis of their political platform, not a religious agenda.  Akef has even instructed his members not to raise the Quran at protests for it overshadows the Brotherhood’s true message – political reform.

            Just this week, Akef released a statement confirming that the Muslim Brotherhood would not endorse President Hosni Mubarak in his bid for re-election during Egypt’s first ever multi-candidate campaign.  It comes as no surprise.  However as candidates such as El-Ghad party leader Ayman Nour sought support from the Brotherhood, the outlawed group is refusing them one by one.  The fact remains, Egypt’s largest party will not participate in this historic election, but just as significant, they have chosen not to boycott the ballot as many opposition groups have.  While members of the Muslim Brotherhood are permitted to run as independents, no independents are among the ten candidates approved by the Electoral Commission as they could not secure the backing of 250 elected officials, such as parliament which is dominated by Mubarak’s National Democratic Party (NDP).

            “Within the 10 candidates, it’s not even a question of whether there are two or three better than Mubarak.  No one is good,” insists Ibrahim El-Houdaiby, 22, a senior at the American University in Cairo (AUC) studying political science.  “I don’t care about the person, I care about his program.  If we see that a candidate’s program was a good, strong program, of course we would support him.  Anyone besides Mubarak would be a step forward, unless it is Gamal [Mubarak].”              “If you look at the people we have here in the country, ask yourself, can any of them be president?  It’s difficult,” says Asmaa Gamal, 20, studying commerce at Cairo University.  “Even the publicity that’s written in the newspapers about the candidates, they are showing all of these strange personalities running for president.”              “How can you expect change when the people must walk down your path, must enter your door in order to reach the other side?” questions Lubna, the others nod in agreement.  “The other point we want to communicate is that it is not whether or not someone from the Muslim Brotherhood is elected, but that it is a natural process, that it is coming from the people and the candidate is someone that the people want,” adds Mahmoud Moustafa, 19, a commerce student at Cairo University.  “However, I believe that these elections are just a big show and that’s it.”     While Egypt has remained moderately liberal next to countries in the Gulf, the Muslim Brotherhood continues to push for a Shar’ia based government, where Islam and politics work hand in hand.  The country has, under rule of the NDP, managed to cling to secularism, as citizens adopt a more conservative outer image.  The young people of the Muslim Brotherhood say the idea of secular and non-secular is an unnatural concept conjured up by the West

“The idea of non-secularism originally is coming from the West,” says Lobna.  “The idea of Islam, as a non-secular government, it doesn’t mean that a Sheikh is running the government.  It simply means that we follow the rules of Shar’ia.  There is no discrimination.” 

“We don’t say that if the Brotherhood holds the government that they are going to enforce the ideologies of Islam in the country,” explains Ahmed Ibrahim, 24, a medical student at Cairo University.  “We would try to enforce what is naturally considered right and wrong.  The ideas of [Islam] would be there, but it does not have anything to do with having a non-secular government.”

“The people think that we will drastically change things and have a religious authority running the country and that we will change things to a way we see fit,” adds Mahmoud.  “It will stay as it is, a secular country, which under the constitution would be supported by Islam.  Nothing new would come out of it.”

The Brotherhood’s leader, Mahdi Akef himself, told the Daily Star Egypt last June that there is no perfect government in the world – citing polar examples such as the United States and Iran as both missing the point to true, honest democratic governance.  “The government that works right must respect the people’s opinion,” explained Akef.  “There is no government that respects the people’s opinions.”

The young people of the Muslim Brotherhood agree.  When asked to define democracy, most of them initially responded, with a chuckle, “Not Egypt!”

“Democracy is the ideas of the people,” responds Asmaa.  “The people choose, they decide.  They govern themselves.”

“Democracy is the opinion of the majority,” adds Ibrahim.  “We don’t look at the government for the first steps.  The government is the result of a strong civil society.” 

“Democracy is the opposite of what we are in now, that’s for starters,” says Ahmed, sparking giggles from the group.  “It is an idea of free expression.  It would give people the opportunity to express his or her own point of view, and the situation should be the opinion of the majority and that a person can make himself heard.”

 

Meet the Incumbent: Mubarak looks to appeal to an evolving nation

By Vivian Salama

Daily Star Staff

 

CAIRO:  It wasn’t the fact that there was a press conference held yesterday at the Mubarak Campaign headquarters that was so atypical; it was the way they held it.  On the tail of a visit by President Hosni Mubarak, who had just be briefed by his campaign staff, reporters filed into the auditorium – as they entered, many were handed headsets so to ensure no one was left lost in translation.  Transcripts of the President’s Wednesday night address were made available in English and Arabic.  The setting itself was almost superfluously comfortable; air-conditioning set at a perfect temperature; theater-style chairs with a high reclining back; television cameras restricted to the back;  microphones strategically lined up on a single podium in the front.

            Then there was the décor.  No longer is the National Democratic Party (NDP) simply calling out for voters to say “yes to Mubarak,” they’re telling them why.  “Mubarak 2005: Leadership and crossing into the future,” the signs read; an image of a robust President Mubarak, sleeves rolled up, placed strategically on the far right hand side of the poster.  All along the left and right walls, silent testaments of dedication to his leadership – each poster depicting a overjoyed commoner in his or her natural habitat in areas across Egypt; “Mubarak 2005” written on top. 

To some, it may not be what the President is saying that interests them so much as it is the way he is saying it.  While the Egyptian people are accustomed to seeing their president’s face decorating billboards across the country, they are not used to seeing a neighborly, softer side to the 77-year old president, now campaigning for his fifth six-year term.  Something has definitely changed. 

“[President Mubarak] has experienced a lot in his life that makes him sympathetic to the problems of the common people,” Mohamed Kamal, political secretariat for the NDP and head of the campaign, told reporters yesterday.  “We will work with the president.  We will have contact with the voters directly and through the media, so the voters know what to expect.”

Kamal was joined by Hossam Badrawi, a member of the People’s Assembly, and Mahmoud Mohieldin, Minister of Investment.  In keeping with an effort to reform inside and out, the President has outlined a platform, or a list of political and economic objectives should he be elected.  The goal, campaign leaders insist, is to focus on the future, and realize that the president can evolve with his citizens.    

To ensure the legitimacy and transparency of their campaign, Mubarak’s staff says they are committed toward working hand in hand with the media during this three week period.  Daily bulletins will be issued listing the President’s schedule, his meeting and public appearances.  The First Lady, Suzanne Mubarak will even hit the campaign trail in an effort to promote her husband’s message of reform leading up to Election Day – September 7.  Then, as much as twice a week, campaign leaders will hold press conferences to inform the media of any major happenings, and give them the opportunity to ask whatever questions they may have. 

“We are trying to mobilize all of our efforts now toward focusing on the future,” explained Kamal.  “We are not elaborating on past achievements.  The President has put forth the basic principles.  He is calling on society to integrate them so any constitutional amendments would be a reflection of the reality at large.”

During his speech to the nation Wednesday night, Mubarak spoke of the future for political reform.  He sited hopeful amendments to the constitution which would enhance the much demanded independence of the judiciary, reinforce the rule of law and revise the system of administrative detention.  The Judges’ Club, which meets September 2 to make a final ruling on whether they intend to monitor the election.  Kamal conveyed the President’s confidence that the elections will be supervised by the judiciary 100 percent.  He added hopes for revisions to Parliament, including it in budgetary issues, promoting the fair representation of women, and giving to it the power to hold the government accountable.  Mubarak also emphasized the importance of free speech and free flow of information.   

“We cannot prejudge changes before they start,” insists Badrawi.  “It is in the favor of a democratic process to have strong opposition.  This is the reformation of society.” 

The President further pledged his dedication to tackling unemployment.  He sited programs to build 1,000 factories in Egypt over the next six years to provide 250,000 jobs annually; reclaiming one million feddans of desert land to allow for 70,000 jobs in the agriculture sector; plus a goal to increase the number of rooms and hotels over the next six years, creating an additional 200,000 job opportunities annually. 

“We are taking into consideration the considerable growth in the labor force,” admits Mohieldin.  “This year alone we have 5,800 new projects.  We are making use of the positive and negative experiences and using it to support our finances.”

Mohieldin admits that it is impossible to site specific records or give exact figures as to past and present corruption taking place in the government, though it did not dismiss it does exist.  “The government is committed to targeting corruption and bringing anyone committing any wrongdoing to justice,” he said.  

Kamal adds that the Mubarak’s campaign staff has made it their mission to stress that the organization and transparency of their campaign is in every way an indication of what is to come for this reformed candidate and party.   

“From our financial side, we are very transparent,” insists Kamal.  “We will submit periodic reports listing the expenses of the campaign and at the end, we will submit a final report.”

The president additionally spoke of his commitment to raising the basic wages of low-income civil servants by 100 percent, and increasing the wages of the remaining civil servants by 75 percent over the next term.  He also stressed other issues, such as enforcement of better education, and the great challenges facing Egypt in its role as a leader in this region battling war and terrorism. 

While such issues remain of vital importance to the citizens of Egypt, we will not see them debated face-to-face among the candidates anytime soon.  With ten candidates – headliners including Mubarak, El-Ghad (Tomorrow) party leader Ayman Nour, and Wafd leader, Norman Gomaa – Kamal insists a debate would be too difficult to pull of logistically or organizationally.  He further emphasized the President’s commitment to seeing to it that there are no outside pressures or disruptions to the coming campaign and election period.     

WAR OF SYMBOLISM: The crescent moon becomes a subject of political debate

By Vivian Salama

Daily Star Staff

 

CAIRO:  Which of the following symbols is more appealing to you?  The crescent moon, the very symbol adorning mosques across the Arab world, which communicates the message of a greater glory to one who is honored by sovereignty; a camel, associated with Sufism, and qualities such as patience, temperance and perseverance; the palm tree, symbolizing victory over death; or the donkey, a symbol of stubbornness, and sometimes of patience and gentleness.

            The symbol you identify with the most might, in theory, influence your choice for choosing Egypt’s next president.  As we near the one month mark before Egypt’s first multi-candidate presidential election, the fight for symbolism, in this case, the crescent moon, is at the heart of a dispute between President Hosni Mubarak and his leading contender, El Ghad (Tomorrow) party leader, Ayman Nour. 

            One week ago, as hopeful candidates submitted their nomination papers to the Electoral Commission for review, they were asked to pick a symbol which they feel best exemplifies their message.  The candidates and their coinciding symbol would be announced when the commission finalizes the list for this year’s candidates.  The symbol would then appear alongside the candidates name on the ballot come September 7, Election Day. 

In this case, the symbols range from the crescent (hilal, in Arabic) which, always the number one symbol on the ballot, has always gone to President Mubarak; a camel, a palm tree, a pyramid, to name a few.  There have been in the past several, more extreme, symbols such as a dagger or a pistol.  The donkey, which at one time was offered, was removed as no one desired to associate themselves with the image. 

            When the commission office opened for submissions last Friday, Ayman Nour arrived bright and early, submitting his papers and choosing for himself the crescent moon.  Hours later, the President’s lawyer, Mohammed Dakruri, registered Mubarak and claimed the crescent for the National Democratic Party (NDP). 

            “The one who gets the hilal is always the first on the ballot,” says Gamila Ismail, El Ghad Party spokesperson, also Nour’s wife.  “On the first day, we went early to be number one.  We wanted the hilal, so we went early but later on we found out President Mubarak was the first one to nominate himself and he got the hilal.”

            According to Ismail, representatives from El Ghad party were on site in front of the Electoral Commission building at 4am, standing guard should obstacles prevent Nour from arriving there himself.  She says that at no point did they see Mubarak’s lawyer or anyone from the NDP present papers to nominate the President for reelection.  However, legal sources tell the Daily Star Egypt that Nour’s papers were incomplete at the time Dakruri submitted nomination papers for Mubarak, and so the president has the right to the crescent.  A final decision has yet to be made on who will claim the crescent for their campaign symbol.    

            Campaign symbols serve a great purpose in Egypt as they cater to the appeal of the illiterate.  According to the United States Department of State, 43 percent of Egyptians cannot read or write.  Therefore, name-symbol association is the easiest way to win participation from the literate and illiterate. 

            “To enable illiterates to vote, they give candidates a symbol so they can tell people vote for the donkey, as it once was, or vote for the hilal,” explains Saad El Din Ibrahim, professor of politics at the American University in Cairo (AUC) and a former presidential hopeful.  “That is the origin of symbols – to combat illiteracy as being an impediment for people to read the names of candidates.”

             The crescent, however, represents far more than a political logo to the literate and illiterate alike.  It is one of the most recognizable symbols representing Islamic ideology worldwide, dating back to the early days of the Ottoman Empire.  The hilal therefore provides a huge advantage to the candidate who will win rights over it, as it hits an emotional chord far removed from any political agenda. 

            “The campaign symbol should be a symbol, nothing more,” explains Khaled Galal, a Branding expert.  “[The crescent] is more than a symbol.  That’s why they are fighting for it.  It is a symbol with equity of more than 700 years.  It is deeply emotional and Egyptians are deeply superstitious.” 

            “The problem is not the symbol, the problem is what this incident is an indication for,” explains Ismail.  “This is an indication of what will happen the day of the election.”

            As far as politics goes, experts agree, the crescent represents votes.  For those Egyptians who do not follow the day to day wrangling of political parties, the crescent is the easiest, safest, most reliable symbol they can turn to, as it represents a power far greater than any politician.  Take Saudi Arabia as an example.  This week, as the nation paid tribune to its late King Fahd Abdel Aziz, the Saudi flag was not flown at half-mast since inscribed on the green flag is an Islamic testament of faith.  Lowering it would therefore be blasphemous.    

            “The crescent is a symbol of Islam in general,” says Ibrahim.  “It’s like a cross in recent civilization.  So it ended up with a fight over the hilal but also over whose name should appear in the ballot first.” 

            Symbols such as the camel or the palm tree, experts say, cannot compete against the crescent, since the less fortunate are likely not to vote against someone whose name is associated with a symbol of God.  Experts therefore agree that the candidate who wins the right to the crescent will essentially win over the hearts and minds of millions of voters.     

            “This is beyond a symbol,” says Galal.  “They are fighting for using a weak spot in the hearts of Egyptian people.  It is a fight for opportunity.”

            Is one solution omitting the crescent – as a campaign symbol – all together?  Since the fall of the monarchy in 1952, Egypt has observed secular rule.  Candidates wishing to run under a platform of parties such as the Muslim Brotherhood have been banned as the government has looked to promote ideologies independent of Islam.  The Brotherhood themselves have opted to stop raising the Quran at protests as they seek to communicate their political agenda exclusively.  With that, the fight over the crescent represents a contradiction as to the role religion plays in mainstream politics.   

            “The crescent is a religious symbol and nobody should own it,” suggests Galal.  “This is a three week symbol war with no depth and no agenda.  Everything related to this will be forgotten afterwards because it is in no way related to a political agenda or a struggle by the Egyptian people.”