Some ASSESSMENTS are presented below, documenting the external factors as well as frank criticisms..and the JUSTIFICATIONS FROM WESTERN COMMENTATORS AND FELLOW TRAVELLERS for the coup, with new terminology such as 'illiberal democracy' and 'elections are a sham' - when the results are not to their liking! The charges against the MB include not being 'stylish' enough! The victim is being made responsible for the crime!
Hugh Roberts in the London Review of Books, 12th Sept 2013 The numbers question was investigated by Jack Brown, an American writer who has lived in Cairo for several years and who on 11 July published a detailed article in Maghreb émergent, an indispensable source of serious coverage of North African developments, republished in English on the website International Boulevard. Brown worked out from the actual area of Tahrir Square and the streets leading to it that on the most generous estimate the demonstration can’t have exceeded 265,000 people. If we assume for the sake of argument that the other big demonstration in Cairo, in Heliopolis, added a further 211,000, that gives at most 476,000. So where did the other 12.8 million needed to exceed Morsi’s election tally come from? Cairo is home to nearly a quarter of Egypt’s total population. Vague Western media references to ‘hundreds of thousands’ marching in other cities may authorise us to push up the overall tally, but we’re still looking at maybe a million, or at the very most two million across the country as a whole, less than the 2.85 million Morsi polled in Cairo and Giza. The phantasmagorical figures quoted to the Western media may, as Brown observes, have exploited a confusion between attendance at the demonstrations and Tamarrod’s claim for the number of petition signatories. But however many millions really signed the petition, none of them signed a petition calling for the army to depose the president.
Peter Beaumont & Patrick Kingsley of the Guardian, quoting Mohammed Habib and Kotb al-Araby, 3rd Sept 2013
...a more pertinent question is whether it [MB] is capable of adapting and responding to what many members see as a failed experiment in power. The Brotherhood's inability to reach out and build a wider coalition in its brief time in office alienated the revolutionaries who brought down the former president Hosni Mubarak by being too cosy with the generals in the post-revolutionary period. As Mohamed Habib, the former deputy general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood – and now fierce critic of it – wrote last month: "They lost everything due to their failure to understand what was happening around them. The Brotherhood's mistakes were their downfall. They failed to achieve political stability and security. They failed to find solutions to the dire economic crisis and their fateful Constitutional Declaration led to division, fragmentation, civil strife, and violence, as well as the collapse of the rule of law."...Some believe the Brotherhood's autocratic ideology renders it inherently incapable of the kind of self-criticism necessary to reinvent itself and expand its appeal again to a wider circle of Egyptians.
Kotb al-Araby disputes this. "Of course what happened will be reviewed and revised. There were mistakes. A lot of mistakes, but good things too. We will build on the good things. In my personal opinion one of the biggest mistakes that we made was running for the presidency [which nearly half of the Brotherhood's leadership council advised against]. We should have fought our battles more gradually."
Wadah Khanfar, 2nd Sept 2013 Already, many Arabs question the credibility of any US role in building a stable democratic Syria. The military coup in Egypt was a major cause for concern, calling into question America's position towards political Islam, and democracy itself. The US has refused to describe the enforced removal and detention of President Morsi as a coup, despite the killing and wounding of thousands of civilian protesters by Egyptian security forces. Given the continuing revolutionary fervour in the region, in which the Islamists play a leading role, America has shown complicity in Egypt's coup by continuing to fund its army. Hence a wide section of Islamic-linked Syrian revolutionaries will never welcome any major role for the US in the country's future.
Osama Abu Irshaid, 31st August 2013
The Muslim Brotherhood participated in the democratic process in Egypt but were then deposed by an alliance of the ancién regime and other vested interests. Does this mean that movements with a vision of establishing an Islamic society should now abandon the political arena of 'liberal democracy'? Will the forces for whom Islam is an anathema prefer violence and dictatorship rather than an elected Islamic government? What are the lessons for Muslim socio-political activists?
What are the alternatives? Was the failure because of President Morsi and the MB, or does it point to some more fundamental problematic within Islamic movements and the need for a major rethink of strategy?
With regards of the Salafi Al-Nour Party, many sources suggest that it is a creation of Gulf intelligence services. They are major sponsors of the "Wahabi-Salafi" tendency across the region. Nevertheless, Al-Nour won 24 per cent of the votes in the 2012 parliamentary election in Egypt; it has been a thorn in the Brotherhood's side ever since. Al-Nour's efforts to undermine the Brotherhood government of Mohamed Morsi included pushing for a detailed explanation of the article of the Constitution which makes it clear that Islam is the state religion of Egypt and support for the coup on the basis that, as Yasser Borhami said, "Morsi did not implement Islamic Law". All of these groups have shown that they are prepared to dance with the devil himself to get rid of the Islamists, even if it means the imposition of a regime more repressive than Mubarak's. The example of Al-Nour Party is interesting as it fits the stereotypical images of a hard-line fundamentalist group but it is also capable of being controlled by state intelligence agencies. Furthermore, it does not have an integrated vision of Islam of the kind promoted by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Kamal Helbawi, 29th August 2013
“What I really think it would take is for Islamist to first agree amongst themselves about what they really mean by the ‘Islamist project’ that has meant so many things for so many people so far. If this could be done, and I doubt it because there are so many different and at this time conflicting views within the Islamist camp, then maybe there could be a cohesive and realistic project that could be offered to the people,” El-Helbawi said. He added that post-Morsi, the public would be scrupulously critical of any Islamist-made proposal, and would be no more willing to follow a catchy slogan, because it was tried and proven to be a failure.
Abdel Bari Atwan, 23rd August 2013
We are asking the liberal leaders and the heads of National Salvation Front (NS), who consider themselves “protectors of democracy” and supporters of the civil state, for their opinion on this step.
They supported the military coup and provided it with the “revolutionary legitimacy” – but what is their opinion of the coup and this release at the same time?
What are their views on the country returning to a state of emergency and their perspectives on the deaths of thousands of peaceful protesters at Rabaa al-Adawiya and El-Nahda squares?
Personally I feel very disheartened when I see such a blasé response from these figures on the release of Hosni Mubarak; a man who used Egypt like private property for him and his sons; a man who associated himself with a group of corrupted businessmen, whilst more than forty million Egyptians lived below the poverty line. This is a sad period for Egypt – its history, its people and its revolution; the very revolution that restored hope to poor people in Arab and Islamic regions, with anticipation for a new beginning, one with dignity.
Muhammad al-Baltaji in the Guardian, 21st August 2013
The worst terrorism that exists in Egypt today is that perpetrated against the people by the coup alliance, which conspired with the aid of Arab monarchies in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait and Jordan, fully supported and lobbied for by Israel and with complicity of the United States of America and its western allies, in order to kill the Egyptian dream and undermine the Arab spring.
State institutions in Egypt, including the army, the police and the judiciary, have been hijacked and turned into tools of oppression. Those who willingly or knowingly participate in this project are hereby warned that they will one day, sooner or later, be brought to justice. I appeal to army and police officers and soldiers to rid themselves of the military uniform and go home. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/21/muslim-brotherhood-violence-egypt
David Hearst in the Guardian, 20th August 2013
"It is one thing to upset the middle class and the intelligentsia, but quite another to have the country's (Saudi Arabia's) religious scholars denounce you. A group of 56 of them did so, by issuing a statement describing the events of 3 July as "unquestionably a military coup and an unlawful and illicit criminal act". The king has also been attacked in a sermon by a sheikh at the al-Masjid al-Nabawi mosque in Medina, Islam's second holiest site.
Bernard Henri-Levy in the Daily Beast, 20th August 2013
No matter how you look at this, no matter what semantic contortions you use to describe this coup that is not a coup, this slaughter that dare not speak its name, the atrocious, unacceptable reality is this: Egypt’s generals, pulling on the boots of Saddam Hussein, of the Assads (father and son), and of Gaddafi (who threatened to unleash in Benghazi the same rivers of blood that are now flowing Cairo and other cities of Egypt), are acting like butchers, plain and simple. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/20/the-criminal-folly-of-the-egyptian-armed-forces.html
David Hearst in the Guardian, 19th August 2013
...Why has the kingdom [of Saudi Arabia], famed for its caution on the diplomatic stage, put all its eggs in one basket, which, considering the volatility in Egypt, remains fragile and unpredictable. Who knows which side in Egypt will prevail, and if that is so, why back the coup leader General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi so publicly? Sisi thanked the kingdom in fulsome terms. He said that the Saudi intervention was unprecedented since the Yom Kippur 1973 war with Israel. Praise indeed.
For Dr Maha Azzam, associate fellow of the Middle East and North Africa programme at Chatham House, the kingdom's fire-breathing support for the coup comes as little surprise. Not only had they been astonished by Washington's abandonment of the kingdom's closest regional ally in Hosni Mubarak, a point they made very clear during his trial. They had seen him replaced, at the polls, by the Brotherhood, which challenged the kingdom's claim to be the protector of Islam.
Azzam said: "What they had was a lethal equation, democracy plus Islamism, albeit under the Muslim Brotherhood. That was a lethal concoction in undermining the kingdom's own legitimacy in the long run. They know full well they do not want democracy, but to have another group representing Islam was intolerable."
New York Times, 16th August 2013
For the first time since the president’s removal six weeks ago, some non-Islamists stood with the Morsi supporters, sometimes risking their own lives as well...By 3 a.m. Saturday, hundreds of protesters had taken refuge in a nearby mosque that for most of the day had served as a field hospital and morgue, refusing to leave for fear of arrests. Swarms of riot police officers and their supporters in civilian clothes began breaking down the doors, throwing rocks through the windows, and filling the mosque with tear gas. Among the Islamists killed in Ramses Square was Dr. Khaled el-Banna, 30, a grandson of the Muslim Brotherhood’s founder, Hassan el-Banna, who was gunned down near the same square in 1949.
Maha Azzam, 16th August 2013
Those calling for a return to the days that preceded the 25 January revolution in 2011, which brought about the fall of Hosni Mubarak, were not only the military high command, the interior ministry, the security services and the police, but critically the judiciary and the state media. These coteries of power actively worked together to block the smooth functioning of the state.
This went hand-in-hand with a vicious campaign to vilify and demonise the party in power, namely the Muslim Brotherhood. Propaganda campaigns against them had been a feature of Egypt's dictatorships from Nasser to Mubarak in an attempt to weaken the main challenge to the regime. But the secular and liberal opposition, having failed to win enough votes themselves, played spoilers rather than engage in the political process, accept the results and campaign for the next elections.
Amr Darrag, 15th August 2013
What the United States ultimately decides to do with its diplomatic relations or foreign aid is President Obama’s decision. But Americans need to recognize that every passing day solidifies the perception among Egyptians that American rhetoric on democracy is empty; that American politicians won’t hesitate to flout their own laws or subvert their declared values for short-term political gains; and that when it comes to freedom, justice and human dignity, Muslims need not apply.
The regime we are facing in Egypt is not new. It is one with which we are intimately familiar. Its leaders are selling torture, repression and stagnation. We are not buying. And America shouldn’t either.
The Guardian Editorial, 15th August 2013
...Spurred on by voices in the liberal and secular camp that the opportunity had finally arrived to deal the Muslim Brotherhood a mortal blow – the running banner on Egypt's private television coverage on the demonstrators was "War on Terrorists" – ...Spurred on by voices in the liberal and secular camp that the opportunity had finally arrived to deal the Muslim Brotherhood a mortal blow – the running banner on Egypt's private television coverage on the demonstrators was "War on Terrorists" – John Kerry, the US secretary of state, called last night for all sides to take a step back. He stated his strong opposition to emergency law, and repeated that the only solution will be a political one. These are all rhetorical statements, unless and until the US is prepared to cut its $1.3bn aid to Egypt's military.
Michael Mansfield & Tayab Ali, 14th August 2013
Egypt has for too long been treated as a client state in the cause of geopolitical struggle. Its military has been central to this and has consistently done so with impunity. It is time for the British government to lead the way in bringing this to an end. The situation in Egypt must be referred to the ICC by the security council. Failing that, human rights lawyers will be waiting in courts across the world for Egypt's military, with evidence that they have committed heinous international crimes.
Seamus Milne, 14th August 2013
There's no doubt the coup had large-scale support (even if polling suggests it has been exaggerated) from an opposition that united right and left, along with supporters of the former Mubarak dictatorship and many who opposed it and want to see more far-reaching change in Egypt.
The latter had plenty of grievances against Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood-led government: its indulgence of army and police brutality, failure to break with Mubarak's failed neoliberal economic policies, social conservatism, institutional power grabs, inability to build alliances with secular forces and appeasement of US and Israeli power.
But there can be no doubting what has taken place. A leader and movement who won a string of elections and referendums have been removed by force in favour of military placemen. The president has been imprisoned while surreal charges are cooked up – of plotting with the Palestinian group Hamas to escape from one of Mubarak's jails.
Sheri Berman, 10th August 2013
In 1848, workers joined with liberals in a democratic revolt to overthrow the French monarchy. However, almost as soon as the old order collapsed, the opposition fell apart, as liberals grew increasingly alarmed by what they saw as “radical” working class demands. Conservatives were able to co-opt fearful liberals and reinstall new forms of dictatorship. Those same patterns are playing out in Egypt today — with liberals and authoritarians playing themselves, and Islamists playing the role of socialists....
The mistake that liberals made in 19th-century Europe was to see all socialists as fanatics. But while some socialists were extremists, others were opposed to violence and dedicated to democracy. Those socialists — who later became Europe’s social democrats rather than communists — wanted social and economic reforms, but not ones that were mortal threats to capitalism or democracy. Yet, for too long, European liberals were unwilling to recognize those differences; they opposed full democratization and worked actively to repress the entire movement. The results were disastrous. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/opinion/sunday/marxs-lesson-for-the-muslim-brothers.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
MEMO, 9th August 2013 In a statement sent on Thursday to Anadolu News Agency, a group of 56 Saudi Arabian religious scholars have condemned the military overthrow of Egypt's elected president Mohammad Morsi. The scholars described what occurred in Egypt as "unquestionably a military coup and an unlawful and illicit criminal act".
...Among those who signed the manifesto are: Mohammad Naser Al Suhaibani, Ali Bin Saeid AlGhamdi, Abdul Aziz bin AbdelMohsen AlTurki, Hasan Bin Saleh AlHameed, Mohammad Bin AbdelAziz AlKhodari, Mohammad Bin Sulaiman AlBarak and AbdelAziz Mohammad AlFouzan. egypt. http://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/middle-east/6837-saudi-religious-scholars-condemn-military-coup-in-egypt
Tawwakol Karman, 8th August 2013
Clearly, the leaders of the military takeover have something to conceal from the watchful eyes of the world. That explains why I was recently refused entry into Egypt. I now feel I have a responsibility to warn the world of the fact that a fully fledged despotic regime is seeking to reinforce its foundations in the country. The 25 January revolution guaranteed freedom of expression, of assembly and organisation. All these freedoms have been crushed in the aftermath of the coup.
...Perhaps one of the few positive aspects of the coup is that it has discredited the claim thatthat that the state had been taken over by the Brotherhood under Morsi. The ministers in charge of defence, the interior and foreign affairs, and many other ministers and holders of senior government posts, are among the supporters of the coup. They were appointed by Morsi but are all opponents of the president, of his party and of his community. Egypt is moving on from the lie of Brotherhood takeover to the reality of state militarisation.
Robert Fisk, 8th August 2013
And the Egyptian army rather loves itself. Its vast and obscenely bloated investments in real estate, banking and industry make this one of the richest Arab armies in one of the poorest Arab countries. It’s hardly in their interest to start a mini-war in the streets of Cairo. But the Brotherhood itself is bloated with arrogance, its record in power – with Morsi as their cypher – hardly worthy of the support of the ‘people’..."
Crispin Blunt, 6th August 2013 Two different narratives infuse Egyptian discourse and alarmingly there is precious little overlap between the two...The Islamist camp is infused with a righteous indignation, as the forces of old, corrupt and rotten Egypt unite to try and drive them underground once again...On the other side is a rich contempt for the dogma in their midst. There is a dose of the contempt of the rich for the dispossessed and their failure to be proper Egyptians, with more regard for their faith than their country. There is a lazy misappreciation of their fellow citizens and a total failure to acknowledge that, among the easily vilified extreme manifestations of an authoritarian ideology, are an awful lot of decent people motivated by high ideals and with an actual record of delivery of social justice in a land rife with extreme poverty....
Failure to find a way to incorporate political Islam in democracy, however uncomfortable its ideology is for secular liberals, will mean we have given them little alternative but to find other means of expression. Inevitably, some of this would be violent. These forces have their expression in Britain too and we need to be clear that they have their place here in our democracy and we will support them having their place in democracy elsewhere. Our national interests are absolutely engaged in Egypt, quite apart from the prospect of a horrifying humanitarian catastrophe in that country, which should concern us all.
Abdel Bari Atwan, 6th August 2013
Egypt's former leader Mohammed Morsi committed a large number of mistakes during his tenure in office which lasted only one year. He and the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood will soon realise that their major mistake was the exclusion of Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi who was replaced by Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. Morsi believed that Sisi's "Islamic feelings" would make him more loyal to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Tariq Ramadan, 5th August 2013
The world has changed, and everything suggests that Islamist organizations, such as the Muslim Brotherhood and other legalist and reformist groups, have not kept pace with world-historical developments, with shifts in international relations, and, most of all, with the new paradigm of globalization. In addition, state power, which in the beginning was understood as a means to social, political, economic and cultural reform, emerged as an end in itself, perverting both the intentions and the actions of a significant number of Islamist movements. These factors have combined to create, over time, a disconnect between the oft-repeated claims of the Islamist movements, which have maintained substantial popular support, and their inability to respond to the challenges of the new era. Having become nationalist Islamist movements, their obsession with the state eventually led to them neglecting fundamental economic issues, major cultural concerns, and even failing to address the basic questions of freedom, citizenship and individual autonomy. Driven into opposition, totally committed to (and imprisoned by) the desire to legitimize their participation in the democratic process as credible, open and dependable in the eyes of the West, the Islamists have become a reactionary force that, in the name of pragmatism, with one compromise after another, have preserved their religious references while voiding them of their potential for social, economic and cultural liberation.
Reuters, 1 August 2013
The violence since Mursi's overthrow has fuelled concern in the West of a wider conflagration in Egypt, which straddles the Suez Canal and receives $1.3 billion a year in U.S. military aid to bolster its 1979 peace treaty with Israel.
Abdel Bari Atwan, 30 July 2013
The military's error of judgement is clear. It is taking sides, favouring the liberals and secularists against the Islamists. The army is dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood an an enemy, not as a political group. It seeks to oust the Islamist movement, not just from power, but from Egypt's political future.
Within weeks, the Egyptian army has created a state within the state. It has its own institutions and independent economic structures. We all thought that we had seen the last of the army in politics, we thought that the 2011 revolution was the start of a new era. It clearly wasn't. President Morsi tried to keep the army on the borders, but he couldn't do it for long. In the end, it cost him his job.
Over the weekend, US Secretary of State, John Kerry, expressed his concern about the political situation in Egypt. This concern was not just for the Egyptian people, their security or economy, but also for the safety and security of Israel and its settlements. Kerry claims to represent a country that supports democracy and freedom, yet he refuses to describe what happened in Egypt as a "military coup." The African Union (AU), on the other hand, didn't hold back, referring to Morsi's ouster as a coup – and freezing Egypt's membership of the Union.
This is the same American hypocrisy which we all know so well. The double standards which have seen the US destroy Iraq and kill a million people, yet hesitate to speak out against the military's interference in Egypt.
Marwan Bishara, 30 July 2013
The earlier that Egyptians sober up from their disillusionment with the politics of power, and get down to the business of running their country, the more likely it will be for them to save it from total collapse.
The $13bn pumped into the economy from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to help the military maintain its control are quite substantial; but, such funds can only go so far in beginning to heal the structural challenges facing the economy.
.... Egypt's total debt is already 87 percent of GDP and 74 percent of that is domestic. As instability and insecurity deepen, the debt is skyrocketing on top of 12 percent interest rates. Since three quarters of the debt is owed to local banks, any default on payment is bound to affect the entire economy. In 2012-2013, Egypt paid a quarter of all the government's budget expenditures -- or 147 out of 615 billion Egyptian Pounds (EGP) ($21bn USD) -- to service its debt. That sum nearly equals the total of all government expenditures put toward public sector wages, or 149 billion EGP ($21.28bn), which by itself is also quite inflated by nepotism that creates unproductive jobs.
Add to all this, the Egyptian government's subsidies for fuel and food has already reached a high 167 billion EGP ($24bn), or more than a quarter of the total government budget. Therefore, interest payments, wages, and subsidies represent 75 percent of the budget's total expenditures, leaving any future government with less than a quarter of its budget to be put toward all other important business of the state.
The Guardian, 29 July 2013
The Egyptian army's overweening sense of entitlement is an aspect of the country's political pathology. An army that has seen no combat for a generation and faces no serious challenge from external enemies nevertheless absorbs massive resources, enjoys marked privileges, and arrogates to itself special political rights. Egypt should be reducing the influence of its military, not reinforcing it. But, in the immediate future, the decisions of the army, and what are probably now its rather nervous civilian allies, are critical. They must release Brotherhood leaders, find a formula for the rehabilitation of Morsi and a framework for talks that the Brotherhood can accept. Otherwise there will soon be more blood on Cairo's pavements.
Abdel Bari Atwan, July 2013
The call by Egypt’s Defence Minister General Abdel Fatah el-Sisi for Egyptians to demonstrate on Friday in order to “give the army and police a mandate" to confront violence and terrorism could be a declaration of war against the Muslim Brotherhood and its supporters. ...I have no doubt that the Egyptian army is facing a conspiracy, possibly hatched behind closed doors in a foreign country, just like the plot that was formed against the Iraqi army in Kuwait. I would not be surprised if some liberals were involved in this plot, perhaps with the best intentions, perhaps not...This is the first time we have ever seen an army leader calling for the people to mass on the streets to support him. Even the leaders of military coups in Turkey and Pakistan, or in South American banana republics, did not do so. I don’t know where General al-Sisi got this idea from, or even who inspired him. Was it Dr. Mohammed ElBaradei, the interim vice president?
Source: Debka.com, July 2013
In a dazzling display of monetary muscle, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates poured $8 billion in a single day into the coffers of Egypt’s army rulers in cash, grants, loans without interest and gifts of gas, a dizzying life-saving infusion into its tottering economy. Forking out sums on this scale in a single day – or even month - is beyond the capacity of almost every world power – even the US and Russia - in this age of economic distress. The Arab oil colossuses managed to dwarf Iran’s pretensions to the standing of regional power.
Tuesday, July 9, just six days after the Egyptian army overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood president Mohamed Morsi, a UAE delegation of foreign and energy ministers and national security adviser landed in Cairo. They came carrying the gifts of $1 billion as a grant and $2 billion in long-term credit.
In well-orchestrated moves, Saudi Arabia then stepped forward with a $5 billion package, of which a lump sum of $2 billion was drafted to Egypt’s state bank that day, followed by another $2 billion as a gift of Saudi gas, and a further $1 billion for propping up the sagging Egyptian currency.
The delivery by two Arab governments to a third of financial assistance on this scale and on a single day is unheard of in the Middle East, or, indeed, anwhere else.
Emad Makay in aljazeera.com, 10th July 2013
A main conduit for channeling the State Department's democracy funds to Egypt has been the National Endowment for Democracy. Federal documents show NED, which in 2011 was authorised an annual budget of $118m by Congress, funneled at least $120,000 over several years to an exiled Egyptian police officer who has for years incited violence in his native country...
A longtime grantee of the National Endowment for Democracy and other US democracy groups is a 34-year old Egyptian woman, Esraa Abdel-Fatah, who sprang to notoriety during the country's pitched battle over the new constitution in December 2012...
Talal Asad, July 2013
...I think perhaps that most of the young people in the Tamarod Movement were probably not aware–although it now turns out that some of the biggest millionaires, like Naguib Sawiris, for example, were bankrolling the movement and supporting it in other ways. So I think there was a 'coordination'–if not a 'conspiracy' as many now allege–to make the opposition effective by fair means or foul. What worries me really is the intervention of the army, something that was not anticipated by everyone...
In my view, their [the MB's] total incompetence, their total stupidity, lies in not anticipating, to begin with, that they would be demonized if they acquired governmental authority. And demonized they were, with a vengeance. Part of this can be related to the crude secularist ideas that dominate most Cairene intellectuals. They were also highly incompetent in their inability, or unwillingness, to reach out to parts of the opposition. In any case, in my view they should never have aspired to the presidency–first of all as a matter of principle, and secondly because the uprising had created colossal practical problems which would be extremely difficult to address by any government. Winning an election does not mean that you are strong, as the Muslim Brotherhood thought it was. It means you are responsible for failures of the state and economy. And, despite their electoral win, the Muslim Brotherhood and its Freedom and Justice Party are and were always weak. One of the things of which they were often accused was that they wanted totalitarian control of society, that they were on the verge of getting what they wanted, which is absolute nonsense, of course. They did not have such control, they could not acquire such control, and there is no real evidence that they wanted such control. This is one part of their stupidity: To be seen to behave as though they had real control of the state.
Tariq Ramadan, July 2013
...Magically, chronic blackouts, gasoline and natural gas shortages came to an abrupt end after the fall of the president. It was as though people had been deprived of the basic necessities in order to drive them into the streets...What, after the fact, is surprising, is the simple-mindedness, the lack of experience and the nature of the mistakes made by Mohamed Morsi, by his allies, and by the Muslim Brotherhood as an organization....
The fact remains, however, that his management of the business of state, his failure to listen to the voice of the people and even to some of his trusted advisors, his exclusivist relationship with the highest echelons of the MB leadership, his hasty and ill-considered decisions (some of which he later acknowledged as errors) must be unsparingly criticized. But on a more fundamental level, his greatest fault has been the utter absence of a political vision and the lack of clearly established political and economic priorities, his failure to struggle against corruption and poverty, and his egregious mismanagement of social and educational affairs...The naivety of the president, of his government and of the Muslim Brotherhood has been stunning. After sixty years of opposition and military repression (with the direct and indirect benediction of the US Administration and the West), how could they possibly have imagined that their former adversaries would support their rise to power, invoking democracy all the while? Did they learn nothing from their own history, from Algeria in 1992, and, more recently, from Palestine?
The Economist, July 2013
... it has become increasingly clear that the appeal of the Islamists stems not so much from their religious standing or their promises to impose sharia law as from their superior ability to harness the resentments of Egypt’s poor. With problems proliferating, from surging unemployment to crippling power and fuel shortages, it was perhaps not surprising that a large section of this vast underclass took to the streets for a second time.
Imam Zaid Shakir, July 2013
Any Muslim party endeavoring to rule democratically over a particular country in the Muslim world has to understand that the eclectic ideological nature of the citizenry of most modern Muslim nation-states, combined in many instances with a similar degree of ethnic, tribal or religious diversity makes it nearly impossible for it to pursue a strict, party-line first agenda. Any group endeavouring to do so will alienate many parties whose support will be critical in any efforts to move the state in a new direction.
This makes the principal challenge for an aspiring Muslim ruling-party a constitutional one. In other words, a carefully crafted constitution has to adjudicate how the requisites of the Shari’ah, widely understood, and the historical approach to religious minorities living in Muslim lands, best articulated under the Ottoman Millet system, can best be reconciled with modern ideas of citizenship and individual rights.
Reuters, July 2013
In the immediate aftermath of Mubarak's overthrow, the Brotherhood had no intention of ruling. It reassured secular Egyptians and the army by promising publicly not to seek the presidency or an outright parliamentary majority...
"I met Shater three times in 2011/2012 and each time it was clear that the political appetite was growing, but the first time he was extremely explicit that the Brotherhood would not seek political power right away," said U.S. academic Nathan Brown, a leading expert on Egypt at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "He was very clear to the reasons: the world's not ready for it, Egypt's not ready for it, and - the phrase he kept using - the burdens of Egypt are too big for any one political actor. Those turned out to be very sound judgments but he abandoned them."
The entire council of the Guidance Office of the Muslim Brotherhood was against the presidential nomination," said Gehad El-Haddad, 31, one of the leading young Islamists....
The issue came to a head at a marathon closed-door meeting of the Brotherhood's Shura Council at its four-storey headquarters in the hill-top Moqattam district that overlooks Cairo from the south.
"We remained for three days, debating, each team giving the justifications of the opinion it had, whether accepting or rejecting. And when the vote happened, the decision was just by three or four votes," said Essam Hashish, 63, a university engineering lecturer and Shura member....
"When we took the decision to nominate Mursi, after the withdrawal of Khairat El-Shater, he (Mursi) returned home weeping: he had been given a responsibility that he had not sought..."
Amr Sabet, Feb 2013
Now that Israel has laid its hands on Egypt’s gas, water in the future, and already oil was being supplied for a long time with preferential prices, was the regime in fact delivering the country’s resources to Egypt’s sworn enemy in the name of a largely suspect so called peace treaty and trade? Statements from two sources seemed to hint toward an answer. The first came from former chairman of the foreign relations committee in the now defunct Egyptian Parliament, Mustafa Al-Fiqi who stated that any president after Mubarak will have to be approved of by the US and not objected to by Israel. The second came from Israeli Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer who described Mubarak as a strategic bonanza for Israel; a language reminiscent of intelligence services references to treasured recruited agents. This gave the impression that the presumed ruler of Egypt was nothing but a figurehead, a front man, and a local enforcer. The real rulers were elsewhere. The myth that Sinai had been liberated as a result of the Sadat-Begin treaty was shattered, even among the most self-deluded, when the whole of Egypt was in fact delivered and colonized.
JUSTIFICATIONS FROM WESTERN COMMENTATORS & FELLOW TRAVELLERS
23rd August 2013, Ahdaf Soueiif
How will we stop the killing? On 3 July this year, the military, in a very popular move, deposed Morsi. And so kicked off the ugly stage we're in. But instead of deposing the president, they should have forced through a referendum on early presidential elections; that would still have protected the country from the unraveling, and it would have preserved the idea of democracy. Nobody I speak to knows why that was not the course taken. I hear dark hints about what Morsi "was about to do", or surmises about the wild support for the army on the street tempting the general to the shorter path. It seems clear that the Muslim Brotherhood and their supporters would have lost the referendum; and they would have had to engage in a profound examination of what it was about their vision and their practice that was so unsuited to Egypt. That would have been good for all of us, for the country. Instead we finally have our own "war on terror".
August 2013, Ahdaf Soueiif
..Could we have waited for parliamentary elections? The many millions who came out on the streets on 30 June didn't think so. They came out again four weeks later to respond to Sisi's request for a mandate....But it has proved that its basic ideology and attitude is sectarian. This cannot be a matter for compromise; it [MB]needs to be defeated.
Failing to realise that winning an election does not give a leader authorisation to seize all state power and disregard minorities is a case in point: here lies, in fact, the gulf between formal and substantial democracy. The Muslim Brotherhood behaved democratically by winning elections through the support of a large component of Egyptian society. However, once in government, it did not abide by the separation of powers nor did it grant full rights to its opponents.
What if democratic change produces partial democracies – or "illiberal" ones (to use western political terminology)? Can it be that, on the southern shores of the Mediterranean, the only game in town is a stark choice between illiberal democracies run by Islamic parties and secular regimes propped up by armies?
This should be a familiar and predictable story. Remember, President George W. Bush and his advisers pushed the people of Gaza into quick elections in 2006 that were free and fair. Guess who won? Hamas, by far the best organized party, whose mottoes were filled with hatred of Israel and the United States. Guess what happened after Hamas won? Right again. They used their majority to set up a dictatorship. Forget democracy with rights and freedoms for all as long as Hamas is in control. And recall how badly Mr. Bush desired these elections and how little criticism was raised.
Free and fair elections honor and advance democracy only when they are built on democratic culture, society, and institutions—on solid laws, a free press, non-governmental organizations, sharp constitutional restraints on governmental power, and the firm rights of individuals. Without these underpinnings, elections are usually a sham. Americans were practicing democracy before the American Revolution. That’s why after the revolution, elections and democracy succeeded here...
Have no doubt about what Morsi was doing. He immunized his decisions from judicial review. He was squeezing and suppressing the rights of women and causing heartburn among non-Muslims. He strangled the free press and packed the organs of government with fellow Muslim Brothers.
It was hard to shed a tear for him when hundreds of thousands took to the streets in protest once again, many of the same charmers as two years ago. It wasn’t pleasant to watch the military shoot and break heads and lock up Morsi and friends. The general sense was that it had to be done and done now. Otherwise, Morsi would have established unstoppable control. Egyptian democrats might have run out of chances to establish a real democracy.
The Economist, July 2013
If Egyptians revolted a second time, it was partly because Mr Morsi’s government committed sins similar to Mr Mubarak’s. It tried to play the same bossy, patriarchal role but was even more inept. The Muslim Brothers turned out to be not something new but a relic from the past. They thought their Islamist dream would inspire the people, but it seems the ambitions of most Egyptians are for something looser-fitting, more individual and more stylish. Other would-be leaders, take note.