SEARCH

Opinion » Comment

Updated: October 9, 2013 02:38 IST

The unended Arab awakening

Arvind Sivaramakrishnan
Comment (5)   ·   print   ·   T  T  
Illustration: Satwik Gade
Illustration: Satwik Gade

The Brotherhood, which claims democratic legitimacy, could now develop a form of Islamism that is more openly responsive to public discourse

The July 3 military coup which overthrew Mohamed Morsy, Egypt’s only civilian President since Muhammad Naguib and Gamal Abdel Nasser deposed King Farouk in 1952, and the army’s brutal response to protests — at least 650, including about 50 soldiers, have been killed and thousands more injured — have been called the end of the Arab Awakening. Those Egyptians who led their country’s contribution to that phenomenon had already been deeply disturbed by Mr. Morsy’s election victory in June 2012, which showed the strength of public support for the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist parent body to Mr. Morsy’s Freedom and Justice Party, and they then received other shocks such as the President’s decree of November 22 giving himself sweeping powers including immunity to any decisions he made thenceforth.

Mr. Morsy rescinded the decree after protests in which at least seven people died and 350 were injured, but the Brotherhood’s methods were already clear. The senior leadership, after decades under bans imposed by Nasser and savage repression by the 30-year regime of Hosni Mubarak, seemed to have developed a siege mentality; they looked unable to acknowledge other groupings and attitudes, let alone accept the existence of the secularists and moderate Islamists who had had the courage to challenge and overthrow Mr. Mubarak early in 2011.

The attitudes Mr. Morsy showed are not uncommon among political groups which have spent long periods under oppression or near-oblivion, even in relatively open democracies, but in Egypt the consequences were deadly. The police and the judiciary, both utterly entrenched under the ancien régime, see the Brotherhood as their major rivals. On June 14 the constitutional court, acting on a narrow interpretation of the eligibility rules for candidates, abolished the 508-seat constituent assembly, in which the Brotherhood and its allies had won 235 seats on a 37.5 per cent vote share, in contrast to the second-placed Islamist Bloc’s 123 seats. The assembly could not even start its task of writing a constitution, and in the same week the interim military government, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, led by Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawy, awarded itself powers to veto changes in the constitution, to propose legislation, and to detain civilians and deploy the military at times of what it called internal unrest; it would also retain control over the armed forces and could veto declarations of war.

Many Egyptians called these events a constitutional obscenity, but the military had no intention of relinquishing control. The senior officers, despite the fact that half the 440,000-strong army are conscripts and include large proportions of Brotherhood sympathisers from rural areas, are extremely wary of any threats to their dominance — and wealth — and feared the political power the Brotherhood could now wield. Those Egyptians who had been as troubled about a Brotherhood government as they had been about the Mubarak regime started by welcoming the coup but soon realised what awaited them; Mohamed ElBaradei, whom the coup leaders had named as acting vice president, resigned, and the coup leader General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has steadily intensified his rule since.

International reactions

As for the international reactions, they could not have been weaker. The United States, which provides $1.5 billion a year in aid, has expressed regret over the violence, but is yet to call the coup a coup, because that would trigger an immediate suspension of aid and could hurt U.S. arms manufacturers; in addition, promises of compensatory aid from Saudi Arabia and Qatar are probably less certain than Washington’s help, which dates back to the early 1980s, and a reduced U.S. presence in Egypt could lead to increased Russian and Chinese influence there. The European Union, for its part, has stated its “deep concern” and hopes that democratic elections will occur “in the shortest possible time,” but the contrast with several western countries’ strident calls for an invasion of Syria is obvious.

The western reactions also amount to tacit support for the regime’s view of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood’s spiritual leader, Mohamed Badie, is under arrest, as are hundreds of other senior members. The organisation itself was banned on September 23, and its funds have been frozen. Mr. Morsy is being held in a secret location; although an African Union delegation has met him, visitors are helicoptered in at night, with the aircraft flying in confusing patterns to preserve secrecy. Furthermore, Al Jazeera TV has released footage showing the military planning to “terrorise” the media; the station’s Cairo offices have been raided several times. Two of their staff are in detention, and at least 10 Egyptian journalists are being held without trial. The army has even arrested a farmer for putting a military-style hat on a donkey, naming it after a general, and riding it around.

The regime clearly aims to close down all political space. Yet it could thereby sow the seeds of its own collapse. The Brotherhood rightly claims democratic legitimacy; furthermore, as some of its younger members have said, absent or arrested seniors cannot dominate or stifle internal debate; the organisation could now develop a form of Islamism which is more openly responsive to public discourse. That could be more than a focal point for mobilisation, because on the evidence neither the senior military nor the Brotherhood’s old guard are likely to have political responses to genuine political argument emerging from within the Brotherhood itself; the Arab Awakening may be far from over yet.

arvind.sivaramakrishnan@thehindu.co.in

More In: Comment | Opinion

This is factually wrong at a place though may be in line with the assumptions the writer holds.The US was by large number of military supporters considered to tacitly support the brotherhood.Obama's posters in a mullah avtar are now history but the military's suspicions are not.How many muslim nations of central Asia recognise the rights of minorities,secularists and non believers including your darling Iran.

from:  abhishek kumar baranwal
Posted on: Oct 9, 2013 at 10:12 IST

The military coup against Morsi government in Egypt has once again exposed the hypocrisy of the liberal West and the Left. The tacit support of these groups to the Egyptian military was amply clear. The votaries of democracy, who blame Islamists for not being ‘democratic enough’ have always scuttled every attempt of Islamist groups to participate in the democratic electoral experiments. Egypt was not different.
After overthrowing a democratically elected government, they now blame Muslim Brotherhood’s high handedness as the reason for the coup. While the Morsi government failed to act decisively against the all powerful deep state in Egypt, the liberal world conveniently hid the truth that there was no reprisal against the enemies of revolution in Egypt as happened in the case of major world revolutions, including the French Revolution.
The coup also provided a justification to Brotherhood for not taking responsibility of their own mistakes in their democratic experiment.

from:  Hussain Kodinhi
Posted on: Oct 9, 2013 at 09:19 IST

The author says: "The Brotherhood, which claims democratic legitimacy, could now develop a form of Islamism that is more openly responsive to public discourse."

Pigs will start to fly first, before this will happen.

N

from:  Ashok Chowgule
Posted on: Oct 9, 2013 at 08:41 IST

Islam (this word does not need a suffix ism)is openly responsive to
public discourse. The last prophet, namely Mohamed, told his followers
not to ask unnecessary questions because that could cause God (Allah
in Arabic language)to impose rules that may put the believers into
difficulty. Now that there is no prophet living, the Muslims
(especially the Brotherhood in Egypt)allow followers and the public to
voice their opinion and the leaders decide based on the discussion but
in the place of God they strictly keep their limits within what is
allowed by His book (Quran) and the practical demonstration (Available
now in recordings of the tradition known as hadeeth) of the Quran
through the life of prophet Mohamed (May peace and blessings of God
be upon him

from:  Deen Mohamed
Posted on: Oct 9, 2013 at 08:31 IST

The arab awakening will only be a dream until muslims are hell bent of 'saving' islam and unless they shed their insecurity. I believe the author is an eternal optimist or he has lost sense of reality when he brings in Mohammed Badie who keeps saying jihad and holy war against Israel and USA.

Also, the author conveniently forgets what all Morsy did when he came back to power. The author is hoping for re-invention of islam which will not happen as long as the interpretation does not come from the Ulama. Why? Because, these are the guys that interpret the holy books and have money backing them. And they say Islam is not to be re-interpreted and thats it. Period. So, unless the people of the muslim world protest against these ulama, nothing ever will happen.

The author and Egyptian are knocking on the wrong door if they want to re-invent islam. They need to overthrow the ulama and let each person practice his islam his way.

from:  Karthik
Posted on: Oct 9, 2013 at 07:11 IST
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor


O
P
E
N

close

Recent Article in Comment

THINK BIG: With a reinvigorated level of ambition and greater confidence, India and the U.S. can go beyond modest and conventional goals.

Forward and together in progress

Narendra Modi and Barack Obama talk about a renewed U.S.-India partnership for the 21st century »