- Islamic MovementsMB in Arabian press
- August 30, 2007
- 10 minutes read
Playing with Muslim Brotherhood!
The Egyptian government is pursuing a certain political method with Muslim Brotherhood Organization that at least could be described as ambiguous. Since this policy is a random one, it threatens the political arena that might sink in anarchy. This confiscates any hopes for a clear featured political system, which bears firm basics and accepted by all intellectual and organizational currents in society.
It is obvious from recent developments that the relation between the Egyptian regime and Muslim Brotherhood that the regime started pursuing a full-fledged crackdown against the organization in order to extirpate it utterly.
The Security apparatus started confiscating and destroying all the financial and organizational resources belonging to MB. A political decree was issued to try the most prominent figures of MB before martial tribunals under the pretexts of “money laundering”. This time the regime started quelling the last political and intellectual resources and figures for the organization but this time under the pretext of being affiliate to an outlawed organization!.. These developments prove that there is a desire to change the existing relation between the regime and Muslim Brotherhood.
It is well known that the relation between the government and MB in Mubarak’s era was little bit stable where MB enjoyed an illegitimatized political role and a bit of political freedom that is determined by the state who can decide at any time to seize it from the organization yet this was not subjected to any criteria or standards.
The government reviewed the status and decided for unknown reasons to clash openly with the organization. This became clear especially after the statement of President Mubarak where he said” MB is a threat to national security”.
It is true that this clash is one-sided and fortunately it did not change into a mutual clash. So far the regime did not uncover any secret conspiracy carried out by the “outlawed organization to oust the regime, and according to our knowledge the organization did not say that it will respond to violence through violence.
I believe that no one can guarantee that MB would keep that self-possessed policy and to endure this quelling especially under the bitter regional and local circumstances that the Arab and Muslim nation are surviving.
It is possible to respond to violence through violence, and it is a legitimate right according to others due to concerns regarding the future especially recently where the region is passing severe circumstances.
The ongoing clash between the government and MB is not the first and will not be the last . it is known that the organization since it was established was quietly applauded by its founder Imam Hassan Al Banna as a preaching religious movement. As soon as this movement changed into a political force, it clashed with regimes as it seeks the necessary power to establish the social method it looks for.
The most obvious thing is that the clash between the organization and the regime sometimes was a bloody one and sometimes it was a quelling one, and these kinds took place in all times regardless of the ruling elites and their ideologies.
In monarchy Era, the organization got involved in a comprehensive clash with the regime in 1948 where the ruling elite adopted “liberal” trends. In Nasser’s time, the group clashed twice with the regime, the first was in 1954 and the second was in 1965 where the ruling elite adopted an independent national trend and a socialist trend affiliate to USSR.
In Sadat’s time, MB clashed comprehensively with the regime where the ruling elite was a conservative one but is pro-American and pro-Israeli.
There are signs for comprehensive clash that is possibly would take place with the ruling regime who pursues the same method of Sadat’s approach, besides the regime insists to make the president’s son Gamal Mubarak succeed him in order to guarantee monopolizing power.
Some believe that the frequent clashes with MB and all kinds of regimes that assumed power in Egypt since the first quarter of the previous century is a clear evidence that the problem lies in the ideologies of the organization and its organizational structure. Also the problem may lie in its policies and tactics used by the organization to meet its goals, we can not exclude this reason.
It is true that the organization failed to adapt with the societal developments in Egypt, also it failed in propounding an approach that can override the bloody clash with all ruling factions, like in the example of Turkey , but this is one face of reality.
In fact, failure can not be attributed to the organization only but this problem lies in the Egyptian political system. This system failed to change into a democratic system that is capable to embrace the organization and the Moderate Islamist current according to the rules of political games especially the rules of succession.
I have pointed in a previous article that it is time to get true lessons from this clash and I summarized this in points. First: Muslim Brotherhood was born to be and no body can ever extirpate it from the social and political background because it became deep rooted.
Second: the frequent security strikes empowers the organization, besides illegitimatizing it and forcing it to work secretly would push the organization towards extremism and makes it lack the ability to dialogue with others.
Third: Quelling other political factions who do not participate in power would be in the favor of Muslim Brotherhood only, contradicting with all predictions. This would make the MB to be the sole alternative to the regime especially when knowing that this organization has no national approach that the middle class can embrace in this time.
I have pointed before that the last legislative elections proved a state of political polarization between MB and the regime which is an extremely serious threat. Both parts can not be described as political parties accurately, thence, neither of them can propound a national approach.
The apparent force for the ruling party reflects the power of security and administrative apparatuses of the state rather than reflecting the support for its political approach. The same with Muslim Brotherhood, the relative apparent power of MB reflects the power of religion in society rather than reflecting the popular support for this organization.
Under these two choices, either the ruling elite that tries to tighten its grip through the violence of security apparatuses, or the opposing force that tries to face this hegemony through religion, Egypt faces an awe-striking political emptiness that hinders the participation of three thirds of electorates in arena of political action, this is well proved recently in the legislative elections.
It is clear that this majority tries to face the monopolizing of power in the hands of the ruling elite , and at the same time it feels suspicious from MB. The ruling regime tries to exploit these fears in depicting MB as a major threat in the face of all powers seeking change. Here lies the paradox where Egypt is in between a stick of two ends, one in the hands of the ruling regime and the other is in the hands of MB.
The national party wants to exaggerate in depicting the threat of MB in order to evade real reform and to monopolize power and wealth. Besides the crackdown against MB makes the organization appear as if it is the only alternative for the existing regime. I have assured in the previous article, that this alternative would not assume power through peaceful means but it will be in the end of a state of anarchy and chaos that it seems that the existing regime is pushing us towards this state..
I would like to assure that I am not from those who believe that MB represents a threat to national unity or an obstacle before modernization and renaissance in Egypt; however the real threat is monopolizing power in one hand.
Monopolizing power in the hands of one party would change this party into a despotic one who would paralyze authorities and hampers their change. Despotism and autocracy are the shortest ways to the spawning of corruption, and this according to my views quells any opportunities for establishing a democratic society with active participation from the part of political Islam movements, and not only MB.
I should also assure at the dame time that it is impossible for political Islam movements, especially Muslim Brotherhood to be an active part in the efforts exerted to establish a real democratic political system, if they would not change into a civil political party believes in citizenship, renounces violence as a method to assume power.
I pointed out in many interviews that I have a deep feeling that the core of the problem is not in Muslim Brotherhood organization but it is a problem in the existing political regime. This regime does not want any political parties who would enjoy real popular support whether Islamist ones or civil ones.
This is evident especially when knowing that parties like Al-Wasat Parties and Al-Karama parties are striving for decades to be licensed. It is strange that the ruling regime started quelling severely MB although it overrode that state of hesitation and decided to change into a civil political party with Islamic reference.
That’s why I do not feel any hesitation in charging the civil society with full responsibility for what is taking place because it failed because it failed in developing a creative approach that extinguish mutual concerns between MB and government and all forces seeking democratic change. This condition if not existing, then it is impossible to have a democratic system allows the circulation of power through peaceful means.
I said it many times, there are no hopes in the national party that it would push the political reform process in Egypt but where is the civil society? Why are they not participating and showing dead silence until the disaster befalls.