Like tigtog, I’m not inclined to offer too much substantive commentary on the revolutionary events in Egypt (and across several other countries) as I don’t think that the value of analysis by Australians who aren’t intimately familiar with Egyptian society and politics is all that great. What we can talk about intelligently, I think, is the way that a number of observers and schools of thought – in the West – have tried to make sense of the upheavals we’ve seen, and the meaning of various calls for action and solidarity across the political spectrum.
One legitimate way of looking at the situation in Egypt is through analysing the country’s embeddedness in the globalised international political economy. That has implications for both how this crisis has arisen, and where it will go next. Jodi Dean has collated some links which demonstrate that the events certainly are of concern to “markets”, and the downgrading of Egypt’s public credit and recalculations of “risk” must have its effects on a polity where 40% of its citizens earn less than US$2 a day. More broadly, a couple of decades of “liberalisation” of the Egyptian economy, following all the usual precepts of the Washington Consensus, are not without an impact, to put it mildly.
To some degree, political unrest is often found in societies where there is a demographically very young population, and a disjunction between desired opportunity and reality. In many Middle Eastern countries, parts of the urban youth cohort are quite highly educated, but lack the ability to translate that education into employment, something often exacerbated by the shrinkage of the public sector and mediated through particular cultural norms of repricocity and influence which become distorted. There is, in other words, a reasonably neat sociological line between a large educated and unemployed younger generation and the potential for political unrest.
But that does not mean that the events in Egypt (and elsewhere) are without their own specificity, nor that they are simply explicable through a purely materialist lens. So, while I think that he’s posted some extremely valuable links to informed analysis, and while there’s no doubt that a nascent labour movement has played an important role, I’d be more cautious than Tad Tietze at Left Flank that class analysis covers the field, as it were, and would also be skeptical at reductions of the role of religion to a state-replacement in providing welfare and services.
That is a factor, but just as we’re ill placed to judge the exact cultural, political and social dynamics in Egypt, we should also be very aware of views which can be generalised as if it were possible to make universal claims about ‘the role of Political Islam’ or whatnot. We should also be wary of views which dichotomise Islam and democracy as irreconcilable opposites: it may not be so, and it may not be a matter of making a choice; not that we have the power to choose.
On the other side of the fence, these are, of course, legion.
We have, for instance, one line of thought, represented in Australia by Tom Switzer and David Burchell, which draws false analogies with the French revolutions, and generally melds a view that there is only one template for political revolution with a predictable ‘realist’ set of claims which assimilates American interests with maintenance of the status quo, or the desire to control unpredictable outcomes. That’s hardly surprising, and the dissonance between ideological proclamations about freedom and democracy and the current disarray among neo-conservatives has been widely noted (see, for instance, Jeff Sparrow). America, of course, cannot control events, and we need to think more deeply about the implications of demands that “we” think this or that, do this or that.
The essential absurdity of these power fantasies might be captured in Switzer’s odd proclamation: “Today the spectre of Wordsworth haunts Egypt.”
The general disarray of the American political and opinion milieux is a pointer to the temptations to impose ideological form on events, and the power drives inherent in such attempts, as well as to the failure of ideology to explain an awful lot. The clash of events and their narrativisation is one of the signal lessons of the last decade or so in the Middle East: as force renders itself deeply counter-productive, and ideology defeats itself. That certain other fetishes of “Western thought” like the notion that Israel is the only democracy in the region may be exposed for what they try to do in shaping the world as well as for their truth claims is one significant possible outcome of the revolutions underway, as John Quiggin noticed.
I do think we should avoid doing what a lot of commentators have done: that is, refuse to take the Egyptian protesters at their word. If the desire for immediate and substantive change in Egypt is being articulated as a demand for democracy, we need to remember that democracy itself is a pluralistic concept, and not solely reducible to a particular cultural or political form. Standing with people who demand it, then, is the best political response, and it implies no a priori judgement as to how it’s best instantiated. Solidarity, and political justice, always implies, and should always imply, attention to the voice of the other.
Conservative Michael J Totten tussles with the paradox and comes out on the side of democracy, to which I concur. OTOH, democracy hasn’t exactly flourished in Iran since Shah-Shah-A-Go-Go. One man, one vote, one time is all too possible in this part of the world.
the Jeff Sparrow link is a bit freudian!
Craig Mc @1, I see this comment often. ‘the Arabs/Muslims aren’t ready for democracy’ or some such similar words. How are they going to get ‘ready’ if not by starting/wishing/hoping etc? (Using Iran as example is very unfair, considering the US/UK intalled the Shahin place of their democratic govt because they wanted the oil monies BP coffers.)
Surely the fact that so may of the citizens are willing to protest, risking their lives, means that they are entitled to have a go. We don’t appear to be doing all that great a job at it ourselves, willing to give up freedoms for unachievable securites seems to be counter-productive.
Exactly.
My only caveat is that infant democracies often need a guardian. We didn’t just trust Germany or Japan to become liberal democracies after WWII. It’s all very well to argue for free elections, but what if the first thing people do is vote their vote away?
Is it unfair? Revolutions are a coin toss. Egypt/Tunisia/etc. could possibly end up as Iran II. Further, you could just as easily argue that Sadat/Mubarek have been propped up with western money ever since Egypt was pried from Moscow’s grip.
Let’s hope the best outcome is the one Egypt gets.
one vote, one value, one time
Been reading Krauthammer, Craig Mc?
Craig, what about us. Did we need a guardian? The whole point of Mark’s post is that we always seem to frame these questions in “how will it affect us”. We (western world)don’t own the planet. Our way or the highway, is not how I want the world to operate.
I’m pretty contemptuous of the “Arabs aren’t ready for Democracy” line. There have been one group of Arabs who have handled democracy with flair and aplomb – in the face of discrimination and racism from the ruling state.
I refer of course to Arab citizens of Israel.
Mark, I think your point about young Egyptians being incredibly frustrated as being one of the main reasons behind this is probably spot on. Waleed Aly wrote about this frustration in ‘The Drum’ a couple of days ago.
My only real contact with Arabic youth is a couple of young Saudi guys. They think their monarchy is ridiculous. But, they’re also very well off so they regularly fly to Beirut to escape the restrictions of Saudi Arabia. Their saying is; “what happens in Beirut, stays in Beirut”. But if you didn’t have the resources to regularly escape, life would be dire.
I saw former US secretary of state Albright being interviewed and she was adamant that the example of Indonesia moving from Soeharto to democracy back in the nineties is the best model for Eqypt. Of course her analysis is certainly influeced by the fact she was a honcho at the time, as well as the fact that going straight to the Turkish analogy is now a little too difficult for the average American foreign policy elitist thanks to the actions of that naughty anti-Semite [sic] Erdogan. But still. Her point is a good one, and I’m disappointed I haven’t seen many people make it. I thought we Australian Left types were supposed to be quite sanguine about Indonesia as a light for the Muslim world.
No, not really. Speculating about vague new theocracries arising in North Africa is not the same as pointing out something along the line of how the army which congress graciously allows to operate the second largest fleet of Abrams tanks in the world has been Mubarak’s security blanket for a long, long time.
I for one take it for granted that Egypt is the kind of place where no supreme leader can stay in power for long if he can’t deliver the sugar to his generals. Something which is going to cause problems for any new governmemt, I’m afraid.
These are the protesters demands:
1. Resignation of the President
2. End of the state of emergency
3. Dissolution of the People’s Assembly and the Shora Council
4. Formation of a national transitional government
5. An elected parliament to amend the constitution to allow for presidential elections
6. Immediate prosecution of those responsible for the deaths of the revolution’s martyrs
7. Immediate prosecution of the corrupt and those who robbed the country of its wealth.
From here via Hossam or Atef Said
One thing … 1 and 2 pretty intertwined. I don’t hear much mention of the state of emergency as a reason for the protesters actions, but its one thing I heard from Egyptians (the couple, especially one, that I correspond with) constantly over the last couple of years. It is associated with Mubarak cos it started around the time his regime started.
They want an end to the state of emergency.
All the kids in the marketplace say …
Heard rumours via Twitter and the AJ live blog that the curfew (4am our time, 7 pm theirs) will be enforced by the military tonight. I don’t think the protesters will be going tho.
Spin the clubs cruise down the block
Nickws @9.
Funny that you mention the army, well maybe not.
from day 1 i’ve been screaming: Do NOT trust the army. This is Mubarak’s army not Egypt’s army
and
the army has deployed soldiers, cordoning off protesters who r sleeping in front of the tanks from the rest of the square.
…
It is America and Israel’s army. Mubarak is merely the caretaker.
Thats in the last hour or so, and its a worrying development.
I doubt it, but I suspect we got one anyway. I doubt the Irish or Canadians needed it, but they got one too. Would South Korea be what it is today without the guardianship of the US? Would it even exist?
In any case I said “often”, not “always”. It’s possible a post-revolution Egypt, flying solo would be a solid functioning democracy with free elections stretching into the future. I’m just afraid it’s more likely to reflect The Gaza where there’s always some excuse to postpone elections, and god help anyone who campaigns agin Hamas. Also, even if the west doesn’t get involved, that doesn’t mean someone worse won’t.
Which sounds like the slippery slope to “Arabs can’t handle democracy”.
“Which sounds like the slippery slope to “Arabs can’t handle democracy”.”
Word up.
All this nonsense about “not ready for democracy” does my head in.
Were “we” (our ancestors, assuming you’re of UK descent like me) ready for democracy during the Commonwealth, or did we just slide back into the Stuarts’ Divine Rule for fun?
Did the assorted earls at Runnymede ensure an electoral official approved their how-to-vote cards when they conducted that one-person referendum on King John?
A vague understanding of democracy will show clearly it is a hard won path, not a static state of grace. This is also true in Anglo countries. Your natural prediliction towards democracy is the result of generations of hard struggle, with some backward steps at times.
The only people not ready for democracy are those on their backs with their tummies in the air.
Well, I for one opined from the beginning that the protest movement would not prove sufficiently powerful, by itself, to shift the Mubarak regime. That is why I suggested that the MB would play a pivotal role in these events. And that is pretty close to how events have panned out.
Now, Obama’s special envoy, Frank Wisner*, has counselled the West to accept a gradualist path to constitutional change overseen by Mubarak himself! And after a period of blather and panic, it appears that Obama and the West will accept that advice. Surprise! Surprise!
Let us consider the significance of Obama’s backdown. He has now turned his back on the protesters whom he encouraged to seek democratic reform. He has now accepted that Mubarak can stay, after saying that he could not. Panic and weakness.
Yet the MB continue to insist that they will not co-operate with alleged government plans to democratise unless and until Mubarak is removed.
What are the sit-in protesters to make of all of this? Obama has betrayed them. Egyptian democracy has no powerful foreign friends. Only the MB stands firm. But this fact guarantees withdrawal of international support.
For the protesters, this is a tragedy. There are only two paths forward for them — despair or radicalism.
____________
* Frank Wisner’s father was Director of Plans for the CIA in the 1950s. “Plans” meant assassination, terrorism, sabotage, coups, and subversion.
Magpie at enpassant has linked to the role American agents for economics have changed the Egyptian economy, [the same way they are changing the Australian economy]
IMF and Egypt
http://anticap.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/imf-and-egypt/
World Bank and Egypt
http://anticap.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/world-bank-and-egypt/#comment-1134
When the Americans installed a dictator to safeguard democracy and insisted on economic changes that promote American businesses they made the Egyptian citzenry’s life worse
I scanned the Switzer column. What I don’t get is how someone who can write such a vacuous piece can hold a position at the “United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney”. All in all he’s plays the MB bogeyman card, tells us that we shouldn’t ignore the protesters, approves of the US supporting dictatorships, warns that it shouldn’t support such dictatorships, points out that the US can’t actually do much about dictatorships it either does or doesn’t support … etc.
Imagine you are a leader and there is a crisis. You ring the “United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney” and Tom answers the phone …
Ah I see now. I didn’t mean to read the Switzer piece, the Sparrow link goes to his drivel.
@16
The White House has said it doesn’t agree with Wisner and that his views are his own. It appears to be a major HR problem. This report in the SMH says the US is still strenuously pursing an early exit for the President of Egypt.
“Mr Obama again stopped short of declaring that Mr Mubarak should leave office sooner, but he set out a series of steps that the Egyptian government must meet to assure an ”orderly transition” that seemed to all but require that the Egyptian leader step out of the way, if not resign.”
Of course, as others have pointed out, US can’t wave a magic wand and have him disappear.
This US bunfight over Wisner’s advice re Mubarak is evidence of an administration in deep turmoil.
Either Wisner spoke with Obama’s authorisation, or he didn’t.
If Wisner did speak with Obama’s authorisation, then Obama is locked in combat with the Israel sceptics in the US administration.
If Wisner did not speak with Obama’s authorisation, then Wisner is a plant of the Israel lobby and Obama has been taken to the cleaners.
Either way, it isn’t a good look.
Viewed from a distance what appears most striking about the Egyptian uprising is its distinctively nationalist orientation – e.g. its broad-based support from across all sections of society and the constant assertion by protestors’ of the desire to ‘redeem’ the true Egyptian nation for the people – to which the authorities have, rather lamely, opposed the image of Mubarak the unifying ‘father’.
@19 – Sorry, link fixed.
@21
I heard a White House spokesperson say that it was Wisner’s view.
“‘The views he (Wisner) expressed today are his own. He did not coordinate his comments with the US government,’ State Department spokesman P J Crowley said yesterday.”
I suppose it could be some kind of reverse jawboning by proxy.
If Mubarak thinks he can sit this one out, that if he waits long enough the protesters will give up and go home he’s misread the whole thing. It appears from this distance that the opposition is quite diverse and well organised, the fact that it doesn’t have a clear figurehead is probably an advantage as it makes it hard to discredit or cripple the movement. This fact also makes me skeptical that the successor to the current secular Egyptian state will be an Islamic theocracy along Iranian line. In addition Iran isn’t well liked in the ME for variety of reasons and it’s not a Arab country.
‘I scanned the Switzer column. What I don’t get is how someone who can write such a vacuous piece can hold a position at the “United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney’
He wouldn’t have got within coo-ee of such a sinecure if he had a track record of making sense on US foreign policy.
@25
Are you saying that the “United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney” isn’t that great at analysing US foreign policy?
I’m saying that a US-funded think tank is hardly likely to provide shelter for genuinely critical analysts of US policy.
And any analysis of an empire, particularly this one, has to be critical to be genuine.
@27,
Thanks for the clarification. Looks like the practice of providing shelter to “bewildered” rightwingers within pseudo-academia is part is the US’s international project then.
One another note, heard Wisner of News Radio, sounded a bit bewildered himself. Rather to sure of his own convictions I would have thought, seemed to be delivering his own views rather than a diplomatic line.
of = on
Patrickb@24
The understatement of the year. Don’t know why anyone would want to focus on or even think decisive what Mubarak thinks or feels, let alone assume he’s basing his actions on rational agency. The stalemate has lot more behind it that one old man being stubborn. Prolonging this period has many uses for many parties and the frustrating but inevitable reality is that we cannot know very much about what is going on behind the scenes especially at the highest levels.
The Iraqis must be really pissed. Their “liberation and democracy” cost them half a million dead, the destruction of their electricity and water infrastructure. To say nothing of Abu Grhaib, the destruction of Fallujah and thousands of Ignorant US thugs loose on the streets. Also of course the control of their industry and oil and at least a 30% unemployment rate.
The brutal arse-holes who supported this slaughter should be tried, convicted and sent to Guantanamo
Of course the apologists for the wholesale slaughter will reply that the people got purple fingers in return.
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11635.shtml
Wow.
@30,
The BBC world service has a pretty good spread of angles, from on the spot to govt spokepersons to commentary. That’s how I’ve stayed informed. Of course it’s not the same as being there let alone being an “insider” but hey, this a blog, we comment.
Meanwhile the clonialist powers are trying to steal the Egyptian revolution and forestall people power.
Not a trace of irony there, The US believes that Egypt should remain as a colony of the Military-Industrial complex.
The Egyptian revolutionaries have time and time again said that they regard Suleiman as a puppet of Mubarek (and by extension of the US colonial project in Egypt), they don’t want him.
The US and it’s Nato allies see nothing wrong with trying to derail the Egyptian’s primary goal of removing the regime as a necessary first step to self determination.
If the US and Nato keep up this project of delaying change then they will reap a new Egyptian regime that is intensely anti-western.
OOps forgot to reference the quote, It’s Hilary Clinton with entitlement issues…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/06/egypt-protests-hosni-mubarak-sulieman
Check out this accidentally insightful piece in the Guardian, where we get to apply the always-useful adage that, if the advertiser is saying A, one should believe not-A. For example, Hilary Clinton:
I think she meant to imply the Muslim Brotherhood in this passage, but really, who has been most active in derailing Egyptian politics to pursue their own agenda over the past 30 years? Methinks Clinton protests too loudly. Then we have this from the US envoy:
Hmm, I wonder how on earth we could measure a “national consensus”? Would it be measured, for example, by a week of continual protests by millions of ordinary citizens, who risk their lives every day to indicate what they want? No, it would be through Mubarak “steering those changes through.”
These fucksticks are responsible for our future. It’s kind of saddening, isn’t it?
Saddening and sickening sg.
Thankfully the Egyptians seem pretty set in their determination to hold their ground until:
The Regime (mubarak and any “successers”) is gone.
The state of emergency is over.
They’re on their way to a just society.
There are as many people on the street today as Friday apparently – well according to Al J anyway. Websites like sandmonkey’s and the arabist are talking about the next step – how to go beyond the open source insurrection thats still going.
Its really a matter of who breaks first – whats left of the economy or the protesters.
BTW This is Frank Wisner
Of Patton Boggs.
This is a memorial site set up for those who have died. (I’d also be interested in finding a list of missing or unaccounted for people since jan 25th if anyone knows a good one.)
Katz
MB shifted their position, a leading member in the MB is now talking about ” Egyptian crisis” instead of ” Egyptian revolution” #Tahrir
Could be nothing, but language is an important thing…
Thanks Jules.
Maybe the MB intends to bale.
If so, the regime has done a great job of divide and rule, like what Howard did to the republican movement in 1999.
The MB and the regime have had a symbiotic relationship for a while. Sadat began the process by encouraging the MB as an alternative to the left (mainly on campuses) in the late 1970s. That he was eventually assassinated by an Islamist was, in that sense, a case of chicken – meet roost. By allowing the MB to operate with just enough persecution to give it credibility but not as much persecution as left-wing organisations face, the regime has fostered it as a useful bug bear to scare the Copts and the middle class.
But the MB is not a monolithic orgaqnisation. It has a rank and file and a layer of younger activists who actually believe in stuff (and not just crazy Taliban stuff – this is a sophisticated urban society). The strike wave in 2008 caused all sorts of tensions within the MB. The left revived, there were non-Stalinist socialists doing stuff and textile workers in Mahallah striking and the young cadre of the MB were drawn towards all this while the leadership were reluctant to get involved (as they have been, of course, in this latest revolt). Dr. Tad has covered all this in great detail, but it needs to be reiterated at this point.
So, I would not at all be surprised if the MB leadership are being invited by Suleiman to do a deal and would not also be surprised if they are solemnly consulting their collection of Hadiths for a justification for a sell out.
Whether such a deal would stick is another question – not to mention what it would do to the MB and Islamism more generally as a political current.
Just love the way the US “left” is backing Suleiman as a successor to Mubarak. Go Hilary. Who knows what sort of chaos might ensue if the US doesn’t have a torturer heading up their friendly regimes.
While there can be no doubt that the MB leadership siding with the regime would have its risks for the population, it would also have potential benefits.
Firstly, and most obviously, the west having made such a fuss about the Mubarak regime being the guarantor against the MB, such a move would be disastrous for the credibility of the regime in the west. Nor can Mubarak claim that he stands between the public and an MB regime, if MB becomes an important source of support. His rationale for remaining in power would vanish. MB is still illegal and many of them are in prison, have suffered torture, lost family members etc. So one has to think that this would not go down well within MB as a whole. There would surely be a split. At a minimum, those responsible for the security apparatus — Suleiman among them, would have to be held to account, and one doesn’t see the regime accepting that.
Then of course there’s the little matter of what the other 80% or so of the anti-Mubarak forces would make of MB after that. Nothing good one suspects.
Fran, according to Hossam el-Hamalawy (here: http://www.occupiedlondon.org/cairo/?p=300 – thanks to Dr_Tad):
Robert Bollard thanks for that.
I have been reading Hossam’s blog for a couple of years now. Every time he doesn’t update on twitter for more than few hours lately I start worrying a little.
He’ll definitely be one the regime goes for if this fails (but it won’t).
Cheers
Sorry to reply to Mark so late, but I’ve been away from significant computer access over the weekend. I fear he is reading my posts through the lens of what he expects that a “materialist” or “class” analysis (I presume he means “Marxist”) offers us regarding Egypt — and not what I have actually written.
As my posts at Left Flank should make clear, I have not been among those playing up the independent working class action going on; hence my view that the Egyptian Left will need to systematically engage the Muslim Brotherhood to deepen the revolution, which so far has developed mainly along national-democratic lines.
My emphasis on the class polarisation underpinning the revolt is not about trying to make the case this revolution is something it is not (at least yet). It is about underlining the limits of hoping to solve the democratic questions purely within the sphere of political institutions. I’m saying that any lasting and just resolution to the crisis of Egyptian society requires a more fundamental social (and hence economic) transformation, and that therefore liberal democracy will have extreme problems stabilising the crisis.
On the MB I too would be “skeptical at reductions of the role of religion to a state-replacement in providing welfare and services”, so I’m not sure why Mark raises it here. I do see the MB as something other than just a religious body. The term “Islamism” as I use it refers to a variety of currents that claim Islam as the basis for their politics, but they are political tendencies, not reducible to either their religious referents or (in the case of some) their welfare activities.
Finally, Mark’s view that “we’re ill placed to judge the exact cultural, political and social dynamics in Egypt” is of course true at one level, but enough is known that we can be aware of the histories and social origins of various political currents, as well as much empirical data (summarised well by people like Juan Cole) about the structure of modern Egyptian society. Otherwise we’re left with being unable to glean much other than the banal fact a plurality of processes have led to an extremely significant event; one which will have wide ramifications globally. Trying to make sense of which ones are more or less important is pretty important, I’d argue, if we are to follow these events reflectively.
For more on the working class action thing, I recommend the interview Robert Bollard @42 linked to via me. The relevant text is on Left Flank here.
@Dr_Tad, sorry if I read more into your post than was there! I should clarify that the bit about religion was a more general comment about some responses I’ve seen from the left, not specifically directed at your posts/s.
I do also think we can make some sense of what’s going on, obviously, but my caution is really:
(a) that we might be reading a lot more into things than meets the eye by viewing it through pre-packaged and probably highly misleading categories (ie Islamism, but also class politics);
(b) there really is a political and ethical point here about the dangers of imposing views which seem common sense or “natural” to us on events.
Just back from the Middle East and I was in Egypt last year where all the talk was of frustration with the succession, no-one wanted Mubarak’s son, but they knew any elections would get rigged. Other commentators have written of the huge preponderance of young people in Egyptian society, with no jobs and no housing so often unable to get married, and they are spot on. The regime stays in power with US aid so the US is over a barrel as they preach democracy but fund authoritarian regimes all over South West Asia.
There comes a point where we have to let Egyptians decide their future for themselves as the West has interfered enough. We might not like the result, as with the elections in Gaza, and there is a lot of nonsense talked a about the Muslim Brotherhood, but our priority is to hear the voices for change and respect them, not interfere as we have for the last two hundred years.
As for the Arabs of Israel point, yes, they can vote, but in most other respects, they are second class citizens and they know it. Go and talk to them.
This is Robert about to get Fisked for this: Exhausted, scared and trapped, protesters put forward plan for future
This comes from an online friend in Egypt called “D” well for the purposes of this post anyway. Thats obviously not her real name or even her real nickname.
Response to the headline:
“Bullshit. Fisk yet again misses the mark, almost completely. His “analysis” eerily echoes the Egyptian media’s disinfo — maybe he’s been playing hookie and doing his “field reporting” watching Al Arabiya and Egyptian tv from the couch in his hotel suite. Yesterday alone, on Day 13, there were nearly 2 MILLION demonstrators in Cairo’s Tahrir Square (plus 1 million in Alexandria and 1/2 million in Mansoura) — Al Jazeera’s continuous live coverage showed singing, dancing, poetry readings, satire and enthusiastic chanting of the revolution’s objectives. The “exhausted, scared and trapped protesters” lie is one being peddled by the Egyptian media which is also, incidentally, preventing any filming or other coverage of the hundreds of thousands of Egyptian citizens who have been and are marching daily across all of Egypt, not just in Tahrir Square.” – D
- Fisk
“Every word in this sentence is false. First, everybody I know who has been to Tahrir Square has remarked on how incredibly clean everything is, despite the huge number of people there. The demonstrators have organized street-cleaning crews that are doing an amazing job. Some are having fun with it, like the group of young people going around with garbage bags and shouting, “I am a representative of (the ruling) National Democratic Party, and we need donations!” If you look at the actual filmed coverage of Tahrir Square, I challenge anybody to find one piece of trash on the ground.
This suggests that Mr. Fisk may not even have been to Tahrir Square in person.
Second, the millions of Egyptians in Tahrir Square and elsewhere have been ADAMANT that they will not appoint ANYBODY to represent them or to engage in any negotiations whatsoever until their most important demand is met, for the regime to fall — with the removal of Hosni Mubarak as a non-negotiable first step.”
- D(she is not in Cairo, but near Alexandria)
- Fisk
“The Egyptian regime is expert at creating a false “opposition” and then pretending that this “diversity” proves how democratic it is. None of these men have anything whatsoever to do with this revolution, and in fact are (witting or unwitting) sock-puppets for every talking point now being put out by the regime’s propaganda machine as “concessions” — the idea is to have these phony “representatives” say them, because it sounds so much better coming from them than from the regime itself.
Most striking is that while the millions of demonstrators are shouting themselves hoarse, saying “No to Mubarak and no to Suleiman, they are agents of the Americans” (it rhymes in Arabic), the first item that these phony representatives are “demanding” is that Mubarak transfer all his dictatorial powers to Omar Suleiman!! Every individual or organization or party that is “demanding” that power is transferred to Omar Suleiman is thus publicly exposed as an enemy of the people, but the Egyptian media is ignoring the real revolutionaries and giving a platform only to these fakes.”
- D
She then goes on to trash Fisk further, criticising his journalism skills:
“Oh, Fiskie, Fiskie, you pathetic excuse for a journalist, you. There is nobody named “Nagib Suez” — one of Egypt’s most famous businessmen is the billionaire Naguib Sawiris, whose family empire includes not only vast telecommunications but construction and tourism and manufacturing and media holdings.”
Finally on the MB:
“Aw jeez, more bullshit. Omar Suleiman invited the Muslim Brotherhood for “dialogue” and the MB spent several days dithering, refusing to say whether they’d go for it or not. After all, following 6 decades of being labeled an illegal organization, here was the regime running after them and brandishing the promise of legitimacy. Finally they decided that they would agree to one meeting to hear what Suleiman had to say. This tentative meeting cost them dearly in terms of public support and it was in response to loud public outrage that they insisted they’d only gone to listen and to repeat the “street’s” demand for Mubarak to leave, and said that the meeting was unfruitful and that they saw no purpose to any further meetings. In other words, Fisk has it exactly bass-ackward: the MB lost some support, not because it refused to talk with the regime, but because it temporarily gave in to the temptation to meet with Suleiman, though they realized their mistake and are trying to make up for it now.
The MB has been desperate to ensure that they are not totally left behind by this revolution that had nothing whatsoever to do with them. In fact, they’d firmly refused to join the initial demonstrations on January 25, saying that they did not know who was calling for these demonstrations and they could not join something whose agenda and organizers were unclear. Only on January 28 (the “Day of Wrath”) did they decide to join, but in doing so they were exposed as much weaker in terms of number and influence than they or the regime have been claiming. Of course, this has not stopped the regime’s media from constantly pushing the lie that the MB is “behind” this movement (along with the Mossad, Hezbullah, Iran, Hamas and Al Qaeda) and that its members form the bulk of the demonstrators.
The MB itself, however, has maintained that its members are Egyptians just like everybody else and deserve the right to have some representation in Egypt’s political landscape, but that they do not feel that they have the right to make any demands of the regime that differ from those made by the revolutionaries themselves. Interestingly, they have even signed off on the revolutionaries’ demand that Egypt’s new constitution be designed to make Egypt a “democratic, secular state”.
I really don’t understand why Fisk is still being quoted — he’s a very poor and lazy researcher who bases his slapped-together “analysis” on errors of fact and what are clearly second- or even third-hand sources.”
- D
Sorry for the big dump of an unattributed source, but given the circumstances there is no way I’m gonna ID that person or provide any potential way to identify them. I hope people understand that, the person I quoted is someone I’ve known “online” for years, and the only reason I ever got exposed to what was brewing there.
She also says things I don’t always agree with, some even in her analysis I posted above (thats not everything she wrote either, just what’s most relevant) but i’m here and she is where its happening so her opinion carries more weight than mine I reckon.
I’ve been following a bunch of Egyptians on the ground in Tahrir, and outside Egypt as well, and her opinions seem closer to those people than anything else outside a few blogs and reports an AL J and Democracy Now. (Many of which come from Egyptians in Egypt)
There are some better sources than Fisk for some of the info she criticises Fisk about. They seem to have got it ‘right”.
here
Ghonim has been released btw. You can see a report and interview via Al J. Pretty heavy stuff, really moving.
Thanks for finding that comment.
One ore report from “D”, one I find disturbing.
“The regime shut down the economy and then blamed the demonstrators for impoverishing people
The regime sent in armed thugs to kill and terrorize people and then blamed the demonstrators for the death and suffering.
The regime sold Egypt to foreign predators and then blamed the demonstrators for “introducing foreign influences”.
And now, while people are celebrating the release of Wael Ghoneim and being persuaded that Hossam Badrawy and Mubarak’s “new team” represent real change, Kareem Amer and many others are quietly being disappeared and more people are being killed.”
- D
As of yet Kareem Amer hasn’t turned up .. finding info on missing or “disappeared” people in Egypt is difficult and frustrating. Egypt’s a big place and everyone’s attenmtion is focused on a very small part of it.
Tho the latest reports are looking promising in general, the popular movement seems to be growing behind following Ghonim’s release and moving appearance on telly.
Israel liked Omar Suleiman in August 2008. From Wikileaks:
All this effort by those young Egyptian protesters has resulted in the installation of Israel’s man!
It’s a funny old world.
Katz I know people who have been saying from the start this was a CIA/Israeli plot to install Suleiman. I still can’t believe it, and I don’t think the protesters will accept it.
For a start none of seem to trust him to end the state of emergency, but they do fear he’d instigate a brutal crackdown on as many people involved as he could. Reading #arabawy’s twitter feed before was quite amazing. He claimed to have has soldiers saying to him “we are with you” and shaking his and other protesters hands and cheering them on.
This guy has been saying “don’t trust the army” from day one, he’s been pretty staunch about that, and right on occasions too – for instance last Wednesday or Thursday, the battle for Tahrir.
Latest reports are marchers joining from the civil service, academics etc etc, and there are rumours that Mubarak is off too Germany for medical treatment, tho thats not the first time false rumours about him have gone around. I don’t think that’ll be enough on its own tho. His regime is tarred with the same brush.
Whatever happens I think today in Tahrir Square would have been one of the greatest places to be, possibly ever, in all history. All the reports I’ve been following have a certain frisson today.
Cept “D”. Tho her last was nearly 12 hours ago.
Jules, I’m sure that it is not too late to remove Suleiman as well. And I’m pretty confident that many people suspected Suleiman. But here is the power of Wikileaks — chapter and verse from the secret stash of dirt at the heart of world power.
Would Egypt have erupted without the inspiration of Tunisia? We’ll never know now. But it is doubtless that Tunisia did rise.
Tunisia has been called the first “Wikileaks revolution”. Again, would Tunisia have risen without Wikileaks? We’ll never know now, it happened.
Despite the regime’s shift towards Suleiman as the hard man to sort out the unruly mob, the evidence from overnight is that the situation is running further out of the state’s control, including the growing presence of organised workers’ action fusing economic and political demands. I’ve brought together some of the latest at Left Flank here, with a bunch of links.
There are now barricades being erected by protesters around the Parliament, where they are occupying the streets.
The regime has survived longer than Tunisia’s but the potential for a wider social radicalisation also seems much greater.
For detailed analysis of what is happening in Egypt here is a link to Almasry Alyoum Egypt’s largest non-government newspaper.
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en
Dr Tad, reading Hossams tweets last night was a moving experience.
The only real time I had online yesterday was spent trying to get my head around the OLO thing, so it wasn’t till late last night that I caught up on how the day was going after Ghonim’s TV appearance. Last night I saw a photo of him with Khaleed Said’s mum, it was the first time they had met.
I kept Hossam’s twitter feed till last cos he’s usually got a good take on whats happening.
When i read this:
can’t stop myself from crying. We will win.
I almost shed a tear myself, but I’ve just had some impossibly good news so thats probably why.
The regime has survived longer, but it was far more robust than Tunisia’s. But its gone, and Sulieman is too I think. People know his attitude, and after Ghonim’s interview I don’t think anyone is scared any more.
And the people are on their way to forming a functioning society and ignoring the state run by the Regime. Yesterday morning I was thinking the people on the street can’t go back, cos the the risk is so great. Today I’m thinking no one can go back cos some sort of invisible line seems to have been crossed.
Katz I don’t think its all down to wikileaks.
a href=”http://www.arabawy.org/2010/10/31/something-in-the-air/”>Today, I took a cab to Ramses. The driver was silent till he found out I was a journalist. That’s when he exploded:
“May God burn down this regime. This country is going on fire soon, very soon. We can’t take it anymore. Why is everyone blaming the Nazif government? Nazif is nothing. It’s Hosni Mubarak himself who is responsible for this situation we have reached.
…
There will be another bread initfada, like that of 1977. And this time we will burn the country down. We will not burn the cars, buses or shops. These are ours. No no. We will burn them. We will burn this government. We will burn down the police stations.”
Thats from Hossam el-Hamalawy’s (#arabawy) blog in October last year.
I think its a perfect storm sort of thing. Khaleed Said’s death inspired a movement called “We are all Khaleed Said”, and it turns out Wael Ghonim (a google exec) was heavily involved in making it happen, if not completely responsible.
Then there is the workers movement that has been unhappy for ages.
Then there was the bombing of the Coptic Church in Alexandria while the Tunisia thing was just getting started.
many more things, harassment of bloggers, ordinary people. Torture of criminals and political prisoners (funny how torture seems to infect a nation – like the US or Egypt)
I think wikileaks contributed, esp in Tunisia, but I think the uprisings would have happened anyway.
The leaked cables certainly accelerated things, and in that sense wikileaks once again shows its awesomeness. Its a great tool for the empowerment of mass movements against corruption. I don’t this revolution was dependent on modern coms or twitter or the internet pr wikileaks, but all of those things made it alot easier for the protesters and could possibly have made the difference between success and failure.
The people driving the uprising were able to use those things as effective tools in countering something regimes usually can control – the flow of info.
That certainly helped their cause.
Once this is all over and people start to unpack and process what happened properly, I think what happened in Egypt is gonna keep people talking and thinking for a long long time. Of course I’m assuming the protesters will win, but I’ve thought that since Jan 30th, well since it started actually.
What happens when Mubarak goes, and how soon the attempts to compromise things in the US’ preferred direction start biting? I don’t think a liberal democratic Egypt, free of external interferenmce will be that sympathetic to US interests, but it probably will have a more measured attitude than other regimes in the area, and potentially other Egyptian ones. I doubt the Egyptian people will want to celebrate freedom by declaring war on Israel, but I assume they will up the pressure wrt to Palestine, esp Gaza.
That was sposed to be a link in the quote. You could C & P it, the article is worth a read. Its about this coming revolution, written in October last year (I think.)
Reports from AlMasry Alyoum show recent developments in the Egyptian revolution including calls for legal action against the information minister, agreement to amend the anti-democratic articles of the Costitution
Fifty international organizations called on US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to stop sending ‘illegal’ aid to Egypt. .
Further reports indicate involvement by the military in beatings, arrests and ‘disappearances’, massive waves of labour unrest and the spread of the revolution to regional towns.
Ugh that linking code is a pain! In future I’ll simply copy the urls in.
[links edited to make them work in previous comment ~ mod]
Far more important news, just beginning to be acknowledged by some of the media around the world, is the growing strikewave in Egypt. There have been strikes from quite early on in Mahalla, the centre of the textile industry where a workers’uprising took place in 2008. These are deepening, but the latest news is a dignificant spread to include steel workers, the oil industry, the railways and the Suez Canal.
It’s no longer just street protests. The big battalions are being brought in to the battle.
http://www.arabawy.org/2010/10/31/something-in-the-air/
Thats the link I stuffed up @56
The Christian Science Monitor reports the outbreak of wildcat strikes by workers who have rejected leadership of the regime-controlled Egyptian Federation of Trade Unions. Moreover, workers are beginning to form independent unions.
The most compelling historical equivalent was the sudden rise of Soviets in both the 1905 and March 1917 revolutions in Russia. However, some caution is needed here because many of Egyptian workers are employed in the bloated Egyptian public sector. Some of these folks would probably perceive the Mubarak regime to be their meal ticket and thus may hang back from demanding a speedy end to the regime.
But it is at least becoming apparent that a disciplined, broad-based, organised political force is emerging and that the MB is no longer the lone movement boasting those attributes.
Katz:
The iron and steel workers, at least, are not holding back. Here’s there demands (from Lenin’s Tomb):
Can’t say I am surprised that a significant proportion of the Egyptian population has chosen not to conform to narratives of ‘orderly transitions’ and ‘getting the economy back on track’. Let’s hope that these recent actions by the Army are the actual last death throes of the current regime and not the precursor to a brutal explosion of blind rage at the ‘ungrateful’ broader population.
Yes RB, this movement is growing some big strong legs.
It took some time for these labour groups to get themselves organised. That organisation occurred during the time that the regime delayed over the question of pushing Mubarak out immediately.
But the protesters hung tough and refused to make any major concessions. Instead of petering out, the Tahrir Square sit-down attracted more, and more diverse, participants.
The stand-off thus created provided a space for the rise of these unofficial workers’ groups.
This movement now has sufficient momentum to force major changes in Egypt and in the region.
Interestingly, Israel probably prefers a leftist revolution to an islamist one, whereas the US probably prefers the opposite. It will be fascinating to watch how the Israel lobby and business lobbies in the US struggle for control of US foreign policy levers.
I guess this activist spam goes here, if anywhere:
Amnesty International Global Day of Solidarity for Egypt – Saturday, 12 February 2011
(Oddly, these protests are organised for only six cities, and half of them are Australian.)
Mubarak announces that he intends to hang tough. He has made a few minor concessions as part of a salami strategy.
But these concessions appear to be insufficient — too little too late — to allay the rising activism of ever broader Egyptian groups and interests.
It appears that this is the moment for serious violence.
Seems like Mubarak is really keen to do a Mussolini/Ceaucescu doesn’t it?
Its scary to watch Mubarak pathetically cling to power, vitually begging for violence to break out in the streets.
The question is, does Mubarak know more than we do about the way important armed forces units and the MB will jump on this one?
What do you reckon Katz?
Did you catch the brotherhood guy on lateline last night?
I’d strongly suggest that if you thinking of having an affair, you get to it asap. It may be too late next week.