Category: Analysis

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/04/11/Tribal-infighting-plagues-Upper-Egypt.html

On April 9, Salem Abu Ghazala, deputy head of the Supreme Council of Arab Tribes, announced a one-month truce between the Upper Egyptian tribes of Bani Helal and the Daboudiya a few hours before the first truce, which was to last for three days, had expired. “The truce aims at paving the way for a final reconciliation between the two tribes as well as identifying the actual perpetrators and estimating the damages,” he said in a press statement. “The state is to interfere in case the truce is breached.” Each tribe formed a committee to monitor the implementation of the truce and make sure normalcy is restored in Aswan, the city in Southern Egypt that witnessed the bloody conflicts which killed 26 and injured more than 50 while the Supreme Council of Arab Tribes formed a fact-finding committee to look into the triggers of the clash.

The fighting reportedly started on April 2 when two students from the Nubian tribe the Daboudiya wrote offensive graffiti on their school wall about a girl from the Arab Bani Helal tribe while according to the Interior Ministry statement, the Bani Helal girl was sexually harassed by a group of Daboudiya’s young men. A cycle of violence and counter-violence ensued during the following two days that witnessed intensive gunfights and acts of vandalism amid complaints of minimal intervention on the part of security forces. The unprecedented nature of the incident triggered a spate of speculation about the real reasons for the occurrence of the massacre and the political factors that might have been involved.

Muslim Brotherhood involvement?

“There are signs of the involvement of the Muslim Brotherhood in igniting the conflict between the two tribes,” said Egyptian army spokesman Colonel Ahmed Ali in a statement. Although the Interior Ministry attributed the conflict to the alleged sexual harassment incident, Nubian lawyer and rights activist Mohammad Azmi had a different story.

According to Azmi, the Interior Ministry first claimed that the conflict was between members of the Muslim Brotherhood and other residents of the city and did not interfere for two whole days because of the ties between security forces and members of the Bani Helal tribe. “Security forces have been using members of the Bani Helal tribe, who mainly work in drugs, arms dealing, and prostitution, to crush protests and sit-ins by force. That is why they have become very influential,” he wrote on his Twitter account. Azmi also refuted allegations by severalmedia outlets concerning an old feud between the two tribes. Nubian activist Manal al-Tibi argued that the Interior Ministry was unable to deal with the Bani Helal tribe because they are heavily armed. “According to eye witnesses, security forces were very weak because they could not confront the arsenal of Bani Helal,” she said in a press statement. “On the other hand, the Daboudiya’s only weapons are cudgels and knives.” Dozens of Nubians staged a protest in Cairo, calling for the resignation of Interior Minister Mohammad Ibrahim, who they accused of siding with Bani Helal, and demanded that investigations into the massacre be conducted by officials from Cairo as the head of the Aswan Investigation Bureau is a member of the Bani Helal tribe.

The involvement of the Muslim Brotherhood was, however, supported by several parties. Former Aswan MP Helal al-Dandarawi said that a teacher from the school where the fight started opened the school gate for members of Bani Helal to attack the Daboudiya students who were said to have harassed the girl. “This teacher is a member in the Muslim Brotherhood and is reported to be behind the graffiti that insulted the Bani Helal girl,” he said in a TV interview. In another interview, Dandarawi noted that the font and color of the graffiti that insulted Bani Helal is the same as that written in retaliation allegedly by Bani Helal to insult the Daboudiya. “This means that a third party was trying to turn the two tribes against each other,” he added.

According to Judge Mohamed Adlan, chairman of the Nubian Club, the Muslim Brotherhood started the conflict to retaliate against Nubians for their stance on presidential elections. “When Field Marshal Abdel Fattah al-Sisi met with Nubian leaders, members of the Muslim Brotherhood were infuriated and decided to take revenge,” he said in a TV interview. Adlan argued that the number of the deaths from Bani Helal proves that there was a conspiracy. “Nubians do not possess weapons, so how all those members of Bani Helal were killed remains a mystery.”

Hani Youssef, coordinator of the Nubian Union, had a differentview. “I am against Mursi, but we cannot blame everything on the Muslim Brotherhood,” he said in a TV interview. “This will never solve the problem.” Potential presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabahi agreed: “There is no evidence to prove the Muslim Brotherhood’s involvement in the Aswan crisis,” he said. “The state has to assume its responsibilities.”

A larger conspiracy

On the other hand, Presidential Media Advisor Ahmed al-Meslemani saw the conflict as part of a larger conspiracy to create an independent Nubian state.

“Several domestic and international parties are involved in a plot to separate Nubia from Egypt,” he said in a press interview. “These attempts would never bear fruit.” He did not, however, name the parties involved. While Meslemani did not support the argument about the Muslim Brotherhood’s involvement, he did accuse the group of taking advantage of the crisis. “The Muslim Brotherhood is trying to politicize the incident to make it seem like a conspiracy by the security forces to distract public opinion from the state’s repression of Islamist protests,” he explained. “Several of the Muslim Brotherhood websites have been promoting this theory.” In the same vein, Sheikh Mahmoud al-Helali, the imam of a mosque in Aswan and a member of the Beni Helal tribe, accused the Interior Ministry of distracting public opinion from the security forces’ inability to contain the crisis as soon as it had started. “It is always easy for security forces to accuse the Muslim Brotherhood to cover up for its negligence,” he said in a TV interview. “They have to admit they were wrong so that similar incidents will not recur.”

“Had it not been for us, the situation would have been much more disastrous,” said Aswan Security Chief General Hassan al-Sohagi. “We intervened at the first minute.” Sohagi refuted claims by members of both tribes about the absence of security forces. “The occurrence of some incidents that we could not prevent was due to the extreme proximity of members of the two conflicting tribes,” he said in a TV interview. “Some even live in the same building.”

“The Aswan security chief is held accountable for every drop of blood that was shed in the city,” insisted Ibrahim al-Prince, coordinator of the Arab Tribes coalition, for his part.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/03/30/Are-female-students-safe-in-Egyptian-universities-.html

On April 6, Gaber Nassar, president of Cairo University, is to sign a cooperation protocol with the “Shoft Taharosh” movement (Arabic for “I’ve been a witness to harassment”) which was founded in Cairo in 2012. According to the group’s coordinator Fathi Farid, the protocol would allow members of the movement to be constantly present across Cairo University’s grounds to document cases of sexual harassment and to conduct surveys with female students about previous experiences of sexual harassment by male colleagues. “The Ministry of Higher Education, the university president, and university security have to facilitate the movement’s job and cooperate with volunteers who would be raising awareness on campus about the dangers of harassment and ways to fight it,” Farid said in a press interview.

The protocol is to be signed between Nassar and movement representative Azza Kamel. According to Nassar, members of the group are to obtain special IDs that will enable them to enter the campus. “They will soon come to my office to complete the necessary paperwork in order to start their work on university grounds,” he said in a TV interview.

Pink top, blonde hair

This news comes in the aftermath of a sexual harassment incident against a female student on campus which made international headlines. The movement, which identifies itself as “a pressure group that works on monitoring and documenting sexual harassment crimes against women,” was the first to report the incident.

According to the statement it issued, dozens of male students surrounded a female student near Cairo University’s School of Law on March 16 and harassed her. “They first harassed her verbally then started touching her and attempted to strip her of her clothes,” said the statement.

“The girl had to hide in the ladies room until security personnel were able to save her and get her out of campus.” While mediareports and the university president referred to the incident as unprecedented, the movement stressed in the same statement that “this is not the first incident of its kind” and that female students have always been subjected to different forms of sexual harassment on campus.

The incident triggered angry reactions among intellectuals and rights activists not only due to the nature and context of the incident, but also due to many of the responses that followed. The most controversial response was that of Nassar himself when he gave a phone interview live on TV a day after the assault took place.

According to Nassar, the girl, who is shown in the video wearing black pants and a pink top, was wearing a loose garment and took it off upon entering campus. “University security does not admit students wearing improper clothes,” he said. “Students’ clothes have to be in line with society’s traditions and we will never allow otherwise to happen.”

Blaming the victim

Responding to Nassar in the same talk show, Farid expressed his shock at the university president’s push to blame the victim instead of acknowledging his moral responsibility for her and objected to his statement about the university administration’s intention to take disciplinary action against the girl and the men who assaulted her. He also refuted Nassar’s allegations about the incident being a first. “A year ago a student from the School of Engineering was sentenced to a month in jail and this was in the press and everyone knew about it,” he said. “He is clearly not doing his job properly at the university.” Farid added that the movement receives dozens of complaints from female students who are harassed by their male colleagues and sometimes by their professors.

On March 19, Nassar issued a statement in which he fully condemned the harassment incident. “The perpetrators of this crime have to be penalized and the victim is not to be blamed at all,” said the statement. “There is nothing that justifies such a crime.” Nassar apologized for his comments on the victim’s clothes, which he attributed to the tension caused by the magnitude of the incident. “I also want to stress that the girl is not to be subjected to any disciplinary action. She will only be summoned to give her testimony about the incident.” He also called in a TV interview upon all students who were witnesses to the incidents to give their testimony and pointed out that students involved in the assault could be subject to dismissal from the university.

While Nassar’s change in stance was welcomed by women rights organizations, which had earlier described his initial response as “regressive,” the reaction of male students interviewed by several media outlets was considered shocking.

Public opinion

In a survey conducted by the Egyptian daily independent al-Shorouk, one of the students, while stressing that the victim was not wearing a loose garment on top of her clothes as claimed by Nassar, blamed university security for admitting her into campus “in such improper clothes.” He also said that what the boys did should not be considered harassment.

In another survey conducted by the news website Veto Gate, a student who witnessed the incident blamed the victim for her “extremely provocative outfit.” When asked if he ever thought of reporting the incident to the dean, he said: “Why should I report it? She had it coming. She provoked the people.” Another student blamed the victim’s parents “for allowing her to go out like this.”

The most shocking response, however, was that of TV talk show host Tamer Amin who referred to the victim’s outfit as “seductive,” “revealing,” and “slutty” and to the attackers as “sexually frustrated” and “miserable” while also blaming both her parents and university security.

Amin criticized the university administration for not being firm enough with the girl and argued that clothes are not a matter of personal freedom. “She is free to wear whatever she wants or not to wear anything at all when she’s out spending the night at bars and whorehouses, but not in state-supervised institutions,” he said. “She was obviously going to campus for another reason that is not related to education.”

Victim’s fear

“If there ever was a case that demonstrated the senselessness of victim-blaming in sexual harassment, it is that of Egypt,” wrote Hannah Somerville in The Independent last week.

In her article entitled “Sadly, this poor woman’s experience at Cairo University is all too common in Egypt,” Somerville noted that a recent U.N. survey revealed that almost 99% of Egyptian women have been subjected to sexual harassment. She, however, expresses her surprise at the lack of official records for the number of harassment incidents owing to women’s fear of exposure.

“Strikingly, the majority of data on the topic comes from NGOs and international organizations, for the simple reason that many women do not report such events to the police,” she added.

In an article entitled “The streets belong to them – women should stay at home,” published in al-Masry al-Youm on March 19, writer Rania Ibrahim linked the Cairo University incident to the general allocation of space between men and women in the Egyptian society.

She recalls seeing a group of young men celebrating New Year’s Eve in the streets while she, driving back home at the same time, made sure she locked her car door so that none of them would be able to assault her.

“While men are out celebrating, thousands of women are at home for fear of going out and being harassed and very few take the risk,” she wrote.

“The city’s nightlife belongs to men because they can do whatever they want without being assaulted or intimidated.” The Cairo University incident, Ibrahim argued, proves that the spaces women have been “allocated” by Egyptian society are getting more and more limited.

“Women are now threatened not only in the streets or in public transportation, but also in their work or study places,” Ibrahim said, adding that women in Egypt are seemingly allowed to practice their rights while in reality they are being deprived of them.

“It’s as if women are allowed to leave their homes under unspoken societal terms: you can work and get an education, but be prepared to bear the consequences if you are humiliated or sexually assaulted while doing so.”

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/03/19/Egypt-s-elections-law-Back-to-square-one-.html

This week, human rights lawyer and former presidential candidate Khaled Ali retracted his decision to run for Egypt’s 2014 elections, citing serious reservations about the new presidential election law. Ali objected to Article 7 of the law, which makes the decisions of the Presidential Elections Committee immune to appeals.

“A candidate who is deemed unqualified by the committee has the right to go to court. If the results are rigged, they have to be contested,” Ali said in the press conference he held to announce his withdrawal. “This is not only in the best interest of candidates, but also of the Egyptian people.”

Ali did not approve of Article 18 of the law, which gives candidates only 30 days to campaign, including meetings, flyers and posters, media outlets, and other activities “permitted by law.” Ali said if members of a candidate’s campaign engage in any kind of gathering seen by the authorities as a form of campaigning before the specified time, they can be arrested under the protest and assembly law.

The same timeframe applies to receiving funds. “How am I supposed to tour all Egypt and collect donations within this short time?” he asked. Ali attributed this article to the state’s reluctance to give “other candidates” the chance to promote their programs.

Article 28 is equally problematic for Ali, as members of the candidate’s campaign in subsidiary polling stations will not be given a copy of the results, as was the case in the 2012 elections. They will only receive reports of the results in the main polling stations, which does not allow them to monitor the process of adding up votes.

Article 1, which lists the qualifications of a presidential candidate, is also of major concern to Ali, as candidates must have a university degree. “So you automatically assume that people who don’t get a university education are unqualified? You’re the ones who spread illiteracy and ruined the education process,” he said, addressing the state. Ali cited the example of prominent Egyptian journalist and writer Mohamed Hassanein Heikal, who does not have a university degree.

Ali also objected to another condition in the same article, which stipulates that the presidential candidate should not suffer from any “physical or mental diseases” that would affect his performance. This would be decided by the health committee appointed by the state. “Is there a list of such diseases?” Ali asked.

“I’m not announcing my withdrawal from the elections. I’m refusing to take part in a charade whose end we all know is predetermined,” he concluded.

Appealing to appeal

Presidential candidate Hamdeen Sabahi sent an open letter, dated March 12, to interim President Adli Mansour asking him to reconsider the immunity given to the Presidential Elections Committee. Sabahi expressed his surprise, which he said is shared by the majority of political factions and legal experts, at not allowing the committee’s decisions to be appealed.

He said Article 7 violates Article 97 of the Egyptian constitution, which states that litigation is a right guaranteed to all, that the state is committed to facilitating the litigation process, and that granting immunity to any act or decision is forbidden.

“Violating the constitution less than two months after it was approved is not acceptable and not in the country’s best interest,” wrote Sabahi. “It makes the constitution, in which we invested a lot of time and effort, sheer ink on paper, and invites distrust in the Egyptian state on both the local and international levels.”

He refuted claims that the article brings more stability to Egypt following the declaration of election results. According to Sabahi, while the decisions of the Presidential Elections Committee cannot be appealed, a lawsuit can be filed at the Supreme Constitutional Court against the law according to which the president is elected. “Then, too, the legitimacy of the elected president will be questioned and stability is not expected to prevail.”

Constitutional legality

Prominent constitutional expert Nour Farahat said: “I was extremely surprised when I read the law. How come a law that violates the constitution is issued in a country that witnessed two revolutions and is ruled by the head of the Supreme Constitutional Court?”

Farahat said the principle of immunity was unacceptable during the rule of Islamist President Mohamed Mursi, but is being approved now. “No man of law with a clear professional conscience could ever accept that,” Farahat said.

He added that while Egypt is struggling to prove that the toppling of the Muslim Brotherhood was the result of a popular revolution rather than a military coup, this law makes matters worse. “The article makes it seem to the international community that the law is tailored for one particular candidate.”

Ayman Salama, a professor of international law, seconded Farahat’s opinion. “All citizens have the right to appeal decisions made by different judicial bodies,” he said. “This right is not only safeguarded by the constitution, but also by international law.”

For judge Ali Awad, the president’s advisor for constitutional affairs, the law is the most adequate for the critical stage through which Egypt is going. “Egypt is going through a tough time as far as security is concerned, and we need to be practical in order to complete the electoral process within the time limit specified in the post-June 30 roadmap,” he said.

Awad said appealing the committee’s decisions would result in a lengthy legal process that would leave Egypt in a political vacuum, resulting in more chaos. He denied that Article 7 violates the constitution, but did not elaborate.

Law professor and constitutional expert Shawki al-Sayed said even though the committee’s decisions cannot be appealed before courts, this does not mean they are absolutely irreversible. “The committee’s decisions can still be appealed before the committee itself, since it’s considered an independent judicial body characterized by neutrality,” he said.

Judge Mohamed Hamed al-Gamal, former head of the State Council, said the article is necessary to prevent “certain factions” from disrupting the electoral process. “Those factions want to obstruct the roadmap and to delay the elections,” he said.

Islamist parties see the law and the withdrawal of Ali as evidence that the presidential elections will not be free or fair. Hamza Zobaa, official spokesman of the Freedom and Justice Party – the political arm of the Brotherhood – said the results are expected to be rigged in favor of army chief and Defense Minister Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

“When candidates withdraw, it means they realize that the electoral process is just a farce that Sisi initiated to deceive theworld into thinking that we have a real democracy,” Zobaa said. The ultra-conservative al-Watan Party shares the same view. “It is indeed a farce and Hamdeen Sabahi is part of it,” said party spokesman Ahmed Badei.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/03/09/Egypt-s-ban-on-Hamas-a-political-decision-.html

On March 4, the Cairo Urgent Matters Court banned the activities of Hamas, ordered the closure of its offices in Egyptand prohibited any kind of interaction with it. The ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by Egyptian lawyer Samir Sabry, if only partially. Sabry originally demanded that Hamas be designated a terrorist organization citing its affiliation to the Muslim Brotherhood, now a terrorist organization in Egypt, and its designation as a terrorist organization by several countries across the world as well as the involvement of its members in storming Egyptian prisoners during the 2011 uprising and the group’s violation of the Gaza border. “I presented to the court 25 CDs that prove Hamas’s involvement in several terrorist operations in Egypt whether in the Sinai Peninsula or Cairo,” Sabry said in a TV interview. These operations, he explained, included the bombing of State Security headquarters in Cairo and Mansoura and the killing of Egyptian soldiers in Sinai. “I even submitted CDs that prove Hamas’ involvement in other atrocities inside the Gaza Strip, like torture.”

Based on the ruling, the ban applies to Hamas and all entities affiliated to it and funded or supported, financially or otherwise, by it. The ban in its current form is temporary pending the ruling on another case before the Cairo Criminal Court, in which Hamas faces charges of espionage and prison break. Unlike what is commonly believed, or what some media outlets had actually reported, Hamas has not been officially declared a terrorist organization as is the case with the Muslim Brotherhood and as was initially requested in Sabry’s lawsuit. Sabry, however, sees the current ruling, which he considers “historic,” as conveying the same meaning. “Banning Hamas’ activities is proof enough that it engaged in terrorist activities,” he said in a TV interview. The verdict, he added, is enough to ensure that Hamas will no longer pose a threat to Egypt. “Through this verdict, Hamas members will be denied entry into Egypt and the ones already in the country will be arrested,” he said. According to Sabry, this ruling is final and no one except the president, the prime minister and the interior minister can appeal it.

“This is a purely political verdict,” said senior Hamas member Mahmoud al-Zahhar. According to Zahhar, the verdict is void because the case is incomplete. “It was a one-sided case. Hamas was not given the chance to defend itself and refute the evidence presented against it,” he explained. Zahhar communicated an perceivable threat to Sabry. “One day, we will take him to task.” For Hamas member Yehia Moussa, the ruling tarnishes the image of Egypt rather than Hamas. “This is a grave affront to Egypt’s role in the Arab world and its history of supporting the Palestinian cause,” he said in an interview. “Plus, this is a punishment for the Palestinian people not Hamas.” Ezzat al-Rashq, a member of Hamas’s politburo agreed with the last point underlined by Moussa.

“This verdict means tightening the blockade against Palestinians in Gaza and increases the possibility of another Israeli aggression,” he said in a statement.

Both Zahhar and Moussa insisted that Hamas has no offices or activities in Egypt. “This is sheer propaganda,” said Moussa.

Muslim Brotherhood supporters outside Egypt condemned the ban with Rashed al-Ghanouchi, head of the Tunisian Islamist party al-Nahda considering it “an oppressive verdict by an oppressive regime” and the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan arguing that it is “an attempt to curry favor with the Zionists.”

French historian and expert on Arab affairs Jean-François Legrain saw the ruling as another battle in the war waged by the Egyptian state on the Muslim Brotherhood. “Hamas is paying the price for the regional conditions in the aftermath of the marginalization of the Muslim Brotherhood,” he told Le Monde. Legrain did not view this step to be in Israel’s interest as is commonly believed. “Israel does not want to get rid of Hamas because it is the only group that can control the Gaza Strip,” he explained. “True, it imposes a blockade on Gaza and makes life hard for Gazans, but does not incite them into getting rid of Hamas.” Mordechai Kedar, an Israeli professor of Arabic literature, argued. He added that the charges leveled against Hamas are fabricated. “I don’t believe Hamas collaborated with the Muslim Brotherhood to destroy Egypt. It is not in their interest to antagonize the Egyptian regime because if they do, they will lose an important source of fuel and foodstuffs in addition to the taxes they charge for these,” he wrote in Maariv. According to Kedar, the Egyptian regime was looking for an external enemy to blame for its failures and warned of the consequences. “If the regime becomes that harsh with Hamas, the group might start another wave of terrorist operations or might resort to Iran and this is not in Israel’s or Egypt’s interest.”

Those in favor…

The ruling was, however, seen as necessary by a number of Egyptian analysts. Security expert Colonel Khaled Okasha said the ruling was the right response to Hamas’s stance on Egypt since the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood. “Hamas preferred the Muslim Brotherhood over its relations with Egypt and they disregarded the will of the Egyptian people,” he said. “They acted as if they spoke on behalf of Egyptians when they called for Mursi’s return.”

Saeid al-Zant, head of the Center for Strategic Studies, argued that the verdict was late. “This verdict should have been passed as soon as it became known that Hamas took part in storming the prisons during the first days of the revolution,” he said. Professor of political science Gamal Salama pointed out that the verdict is not expected to have an effect on Hamas. “I think the only purpose of this ruling is to put pressure on Hamas so that it would stop interfering in Egypt’s domestic affairs,” he explained. The liberal Free Egyptians Party issued a statement welcoming the ruling as an important step in the war on terrorism. “It is time for everyone who plotted against Egypt to be punished and for everyone to know that Egypt will not be intimidated by extremist groups.” The statement downplayed the impact of the ban on the relationship between Egyptians and Palestinians. “The Egyptian and Palestinian people have historical relations that will not be affected by the terrorist activities of this group which falsely claims that it represents Palestinians,” the statement added.

On the official level, Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy stressed that the ban on Hamas will not affect Egypt’s role in Palestinian reconciliation. Fahmy refused to comment on the ruling in respect of the independence of the judiciary. “The law is being implemented,” he said. “And no one is to threaten Egypt’s national interests, whether Hamas or anyone else.” Fahmy also stressed that Egyptian sentiments towards the Palestinian people remain unchanged. “We consider the Palestinians our brothers.”

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/02/23/Does-Egypt-s-Hamdeen-Sabahi-stand-a-chance-in-the-presidency-race-.html

“If your wish is that I run for president, then I will abide by it,” said Hamdeen Sabahi addressing a group of revolutionary youths who cheered upon hearing his final decision: “I, the citizen Hamdeen Sabahi, have decided to fight the battle.” Sabahi had for a long time been hesitant to join the presidential race and had even declared his willingness to support army chief Abel Fattah al-Sisi if his electoral platform is in line with the goals of the revolution. However, after pressure from several youth and revolutionary groups, he has decided run.

The Revolution’s Candidate Campaign, whose goal is to support a presidential candidate who best represents the demands of the January 25 Revolution, played a major role in encouraging Sabahi to stay in the race, a fact that he himself mentions in the press conference in which he announced his intention to run for president. “By the will of the youths, Hamdeen Sabahi is the revolution’s candidate,” read the campaign banners distributed across Egypt as soon as Sabahi announced his decision.

Sabahi rallies support

“Sabahi is the most suitable person for this stage,” said campaign coordinator Amr Badr. “He has no links to Mubarak’s regime or the Muslim Brotherhood and he is civilian and not from the military. Plus, he has a long history of struggle for freedom and he really believes in democracy.”

Badr added that Sabahi’s platform is one that prioritizes the poor and that is why millions voted for him in the previous 2012 presidential elections. Badr noted that neither Sisi nor Sami Anan, former chief of staff of the Egyptian army and a potential presidential candidate, will achieve the goals of the revolution. “Both are an extension of the regimes of Mubarak and the Muslim Brotherhood. They will not meet the demands of the people.” The campaign’s views were echoed by George Ishak, co-founder of the anti-Mubarak Egyptian Movement for Change (Kefaya).  “Hamdeen Sabahi is the one whose platform is in compliance with the goals of the January 25 and June 30 revolutions,” he said in the same press conference in which Sabahi announced his candidacy.

Talaat Fahmy, secretary general of the Socialist Popular Alliance Party, says that Sabahi’s presidential bid will give civilian parties the opportunity to rally around a non-military candidate. “This strengthens the democratic process and creates real competition between different parties,” he said, adding that the army should focus on maintaining national security. Fahmy added that Sabahi’s strongest point is his “known support for the working class.”

Sabahi supporters back Sisi

However, not everyone is on board.

The presidential candidate has lost the backing of two of his formerly most ardent supporters who played a major role in his previous campaign—director Khaled Youssef and Abdel Hakim Abdel Nasser, son of late president Gamal Abdel Nasser. Youssef, who has recently declared his support for Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, argued that Sabahi’s announcement was not an official one since it had not yet been endorsed by the Egyptian Popular Current, which Sabahi chairs.

“The party’s board of trustees has to announce the candidacy in order for it to be official,” Youssef said in a TV interview. “Sabahi’s announcement was only an emotional response to pressure by youths who were present at the press conference.” That is why, Youssef explained, Sabahi noted that he has made “the personal decision” to run for president.

Even though the party later announced its official support for Sabahi, Youssef expressed his personal objection. “We have all agreed that for the four years that follow the June 30 revolution, we should not open the door for divisions and should, instead, focus on reconstructing the state and fighting terrorism,” he said. “This is not the time for political competition.” Youssef stressed the necessity of supporting Sisi at this stage: “We need to back one single candidate so that we don’t jeopardize our unity and this candidate is Abdel Fatah al-Sisi.”

Abdel Hakim Abdel Nasser said he saw Sabahi’s decision as a purely emotional one since it is clear that the Egyptian people want Sisi to be their leader. “Sisi is the people’s hero because he responded to their demands on June 30,” he said in an interview. In response to criticism about changing his stance, Abdel Nasser stressed that he did not abandon Sabahi as some claim, but that circumstances have changed. “Sisi was not a presidential candidate back in 2012 and had he been, I would have voted for him,” he said. “But after June 30, he risked his life and defied the U.S. in order to side with the people. He is the most suitable man for this stage.”

The National Salvation Front, the main opposition bloc against the Muslim Brotherhood of which Sabahi’s Egyptian Popular Current is a co-founder and a leading member, has not officially announced who it will support. However, initial statements by its leading members hint that backing Sabahi is quite unlikely. Mohammad al-Orabi, former foreign minister and current chairman of the Congress Party, argued that Sabahi is not qualified to become president and will not be able to solve Egypt’s problems as far as foreign policy is concerned. Orabi added that the front leaders had earlier agreed not to field a candidate and to only monitor the performance of the government. Amr Ali, member of the Free Egyptians Party, another member in the front, said that Sabahi’s ideologies are different from the rest of the parties in the front. “The parties in the front are liberal while Sabahi adopts socialist ideologies,” he said. “Besides, most of the front’s parties are more inclined to backing Sisi.” Hossam al-Kholy, assistant secretary general of al-Wafd Party, a member of the front, also cited ideological differences as the main reason for not preferring to support Sabahi. Kholy objected to referring to Sabahi as “the revolution’s candidate.” “Not everyone who had been to Tahrir Square would be a representative of the revolution,” he said. “Nobody has the right to monopolize the revolution.”

Candidacy causes divisions

Sabahi’s intention to run for president caused a serious rift in the ranks of the Tamarod Movement, the group behind the signature collection campaign that triggered the June 30, 2013 protests and the subsequent ouster of Islamist president Mohammad Mursi. While Tamarod officially supports Sisi’s candidacy, several of its senior members declared their support for Sabahi. His fifty supporters from group the issued a statement explaining the reason for their decision.

“We the undersigned support freedom fighter Hamdeen Sabahi for his struggle against corruption throughout the regimes of Mubarak and the Muslim Brotherhood, for a political agenda that adheres to the goals of the January 25 and June 30 revolutions, and for his prioritization of social justice,” read the statement. Tamarod co-founders Mohammad Abdel Aziz and Hassan Shahin were among the signatories. Their membership in the group was reportedly frozen following the move. The group’s third co-founder Mahmoud Badr said Abdel Aziz and Shahin have the right to voice their opinion but as individuals, not representatives of the group. “Tamarod has officially announced its full support for Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, therefore those adopting a different viewcannotspeak in the movement’s name,” he wrote in a statement. Tamarod spokesman Mohammad Nabawi accused Sabahi of causing a split in the movement by inviting some of its senior members to the press conference in which he announced his intention to run for president. “Sabahi introduced Abdel Aziz and Shahin in the press conference as senior members of Tamarod which made it sound like the movement is supporting him while he knows very well that we support Sisi,” he said in a TV interview. Nabawi accused Khaled al-Qadi, member of Tamarod’s politburo and one of the Sahabi supporters, of allowing members of the Egyptian Popular Current to infiltrate the movement.

Sabahi’s candidacy was met with objection by groups such as the April 6 Youth Movement and Revolutionary Socialists known for their stance against the army and particularly against Sisi. Sherif al-Rubi, member of the April 6 politburo, said the movement will not support Sabahi because of his hesitation. “One time, he says he will support Sisi, then another time he decides to run for president,” he said. Mohammad Hassan, another member of the movement, said he thinks it is likely Sabahi might withdraw in the last minute to leave the stage for Sisi. “By stressing that his presidential bid is a personal decision, he left the door open for himself to withdraw and support Sisi,” he said. “We cannot trust Sabahi.” Hassan’s statement, however, came before the Egyptian Popular Current’s official decision to back Sabahi.

Mahmoud Ezzat, member of the Revolutionary Socialists politburo, said the movement will not back Sabahi, also citing also his reluctance to make a decision earlier. “Sabahi’s popularity decreased remarkably owing to his stances on the military,” he added. “Right now he does not represent the January 25 Revolution.”

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/02/08/Egypt-s-latest-fatwa-Divorce-if-your-wife-belongs-to-the-Muslim-Brotherhood-.html

“If a man discovers that his wife belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood, he should divorce her,” said preacher Mazhar Shahin in the show he presents in one of the private Egyptian satellite channels. “It is like having a bomb sleep in your own bedroom,” he added.

In this case, Shahin explained, the wife should be given the chance to sever all ties with the Brotherhood, but if she refuses, the husband has to divorce her. Shahin, who is also the imam of the Omar Makram Mosque in Tahrir Square and is known as “the imam of the revolution,” attributed his fatwa to the “jurisprudence of priorities” in Islam, through which, he argued, it becomes obvious that Egypt takes priority over individuals.

“If the interests of my country contradict those of my wife, I would definitely choose my country,” he noted. “A man can find many other women to marry, but there is only one Egypt.”

Belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood, however, does not mean the wife should be stripped of her financial rights, according to Shahin, who stressed that the divorce has to “comply with God’s laws.” The fatwa, Shahin said, also gives the right to any woman who finds out that her husband belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood to seek divorce.

Lesser of two evils

For Shahin, divorce is considered the lesser of two evils for the wife because otherwise the husband might report her to the police. “It is better for her to end up divorced than to end up in jail.” Shahin was referring to the case of a man who reported his wife to State Security for belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood.

In his complaint, the husband said that he only found out his wife is a Brotherhood member after Islamist President Mohammad Mursi came to power. “After the Brotherhood was toppled, the group started assigning her missions,” the complaint added. “That is why she traveled to the United Kingdom and Germany.”

The husband said that he decided to report her after she started putting pressure on him to join the Muslim Brotherhood and presented pictures of her in London doing the four-fingered salute, which declares solidarity with the victims of the Islamist sit-in that was dispersed by security forces.

Taking advantage

The husband also accused the wife of taking advantage of her position as a teaching assistant in Cairo University to incite students to demonstrate against the Egyptian state.

Dar al-Iftaa, the body officially in charge of issuing fatwas, promptly declared that Shahin’s words constitute a “personalopinion” rather than a fatwa. “The reason Shahin stated for the divorce is not one of those mentioned in Islamic law,” said the statement issued by Dar al-Iftaa. “As for the possible involvement of the husband or the wife in terrorist activities, this is to be determined through investigations.” Sheikh Magdi Ashour, head of the Fatwa Committee at Dar al-Iftaa, argued that Shahin is a mosque imam, therefore “not qualified to issue fatwas.” Ashour added that Dar al-Iftaa has always been keen on preserving the unity of the family and that is why it is careful with fatwas concerning divorce.

“Plus, not all members of the Muslim Brotherhood were involved in destructive activities, so it is not possible to issue such a general fatwa” he added in a TV interview. “Divorce, then, becomes permissible if being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood is detrimental to the safety of the family.”

Outside the mosque

Minister of Islamic Endowments Mohamed Mokhtar Gomaa called Shahin’s fatwas “political” and not religious, hence is not under the ministry’s jurisdiction. “The ministry has the right to take to task preachers who violate the rules while delivering sermons in mosques,” he said in a press statement. “But Shahin said that outside the mosque, so it is an opinion only he is responsible for.”

Shain’s fatwa was met with indignation by Islamist parties. Laila Samy, member of the Higher Committee of al-Wasat Party, known for its close links to the Muslim Brotherhood, accused Shahin of inciting hatred against “citizens who are now paying for their stance against the ‘coup,’” she wrote in reference to the ouster of president Mohammad Mursi, considered a military coup by pro-Muslim Brotherhood factions.

Samy described Mazhar as “another of the coup sheikhs who do not mind bringing about the disintegration of society to serve their interests.”

Samy expressed her shock as Shahin’s “recklessness” when it comes to a “grave matter” like divorce. “He is simply calling upon husbands to divorce their wives. He doesn’t mind ruining entire families.”

Tampering

The ultra-conservative al-Nour Party, which supported the ouster of Mursi and took part in the subsequent road map, considered the fatwa to have “tampered with religious laws.” Party spokesman Sherif Taha said the fatwa increases divisions in the Egyptian society under the pretext of patriotism.

“Involving love for one’s country in this matter is a type of manipulation that has unfortunately become prevalent in the political scene nowadays,” he said. Islamic researcher Sheikh Mohamed Teleima argued that all women who are against the “coup” are now suffering and that Shahin’s fatwa is part of the price they are paying. “My wife is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and I am proud of that,” he added.

Teleima addressed a question to Shahin and “other issuers of disastrous fatwas,” as he put it.

“What then is the fatwa that can be issued about women who danced in front of strangers?” in reference to women dancing in front of polling stations on the day of the referendum on the post-Muslim Brotherhood constitution as an expression of approval for the new draft and the current Egyptian government.

Objections to the fatwa also came from secular figures known for their stance against the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt’s top political Bassem Youssef said that the fatwa is not really different from others issued by the Muslim Brotherhood against their opponents. “This is exactly like saying that liberals are not going to heaven,” he said in a TV interview.

Manipulation

“People against the Brotherhood are now manipulating religion exactly like Brotherhood members and supporters used to do before. This is hysteria!” Youssef said that while the general discourse is about unity, a fatwa like this will only create more rifts.“You can’t just call upon husbands to divorce their wives or wives to seek divorces because of belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood,” he said.

The April 6 Youth Movement issued a statement condemning Shahin’s fatwa and likening his stances to those of “the sultan’s preachers” throughout history. “The sultan’s preacher would issue fatwas that serve the interests of the ruler because currying favor with the authorities becomes his topmost priority.”

The statement added that even though Shahin was called “the imam of the revolution,” he turned out to have been using the revolution to be in the limelight. “There are many like you who we used to respect and who we thought are real revolutionaries, but they are in reality taking advantage of the revolution in order to be close to those in power at the expense of morals and principles and even religion,” the statement concluded.

In response to the harsh criticism to which he was subjected, Shahin said his words were taken out of context, arguing that it was obvious he meant wives who are involved in terrorist activities.

Female terrorists

“If the wife prepares Molotov cocktails, raises her children to hate the army and the police, curses Egypt and steps over the Egyptian flag, and is happy when other Egyptians are killed, she becomes dangerous to the family,” he said in a TV interview. Shahin explained that this applies to any woman who engages in terrorism regardless of her affiliation. “I did not mean that difference in political views justifies divorce,” he added.

In another interview, Shahin said that if he were in this position, he would definitely divorce his wife. “I will not sit still while my wife is out there burning down the country,” he said. On hisFacebook page, Shahin explained the logic behind his fatwa. “If a man has the right to divorce his wife if she betrays him, then what about betraying the country?” he asked. “If betraying a spouse is a sin, betraying one’s country is the gravest of sins.”

Even though Shahin was the center of the controversy and the recipient of all criticism, he was not the only scholar to issue this kind of fatwa. Professor of Comparative Jurisprudence at al-Azhar University Souad Saleh said that Muslim men should not marry women who belong to the Muslim Brotherhood and called upon men who find out their fiancées are from the Brotherhood to break off the engagement.

“Marrying a woman from the Muslim Brotherhood will produce a new generation of terrorists because she will instill her violent ideas into the minds of her children,” she said in a TV interview. Saleh explained that the relationship between husband and wife should be based on “love and compassion” as stated in the Quran.

“This is not the case with Brotherhood women who incite murder and destabilize society,” she added, stressing that her fatwa is supported by evidence from religion.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/2014/02/01/Ansar-Bayt-al-Maqdis-Egypt-s-own-al-Qaeda-.html

The name Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis has been associated with almost every terrorist attack that hit Egypt after the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood, including the attempt on the life of the interior minister, the bombing of National Security headquarters in Mansoura and Cairo, the shooting down of a military helicopter in the Sinai Peninsula, and, most recently, the assassination of a senior security official. The group’s keenness to claim responsibility for each operation it carries out and its pledge to carry out more as part of what it calls “the battle for avenging the Muslims of Egypt” raised more question marks about what its real objectives are, how and where it originated, and what links, if any, it could possibly have with al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, or any other militant and/or Islamist groups.

Based on the statements it has so far issued, the attacks mainly target police and army facilities and personnel. In one of those statements, the group lists the reasons why it labels the police and army as “apostates” and why, accordingly, it is a religious duty to declare war against them. According to one of those statements, entitled “A message to police and army officers and their families,” the police and the army are “fighting whoever attempts to apply Islamic law, “joining forces with the liberals and seculars,” “empowering a secular government that does not rule according to God’s laws,” “protecting a constitution that permits what God has forbidden and forbids what God has permitted” and “supporting Christians and Jews against Muslims under the pretext of fighting terrorism.” In the same statement, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis called upon police and army officers to quit their jobs or else suffer the consequences and upon their families to help them “save their lives and honor their religion.” In another statement, entitled “Operation ‘Right of Vengeance,’” Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis makes clear it will not target civilians as long as they do not take to the streets in support of the police and the army. “We are asking you not to go out to support apostasy and injustice,” read the statement. “If you stay at home, we promise that you’ll be safe.” In addition to the statements it is in the habit of issuing following each attack, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis also released a video that features the firing of the missile which downed the military helicopter and claimed the lives of five Egyptian officers. In the last statement it issued to claim responsibility for the assassination of the deputy interior minister and head of the Interior Ministry’s Technical Department General Mohammad Saeid, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis warned that defense minister, now potential presidential candidate, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Interior Minister Mohammad Ibrahim are next. “Retaliation is imminent and God’s will shall prevail,” said the statement.

Al-Qaeda-linked?

Although Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis is always referred to in the media as “al-Qaeda-linked” and “al-Qaeda-inspired,” there is no evidence of the group being an off-shoot of al-Qaeda. One of the few links so far was established by former militant and founder of the Islamic Jihad in Egypt Nabil Naeim, who said that the group originated in Gaza then started operating in Egypt following the 2011 Revolution. According to Naeim, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis is funded by the Muslim Brotherhood through a deal with the Brotherhood’s Deputy Supreme Guide Khairat al-Shater that was mediated by Mohammad al-Zawahiri, the brother of al-Qaeda chief. “Hamas is also part of the deal, according to an appeasement deal sponsored by ousted President Mohammad Mursi in return for cooperation with the Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis,” Naeim said in a press interview. Naeim added that the leader of the original Gaza group received his “takfiri” education from Sheikh Abdel Meguid al-Shazli, who is also the mentor of both Shater and Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammad Badei. According to Naeim, the Muslim Brotherhood supplies Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis with weapons “through Libya and the Gaza tunnels.” Although al-Qaeda link is not the center of attention at the moment, the Muslim Brotherhood link is the one several parties seem to agree on. Expert on Islamist groups Sameh Eid called Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis “the military wing of the Muslim Brotherhood” and said that Shater had threatened Sisi with “escalation in Sinai and the targeting of the Egyptian army.” Eid added that the Muslim Brotherhood was planning on forming its own militia. “This militia was to be made up of Hamas militants, youths from the Brotherhood, and fighters trained in Afghanistan,” he said in a TV interview. Medhat Naguib, head of al-Ahrar Party, argued that Shater’s aim of forming this militia was “having a deterrent power against the state to guarantee remaining in power.” He added that militants granted a presidential pardon when Mursi came to power played an important role in the establishment of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis: “That explains why they moved to Sinai right after they were released,” he said. Naguib established another al-Qaeda link when he said that member of Ansar Bayt al-Magdes were trained by al-Qaeda operatives in Sinai. “This was done based on coordination between Mursi and al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri,” he added. Naguib argues that another proof of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis’s affiliation to the Muslim Brotherhood is the group’s rejection of a merging request by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. “This shows that they only want to terrorize the Egyptian people,” he explained. Mohammad Hamza, head of Middle East Forum for Strategic Studies, finds the statements issued by Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis proof enough of their Brotherhood connection. “All the group’s statements show that they are avenging the Brotherhood,” he said.

Similar to al-Qaeda link, both the Brotherhood and Hamas links do not seem to be supported by concrete evidence. In his article “Can Egypt Handle Ansar Bayt al Maqdis?”, published in The National Interest, David Barnett expresses his surprise at the Egyptian government’s insistence on accusing the Muslim Brotherhood of carrying out all terrorist attacks even though Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis claims responsibility every time and its designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization immediately after one of those attacks. Barnett argues that in what it considers “an existential battle,” the Egyptian state finds justification for its continuous incrimination of the Muslim Brotherhood in a public opinion that blames the group for all the country’s ailments and he cites the example of a poll which revealed that only 6% of the Egyptian people believe that Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis are to blame for terrorist attacks. For Barnett, there has not been any proof of the link between the two groups. “The evidence presented thus far is tenuous, at best,” he wrote. “The command and control links that some Egyptian officials have suggested are unproven. And while ABM certainly has former members of the Muslim Brotherhood within its ranks, these are former members who specifically left because the Brotherhood was not, in their view, fully committed to offensive jihad.”

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhari also came out to refute allegations of any link between Hamas and Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis. “Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis is not Palestinian at all,” he said in a press statement. Abu Zuhari slammed attempts at “fabricating a link between this Egyptian group and Gaza” and which he considered a means of “escaping from the problem and exporting the Egyptian crisis.” He also denied claims that the missile used for downing the Egyptian helicopter came from Gaza. “That was a Russian missile that any group in Sinai could get from the black market.” Abu Zuhari called upon the Egyptian media to stop the propagation of such false news. “This serves no one except the Israeli occupation,” he concluded.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/life-style/entertainment/2014/01/25/The-Square-Will-Egyptians-be-banned-from-watching-their-revolution-.html

A few days ago, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced its final list of nominations for the 2014 Oscars, with the Egyptian film “The Square” in the Best Documentary category. The nomination is the first of its kind since 1962, when Egyptian actor Omar al-Sharif was nominated for best supporting actor in “Lawrence of Arabia.” This year’s nomination was received with more controversy than joy, with heated debates about why “The Square” has not been screened in Egypt, and a state ban seeming like the most plausible explanation.

The film chronicles the events of the Egyptian revolution until the ouster of former President Mohammad Mursi through a laborer, an actor, and a Muslim Brotherhood member. It was scheduled to be screened in Dec. 2013 as part of the sixth edition of the Panorama of European Film, held annually in Cairo, but was cancelled on the same day. “We have been working very hard to give the film an Egyptian premiere,” said a statement by the Panorama organizers following the cancellation. “Getting the permit to screen the film was very difficult and although we were granted authorization, the producers of the film wanted to take the time to work on a wholly Arabic translated version for the Egyptian audience rather than screening the film in its international version. This was however not completed and shipped on time.”

The film’s director, Egyptian-American Jehane Noujaim, has a different story. According to her, an official request to screen the film in Egypt was submitted to the censorship authority. “We never received a reply,” she said. Noujaim insisted that the screening of the film was never approved: “What you need in order to show the film in a theater and in public spaces for large audiences is an official letter allowing you to do so. They have not issued that letter.” Although at the time the censorship authority did not respond, the fact that the film was not screened was considered a confirmation of reports that it is officially banned. That is how the international press dealt with it as soon as the Academy nominations were out. This was obvious in headlines such as “The Square: an Egyptian Oscar nominee that won’t be shown in Egypt” in The Guardian, “Banned at home and noticed by Oscars” in the New York Times, and “Oscar nod for banned Egyptian film” in the Sydney Morning Herald.

“I don’t know her and I have never seen her before,” was the response Ahmed Awwad, head of the Egyptian Censorship Authority, to Noujaim’s statement about the request to screen her film. “We only received a request from the organizers of the Panorama of European Film so that the film can be screened in that festival, but the copy to be screened did not arrive on time from abroad,” he said. “All the rumors about banning the film are not true. We did not receive any official request by the film producers and if we do, we will look into it and take all the necessary procedures according to the law,” Awwad added.

Noujaim said the censorship authority has recently asked that another screening request be submitted, adding that the film will be welcomed this time. “We were very happy to hear that,” she said. “Screening the film in Egypt is our ultimate goal and we are ready to engage in all sorts of dialogue with the censorship authority and to answer all their questions.”

In the midst of contradicting statements, speculation is rife as to why the documentary, whose rights were acquired by Netflix – where it is currently streaming – would be banned in Egypt in the first place. Journalist Ola al-Shafei said the film’s content “can be seen as unfair” to the Egyptian army in the way it highlights violations committed by the military when in power, while not focusing at all on the role the army later played in fighting the Brotherhood and restoring stability. Shafei said the new dangers to which Egypt is exposed – such as international conspiracies, internal conflict and terrorist attacks – have changed the reality on the ground, and consequently changed the angle from which the army is to be seen, which was not made clear in the film. Journalist Atef Bishara objects to considering the film a means of documenting the Egyptian revolution because, to him, it contains several inaccuracies. “For example, it is mentioned more than once in the film that the army struck a deal with the Muslim Brotherhood while there is no evidence of that,” he wrote. “Instead of investigating, the filmmakers just took information from social networking websites.”

For film critic Tarek al-Shennawi, it is not the content as much as the message of “The Square” that matters. “The film encourages the people to continue their revolution,” he said. “And I think that is why the film was not screened in Egypt.” Activist Aida al-Kashef, who appears in the film, said “The Square” revives memories that could cause more uprisings. “The film reminds Egyptians that the demands for which they started the revolution, like freedom and dignity, haven’t been met, and that the reality we’re living now confirms this,” she said. For singer and activist Ramy Essam, who also appears in the film, it gives Egyptian youths more hope for the future. “The film reminds the people that despite the obstacles the revolution is facing, the younger generations should still believe in their ability to change reality after they conquered their fears,” he said.

Regardless of the reasons for the alleged ban and how official it is, Noujaim sees the Oscar nomination as one of the best means to fight the state’s attempts at severing the link between Egyptians and their memories, and she explicitly accused the army of that. “In Egypt, the military is trying to whitewash history. The film is banned in Egypt. The nomination gives it incredible attention and energy, and allows for the people back home to know that our story will continue to be heard,” she said.

The nomination, and the international fame it has already brought the film, is bound to place the Egyptian authorities in an awkward position if they insist on not screening it she added. “It is putting the film on an international stage, so that the authorities in Egypt are starting to get phone calls and questions about why the rest of the world is allowed to see this film about a crucially important chapter in Egyptian history, and it’s not being shown to the Egyptian people,” she said.

“The Square” won the Audience Award at the Sundance Film Festival in Jan. 2013, when it was presented as a work in progress. The updated version won the People’s Choice Documentary Award at the Toronto International Film Festival in September last year.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/analysis/2014/01/15/Egypt-s-referendum-between-a-sweeping-yes-and-a-feeble-no-.html

A few days ago, a documentary entitled “Please Remember: January 14-15,” in reference to the date of the upcoming referendum on the new constitution, drafted after the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood rule, was released. The 12- minute long film features interviews with dozens of Egyptians from all over the country with all of them saying they will vote yes in the referendum, with the exception of one who will vote no and two who still need to read the amendments. The documentary was received with enthusiastic support by some and with extreme indignation by others.

For supporters of the new constitution, the film offered an authentic portrayal of Egyptians’ willingness to participate in what they see as a positive step towards democracy. In an article entitled “Sandra Nashaat… That a Girl,” journalist Ahmed Afifi heaps praise on the director, the young woman whose name is mentioned in the title, for her ability to reflect what Egyptians really want and to make all viewers want the same thing.

“She made us feel that we would not be true Egyptians if we do not vote ‘yes’ and do so zealously,” he wrote. “She made us say ‘yes’ even before referendum day. She extracted it from us without pressure and without propaganda. She made us feel the pleasure of ticking ‘yes’ in advance.”

Accurate expose or pure propaganda?

Critics of the film had a totally opposite view, for they viewed it as state-sponsored propaganda that intentionally avoided presenting both sides of the argument. Director Kamla Abu Zikri refused to call the work a documentary.
“It is cheerful and pleasant like a nice clip or a fascinating ad, but it cannot be called a documentary,” she wrote. “This is sheer propaganda and lacks the depth with which documentaries are characterized.”

Activist Wael Abbas simply tweeted, “To fans of Sandra Nashaat, do you remember Leni Riefenstahl?” he asked, referring to the famous German director who was an integral part of the Nazi propaganda machine.

Nashaat refused to categorize her documentary as propaganda and insisted that she did not pick the people she interviewed and that Egyptians across the country will vote for the constitution.

“I found overwhelming approval of the constitution,” she said in an interview. “I was not trying to mobilize the people. I was simply reflecting public opinion as it is and as you could see only one person supported Mursi’s legitimacy compared to hundreds who want stability and who see the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.”

The majority of civilian powers, which played an important role in mobilizing the June 30 protests that toppled the Muslim Brotherhood and many of whose leaders were members of the committee that drafted the new constitution, declared their support for a yes vote.

Political leaders: constitution imperfect, but step in the right direction

Mohammad Abul Ghar, head of the Egyptian Social Democratic Party and member of the drafting committee concurred that the constitution “is not the ideal outcome of the Jan. 25 Revolution,” yet added that it is “remarkable in terms of the rights and freedoms it grants to Egyptians.”

In a conference the party organized under the slogan “Supporting the Constitution,” Abul Ghar enumerated the advantages of the new constitution like freedom of faith, freedom of the press, gender equality, and the limitation of the president’s powers. The implementation of such articles, he noted, requires a powerful parliament that works on drafting the necessary legislations.

“That is why legislators have to represent the people because only then will the people be able to benefit from this constitution,” he concluded. Member parties of the National Salvation Front, the main opposition bloc against Muslim Brotherhood rule, similarly supported the new constitution.

Former presidential candidate and head of the Egyptian Popular Current Hamdeen Sabahi considers a yes vote “a renewal of confidence in the roadmap charted in the aftermath of the June 30 protests with the approval of the Egyptian people.”

Endorsing the constitution, he added, is a continuation of the path started on Jan. 25, 2011: “Those who will vote yes will be endorsing the text of the constitution as well as the revolutions of Jan. 25 and June 30, hence adding constitutional legitimacy to revolutionary legitimacy.”

Sabahi expected the freedoms and rights stated in the constitution to earn it a sweeping yes vote among the Egyptian population.

The Rebel movement, which started the signature collection campaign to topple Mursi, also declared its support for the constitution. “It is not a flawless constitution, but it is definitely better than 1971 and 2012,” the movement said in a statement in reference to the constitutions that were in force during the times of Mubarak and Mursi, respectively. The movement expressed its objection to an article that allows the trial of civilians before military courts, yet praised other articles it saw as a success.

“There are very good articles on social justice, rights and freedoms, and people with disabilities,” the statement added. “This constitution gives all segments of the Egyptian society their rights.”

Civilian powers were joined by the ultra-conservative al-Nour Party, which took part in the roadmap that followed Mursi’s ouster.

Despite disagreements with civilian committee members over articles involving Islamic law, party chairman Yunes Makhioun called for a yes vote adding that “Egypt is going through a critical time, the time of to be or not to be,” he said in a statement. In response to reservations about crossing out an article that offered a strict interpretation of Islamic law, from a Sunni point of view, Makhioun argued that the constitution is not expected to be perfect. “This is a work of human beings after all, so it has to have negative and positive sides,” he explained. “Plus each party had to display some flexibility so that we can move on.”

Sheikh Yasser Borhami, a prominent leader of the Salafi movement in Egypt and member of al-Nour Party, warned that three disasters will take place if the constitution is not approved. “One is the collapse of the state, the economy, and security; two is the division of the army; and three is foreign intervention,” he said in a conference held in support of the constitution in Alexandria.

Government, religious officials weigh in

Approval of the constitution took a more official shape as interim president Adli Mansour openly praised the new draft through urging the people to vote in order “to fulfill our revolution the way we wanted it with a constitution that marks the first step to a civil, democratic state.”

One day before, Minister of Defense and Army Chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi did the same when he linked the new constitution to the Jan. 25 and June 30 revolutions and urged Egyptians to make a change similar to the one they made on those two days through taking part in the referendum. He also praised the constitution saying, “it achieved real balance, harmony, and justice.”

The constitution also acquired religious leverage as senior Muslim and Christian clerics took part in the campaign supporting the constitution.

Former Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa stressed that approving the constitution “will show the entire world the difference between Egyptians and those who seek to shed Egyptian blood” while Coptic Pope Tawadros II argued that the passing of the constitution “is bound to bring Egypt a lot of blessings.”

‘Strong Egypt Party’ vocalizes strong opposition

Not all factions that took part in the June 30 protests against the Muslim Brotherhood approve the constitution, though. The Strong Egypt Party, founded by former Muslim Brotherhood member and former presidential candidate Abdel Moneim Abul Fotouh announced the group’s boycott of the referendum after declaring earlier that it would vote no. In a statement it issued less than 24 hours before the first day of the referendum, the party voiced its objection to what followed the ouster of Mursi by the military.

“We object to the bloodshed, the detentions, and the violations and the way they deepened divisions and destabilized security,” said the statement. “And we object to the return of Mubarak’s repressive regime.”

The statement added that the referendum is being held in “an atmosphere that violates the most basic internationally acknowledged democratic rules,” in reference to the arrest of several of party members as they were campaigning against the constitution.

The April 6 movement announced its boycott of the referendum, yet proclaimed its intention to monitor it in order “to issue reports that expose violation and evaluate the referendum process as a whole,” according to the movement’s statement. The decision comes in defiance of the Higher Elections Committee which banned members of the movement from monitoring the poll.

The movement, however, called upon Egyptians to vote no to the constitution, citing its objection to 20 articles in the new draft. “The constitution gives the president and the military a lot of powers and allows the trial of civilians before military courts,” said Khaled al-Masry, member of the April 6 politburo.

The pro-Muslim Brotherhood National Alliance in Support of Legitimacy urged Egyptians to boycott the referendum and stage protests against “a new massacre to complete the usurpation of the homeland,” as the group said in a statement. “Do not listen to the leaders of the coup, for blood is dripping from their mouths,” the statement added.

 

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/variety/2014/01/07/The-Fahita-affair-Egyptian-puppetry-and-terrorism.html

“Egypt’s latest terror suspect: The popular felt-and-yarn puppet Abla Fahita,” read a Washington Post headline. It was referring to a complaint filed against a cellphone provider for allegedly using the popular character in an internet ad to send coded messages that instruct Muslim Brotherhood members to carry out terrorist operations.

There have been similarly sarcastic headlines in the international press, such as “Egyptian puppet Abla Fahita accused of terrorism” in the Sydney Morning Herald, “Silly season in Egypt: Hounding the Muppet Brotherhood” in The Economist, and “Egyptian puppet called terrorist mouthpiece” in the New York Times.

This gives an insight into the general reaction to the investigation into the alleged collaboration between Vodafone and the Brotherhood, now officially designated a terrorist group. Such sarcasm is also apparent in the local media, and especially on social networking websites.

Activists have posted pictures of local and international puppets declaring their support for Fahita. There is a cartoon in which an interrogator shows Fahita a photo of Kermit, the frog from the Muppet Show, and accuses her of receiving funding from an American puppet. The hashtag #freefahita has been created on Twitter.

Sarcasm, however, is giving way to alarm as fears grow over the ominous nature of such a step by the authorities. “It says a lot about the patriotism frenzy we’re in,” said political analyst Ziad Akl of Al-Ahram Center for Strategic Studies. “There’s definitely a sentiment of fascist nationalism that you either subscribe to, or face being labeled a traitor.”

He added: “We’re laughing about the puppet now, but replace the puppet with anything else – another symbol, another figure – and the media can manipulate and do anything with it in this climate.”

British-Egyptian blogger Sarah Carr wrote in her entry “Laughing till we cry”: “The current mood is almost fascistic in its reverence for the state and for state hegemony and for state opponents to be eliminated.”

In her article “Egypt adds puppetry to its enemy of the state list,” published in Foreign Policy, Katelyn Fossett wrote that the government is especially clamping down on popular satirists. She gave the example of Bassem Youssef, whose TV show was terminated for making fun of the military. Fossett sees the “the puppet witch-hunt” as a continuation of that policy. “It hasn’t been an easy year for satire in Egypt,” she wrote.

The Interior Ministry’s media department published on its Facebook page a statement that “unintelligible codes and symbols have been published on Abla Fahita’s pages on social networking websites in violation of the law.” The statement added that even though it is still not known whether those codes and symbols are real, the creators of the puppet have to be arrested and questioned.

The former deputy head of general intelligence, Tharwat Gouda, said Fahita is “American-made,” and is “a code channel” used by the Brotherhood and the revolutionary April 6 Youth Movement “to coordinate acts of violence against the police and the army and for mobilization.

“Gouda added that Khairat al-Shater, the imprisoned Brotherhood deputy supreme guide, has given instructions from jail to members and supporters of the groups to use Fahita to send coded messages “to wreak havoc in the country.”

Journalist Mohamed Ramzy asked in his article “Abla Fahita and cryptography”: “Is it possible that the media can be used by secret organizations for sending coded messages?” He did not answer the question, but said the majority of prominent American TV networks and newspapers are owned by Jews and Zionists.

“There is no doubt that there is a close relationship between the tycoons of Western media and secret Zionist organizations, on top of which are Masonic organizations which are known for using symbols and cryptic messages and these are well-connected with most if not all secret organizations that are known and unknown to us,” he wrote.

Vodafone has issued a statement denying all allegations listed in the complaint, refusing to get involved in “the details of such irrational interpretations and accusations,” and calling the charges “mere imagination.” Vodafone spokesman Khaled Hegazy said: “I’m sad we’ve reached this level of thinking.”