Egypt’s Arab Spring sprung early last winter. That was eight months ago. That’s when the Egyptian military ousted long-time President Hosni Mubarak. The voice of the Egyptian people had been heard. Democracy was distantly visible on the Egyptian horizon. The reins of government would be held –but on an interim basis only- by the Egyptian military. That military was widely and favorably viewed as the protector of Egyptian stability. Timely elections were to be held. A new Constitution was to be promulgated. Fresh spring air was seemingly wafting through Cairo’s Tahrir Square.
But wait. Not so fast. That fresh spring air was –and is – polluted. In fact, with Mubarak gone, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and its head, Field Marshall Tantawi, assumed absolute control. Contrary to fond expectations, very little has changed.
In March, with Mubarak’s ouster still fresh, the Egyptian military arrested, tried and sentenced Maikel Nabil Sanad to three years in prison. Maikel was a young, dissident blogger. His crime was that he had posted an article criticizing the military’s role in the Egyptian revolution. Maikel had argued that the military was a nemesis to the protestors. Maikel pulled no punches. He flatly asserted: “The revolution has so far managed to get rid of the dictator, but not the dictatorship!”
Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces deemed Maikel’s comments
to be “a clear transgression of all boundaries of insult and libel.”
More pointedly, dissident bloggers had been routinely imprisoned by Mubarak’s regime. But Maikel’s imprisonment by the SCAF served as an early red flag that even free expression would not be tolerated in Egypt. It was thus that Egypt’s Arab Spring began to be rained out.
That said, Maikel’s travails are also an clear indication that Egypt’s military is not disposed to surrender power any time soon. Indeed, as another dissident Egyptian blogger recently wrote: “The military wants to annihilate anyone who questions what it does.” That blogger -with abundant premeditation - identified himself as “Kafaya Punk” (roughly translated as "The Defiant Punk!").
And so it is that we arrive back in Cairo on 9 October 2011. The scene was yet again one of chaos, confusion and virtual anarchy. But this time, the mood and targets of the mobs were different. For the first time, the military itself was also targeted by demonstrators.
As it happens, the Coptic Church, which claims about 10 percent of Egypt's 83 million people, accused the military of purposely failing control a Moslem mob. The Copts had been peacefully protesting against attacks on their churches. The Moslem mob turned that protest into a violent sectarian riot. Inexplicably, the military somehow failed to prevent the death of about two dozen Coptic Christians.
Indeed, recent months have witnessed an undercurrent of growing disaffection with the military. Anti-military rhetoric has been on the upswing. In fact, disparate groups, upset with the military, had begun denouncing the SCAF for willfully obstructing the Egypt's evolution into
a democracy.
But it was not until October 9th that protestors used weapons against the military. While the identity of those rioters remains unclear, at least one message is clear. The Egyptian military’s image as a neutral arbiter and/or protector of the people has now been called into question.
As the mob scene developed on October 9th, three distinct factions revealed themselves, i.e. the Copts, the Moslems and the military. Arguably, the military sided with neither the Copts or the Moslems. But that perception may be skewed.
It was widely rumored that Copts were attacking soldiers. True or not, that perception catalyzed a Moslem mob into action. Some threateningly chanted: "Islamiyyah, Islamiyyah" (only an Islamic state!). Simultaneously, the military-controlled media conveniently characterized Copts as the primary perpetrators of the riot.
The bottom line of all this is that Egypt remains fractured by a broad spectrum of opposition groups. Each group espouses its own platform, promotes its own self-interested objectives and awaits its own preconceived expectations for the future of Egypt.
The most important, the most self-interested and the group with the most to lose is the Egyptian military. Without question, the military was (under Mubarak) and still is (under the rule of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces) the most critical entity in Egypt. That is true with reference to virtually every aspect of life in Egypt. It is especially true (to no little extent) as to the pregnant issue of whether or not Egypt devolves from a technically secular state into an officially Islamic nation.
Need it be said that Egypt's military establishment has, in many respects, been decidedly astute. For four decades the military was the power behind Mubarak. But, when it served the military’s interests to do so, it simply ousted Mubarak from office. When Tahrir Square exploded with anti-Mubarak demonstrations, the military studiously avoided becoming embroiled in the demonstrations. The military carefully distanced itself from Mubarak’s policies and skillfully portrayed itself as the sole guarantor of Egyptian stability.
It is now crystal clear that the military has out-maneuvered Egypt’s dissidents. Some among latter had high hopes that military rule would only be a transitional bridge to a democratic Egypt. Other dissidents of an Islamist stripe envisioned an Egypt that would –sooner or later – become officially Islamic. But by now both factions must recognize that the Egyptian military may well harbor a third and completely different vision for Egypt’s future.
It is virtually axiomatic –if not also Machiavellian– that preservation of the status quo is the primary aspiration and objective of those in power. Egypt’s Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is in power. It was the power behind Mubarak's Presidency. Furthermore, it seems increasingly clear that the SCAF has little intention of willingly yielding power to democratic secularists, to the Muslim Brotherhood or to any other aspiring entity of whatever ilk.
What happens next is subject to all manner of speculation. Will the SCAF proceed with the Parliamentary elections scheduled for November 28th? Will the SCAF willingly transfer its power to a democratically elected civilian government? Will the elections be rigged to ensure continued military control?
Additionally, will the SCAF act to keep Egyptian dissidents divided and/or to provoke further discord? Is it in the SCAF's interest to contain or to exacerbate sectarian strife? Will it be a surprise if the SCAF decides that the continuing unrest merits a calculated delay in the path to democracy? Or will the SCAF decide that a growing level of Egyptian dissent is sufficient to simply cancel elections and justify the imposition of emergency rule?
Clearly, the SCAF's reign has already dampened -and may yet completely drench- Egypt's Arab Spring. It is thus that the felonious words of Egypt’s imprisoned dissident blogger now resonate with ever increasing intensity: “The revolution has so far managed to get rid of the dictator, but not the dictatorship!”
So much for the Arab Spring in Egypt!
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Monday, October 10, 2011
Pity The Palestinians
It is truly sad, even pitiful. The Palestinians have no state. They have never had a state. They need a state. They cannot get the Israelis to unilaterally declare the existence of a Palestinian state. They cannot convince the U.N. Security Council to proclaim the creation of a Palestinian state. They cannot even cajole the rest of the massive Arab world to carve out a little space for a Palestinian state. In short, the Palestinians get no respect. They are the Rodney Dangerfields of the Arab world.
But wait. It is not the Israelis who disrespect the Palestinians. The Israelis know better. The Israelis recognize that, by and large, the Palestinians are well-educated and well-attuned to their geopolitical realities. The Israelis know that the Palestinians are –as is evidenced by last year’s enviable 7.6% growth on the West Bank – able to manage an economy. The Israelis know that stability on the West Bank reflects the Palestinian capacity to run a state. The Israelis know that the Palestinians are neither intellectually inferior nor culturally impoverished.
So, if the Israelis do not disrespect the Palestinians as a people who does? Kindly check out the conduct of the Arab world. Indeed, it is the Palestinians’ own Arab brethren who have repeatedly demonstrated disrespect for the Palestinians.
But is that news? Anyone conversant with the stateless plight of the Palestinians knows that the Palestinians have long been the bane of the Arab world. Arabs will rush to deny that inglorious allegation, but historical facts speak to the veracity of that assertion. Thus, a candid review of the history of Palestine and the Palestinians is in order.
In the beginning God created heaven and earth. But God chose not create Palestine so the region was called Canaan. Time passed. In due course, Abraham begot a son named Ishmael. He became the forefather of the Arab Palestinians. But the term Palestinian has its origin elsewhere. So where does the term “Palestinian” come from?
In antiquity there was no such people known as the Palestinians. The closest one comes to fabricating a “Palestinian” ancestry is a people known as the Philistines. Arguably, the Philistines came from somewhere in the Aegean. They settled along the eastern Mediterranean coast where they built a pentapolis one of whose cities was named Gaza.
The Philistines evicted the local Canaanites and expropriated their lands. This occurred about the time that Joshua and the twelve Israelite tribes were invading Canaan. That’s when Jericho’s walls came tumbling down. Like the Philistines, the Israelite tribes evicted the locals and expropriated their lands.
In due course, the Israelites expanded westward while the Philistines were expanding eastward. That’s when Samson (the Israelite) got into trouble with Delilah (a Philistine). That’s when David (the Israelite) slew Goliath (a Philistine). My goodness, the Philistines were at odds with the Israelites just like the Palestinians are at odds with the Israelis.
But, long story short, the Philistines were not Arabs. The Philistines were not Semites. The Arab Palestinians are Semites. The Philistines are not the long lost forefathers of the Palestinians. In fact, by about seven hundred years before Jesus, the Philistines had disappeared from history.
Fast forward another seven hundred years. That’s when the Roman General Pompey appeared in the Mideast. Upon learning that the Mediterranean coast had once been populated by the Philistines, Pompey labeled that region Palestina. The “Ph” from Philistine morphed into the “P” of Palestina. It took another several thousand years for the region to become widely known as Palestine. Not incidentally, the P and the F (Ph) are essentially the same alphabetical letter, the P just has a stronger accent. Thus, the relationship between the Philistines and the Palestinians is purely alphabetical and linguistic, but not genetic
All of which (by way of a very telescoped history) brings us to the twentieth century. With seeming suddeness, the region’s residents –now identified by the Anglicized name of Palestine- were labeled as Palestinians. And now the plot thickens.
Jump to 1947. By fiat, the U.N. created two new entities in Palestine. One entity was to be a Jewish State. The other entity was to be an Arab State. There was no mention of a Palestinian State. That was no oversight. Back in 1947 a Palestinian State would have been a figment of a demographer’s fertile imagination.
Be that as it may, Arab nations attacked the fledgling Jewish State. The ensuing war created refugees. The refugees were locals. Perforce, the refugees were called Palestinians.
Time marched on. Jordan “occupied” Jerusalem and the West Bank. In 1967, Israel kicked Jordan out of Jerusalem and retook the West Bank. Depending on one’s perspective, the West Bank and East Jerusalem then became either “occupied” or “disputed” territory. Since that catastrophe, the Palestinians have yearned to regain “their” territory.
Meanwhile, Palestinian refugees had fled. The refugees found homes, but not havens, across the entirety of the Arab Mideast. And the Palestinian refugees multiplied.
It was and is in Arab nations that the Palestinians have suffered widespread discrimination simply because they are Palestinians. It was in Arab nations that the Palestinians were forbidden to enjoy state healthcare, were precluded from being professionals, were restricted from owning real estate, were restricted in their right to travel, were denied citizenship and were even consigned to squalid refugee camps.
These indignities were thrust upon the Palestinians by the own Arab brethern. Palestinian refugees and their progeny were welcomed across their Arab Mideast with disaffection, were often treated with disrespect and were frequently denigrated by rejection.
In fact, by 1965 the plight of the Palestinian refugees across the Arab Mideast had become so pitiful that the Arab League convened a conference designed to ameliorate the substantial adversities afflicting the Palestinians. What resulted was a proclamation known as The Casablanca Protocol.
But Morocco, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia adamantly refused to sign the Protocol. Lebanon, Libya and Kuwait only signed the Protocol with explicit reservations. That posture left about a million Palestinian refugees trapped in a pathetic state of affairs.
As such, in its 1991 campaign of explicit ethnic cleansing, Kuwait unceremoniously expelled 370,000 of the 400,000 Palestinians then living in that country. Why? Because the Palestinian leader, Yassir Arafat, had sided with Saddam Hussein whose army had invaded Kuwait.
In 1995, Libya expelled its 30,000 Palestinians as punishment for Palestinian peace talks with Israel. In his madness, Col. Qadaffi reasoned that even more Palestinian refugees would punish Israel!
As late as 7 March 2011, Lebanon’s 300,000 Palestinians were still denied the right to own real estate, were still denied access to state healthcare and were still forbidden to practice law or medicine.
As recently as mid-2011, Palestinian President Abbas felt constrained to beg Iraqi President Talabani to protect Iraq’s 15,000-30,000 Palestinians from assaults by Iraqi Shia. Additionally, Palestinians in Iraq are still required to regularly reapply for residence papers.
As of this very moment, the approximate half-million or more Palestinian refugees in Saudi Arabia are still the only Moslems in the world who can never become Saudi citizens. The Saudis argue that this policy is designed “…to avoid dissolution of their (Palestinian) identity & to protect their right to return to their homeland.” Geopolitical hogwash!
Premises considered, the Palestinians must surely merit the world's concern and compassion, if not also sympathy. Lest we forget, the Palestinians still have no state, they still have little or no standing in many Arab nations and they still have no Philistine forefathers. And, candidly, absent those redoubtable Philistine ancestors, even the Palestinian claim to Palestine still remains putrid. Pity the Palestinians!
But wait. It is not the Israelis who disrespect the Palestinians. The Israelis know better. The Israelis recognize that, by and large, the Palestinians are well-educated and well-attuned to their geopolitical realities. The Israelis know that the Palestinians are –as is evidenced by last year’s enviable 7.6% growth on the West Bank – able to manage an economy. The Israelis know that stability on the West Bank reflects the Palestinian capacity to run a state. The Israelis know that the Palestinians are neither intellectually inferior nor culturally impoverished.
So, if the Israelis do not disrespect the Palestinians as a people who does? Kindly check out the conduct of the Arab world. Indeed, it is the Palestinians’ own Arab brethren who have repeatedly demonstrated disrespect for the Palestinians.
But is that news? Anyone conversant with the stateless plight of the Palestinians knows that the Palestinians have long been the bane of the Arab world. Arabs will rush to deny that inglorious allegation, but historical facts speak to the veracity of that assertion. Thus, a candid review of the history of Palestine and the Palestinians is in order.
In the beginning God created heaven and earth. But God chose not create Palestine so the region was called Canaan. Time passed. In due course, Abraham begot a son named Ishmael. He became the forefather of the Arab Palestinians. But the term Palestinian has its origin elsewhere. So where does the term “Palestinian” come from?
In antiquity there was no such people known as the Palestinians. The closest one comes to fabricating a “Palestinian” ancestry is a people known as the Philistines. Arguably, the Philistines came from somewhere in the Aegean. They settled along the eastern Mediterranean coast where they built a pentapolis one of whose cities was named Gaza.
The Philistines evicted the local Canaanites and expropriated their lands. This occurred about the time that Joshua and the twelve Israelite tribes were invading Canaan. That’s when Jericho’s walls came tumbling down. Like the Philistines, the Israelite tribes evicted the locals and expropriated their lands.
In due course, the Israelites expanded westward while the Philistines were expanding eastward. That’s when Samson (the Israelite) got into trouble with Delilah (a Philistine). That’s when David (the Israelite) slew Goliath (a Philistine). My goodness, the Philistines were at odds with the Israelites just like the Palestinians are at odds with the Israelis.
But, long story short, the Philistines were not Arabs. The Philistines were not Semites. The Arab Palestinians are Semites. The Philistines are not the long lost forefathers of the Palestinians. In fact, by about seven hundred years before Jesus, the Philistines had disappeared from history.
Fast forward another seven hundred years. That’s when the Roman General Pompey appeared in the Mideast. Upon learning that the Mediterranean coast had once been populated by the Philistines, Pompey labeled that region Palestina. The “Ph” from Philistine morphed into the “P” of Palestina. It took another several thousand years for the region to become widely known as Palestine. Not incidentally, the P and the F (Ph) are essentially the same alphabetical letter, the P just has a stronger accent. Thus, the relationship between the Philistines and the Palestinians is purely alphabetical and linguistic, but not genetic
All of which (by way of a very telescoped history) brings us to the twentieth century. With seeming suddeness, the region’s residents –now identified by the Anglicized name of Palestine- were labeled as Palestinians. And now the plot thickens.
Jump to 1947. By fiat, the U.N. created two new entities in Palestine. One entity was to be a Jewish State. The other entity was to be an Arab State. There was no mention of a Palestinian State. That was no oversight. Back in 1947 a Palestinian State would have been a figment of a demographer’s fertile imagination.
Be that as it may, Arab nations attacked the fledgling Jewish State. The ensuing war created refugees. The refugees were locals. Perforce, the refugees were called Palestinians.
Time marched on. Jordan “occupied” Jerusalem and the West Bank. In 1967, Israel kicked Jordan out of Jerusalem and retook the West Bank. Depending on one’s perspective, the West Bank and East Jerusalem then became either “occupied” or “disputed” territory. Since that catastrophe, the Palestinians have yearned to regain “their” territory.
Meanwhile, Palestinian refugees had fled. The refugees found homes, but not havens, across the entirety of the Arab Mideast. And the Palestinian refugees multiplied.
It was and is in Arab nations that the Palestinians have suffered widespread discrimination simply because they are Palestinians. It was in Arab nations that the Palestinians were forbidden to enjoy state healthcare, were precluded from being professionals, were restricted from owning real estate, were restricted in their right to travel, were denied citizenship and were even consigned to squalid refugee camps.
These indignities were thrust upon the Palestinians by the own Arab brethern. Palestinian refugees and their progeny were welcomed across their Arab Mideast with disaffection, were often treated with disrespect and were frequently denigrated by rejection.
In fact, by 1965 the plight of the Palestinian refugees across the Arab Mideast had become so pitiful that the Arab League convened a conference designed to ameliorate the substantial adversities afflicting the Palestinians. What resulted was a proclamation known as The Casablanca Protocol.
But Morocco, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia adamantly refused to sign the Protocol. Lebanon, Libya and Kuwait only signed the Protocol with explicit reservations. That posture left about a million Palestinian refugees trapped in a pathetic state of affairs.
As such, in its 1991 campaign of explicit ethnic cleansing, Kuwait unceremoniously expelled 370,000 of the 400,000 Palestinians then living in that country. Why? Because the Palestinian leader, Yassir Arafat, had sided with Saddam Hussein whose army had invaded Kuwait.
In 1995, Libya expelled its 30,000 Palestinians as punishment for Palestinian peace talks with Israel. In his madness, Col. Qadaffi reasoned that even more Palestinian refugees would punish Israel!
As late as 7 March 2011, Lebanon’s 300,000 Palestinians were still denied the right to own real estate, were still denied access to state healthcare and were still forbidden to practice law or medicine.
As recently as mid-2011, Palestinian President Abbas felt constrained to beg Iraqi President Talabani to protect Iraq’s 15,000-30,000 Palestinians from assaults by Iraqi Shia. Additionally, Palestinians in Iraq are still required to regularly reapply for residence papers.
As of this very moment, the approximate half-million or more Palestinian refugees in Saudi Arabia are still the only Moslems in the world who can never become Saudi citizens. The Saudis argue that this policy is designed “…to avoid dissolution of their (Palestinian) identity & to protect their right to return to their homeland.” Geopolitical hogwash!
Premises considered, the Palestinians must surely merit the world's concern and compassion, if not also sympathy. Lest we forget, the Palestinians still have no state, they still have little or no standing in many Arab nations and they still have no Philistine forefathers. And, candidly, absent those redoubtable Philistine ancestors, even the Palestinian claim to Palestine still remains putrid. Pity the Palestinians!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
