Implicit alliance of Egypt’s Islamists and military rulers shows cracks

By: Mustapha Ajbaili


An alliance that was formed following the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak between Egypt’s powerful Muslim Brotherhood group and the intractable ruling generals has exhibited cracks in the recent weeks as the country moves closer to the presidential race.


Both parties built up their strengths in the shade during Mubarak’s 30-year rule. The military took advantage of billions of dollars in U.S. military aid to strengthen itself far from the public limelight, while the Muslim brotherhood built up a massive underground network that brought it closer to the lives of millions of Egyptians.


In the wake of the Jan. 25 revolution, both forces made their presence felt in the country’s political center stage. Both appeared to understand one another’s might, agenda, and the need for mutual cooperation, which developed into an alliance – however implicit this might be. The coming together of the two forces in the post-revolutionary Egypt spared the country a clash of the titans.


Coming under fire from liberal groups last year, the military moved closer to the Brotherhood and succumbed to its “less painful” demands in several occasions to win their support. For the generals, winning the support of Egypt’s most powerful political bloc was essential for steering the boat in the direction of their intended objective, which looks more like a democracy, but not a democracy. They want a system in which elected officials manage domestic affairs but have little say on strategic matters.


While everyone was busy talking about a “Turkish model” that reconciles Islam with democracy, the generals in Cairo appeared to be heading towards a “Turkish model” in which a "pasha" general – like the leader of Turkey’s 1980 military coup, Kenan Evren – acts as the custodian of the state’s strategic issues, especially when it comes to foreign policy, including primarily the relation with the United States and Israel.


Muslim Brotherhood leaderships, appearing to have learned from decades of enmity with Egyptian rulers, decided this time it was in their best interest to support the military in the path to democracy, because they are all but certain to emerge as the victors.


The two forces had interests in joint collaboration during the transitional period, but their starkly different – if not opposing – visions of the future dictated their inevitable breakup – and the cracks are emerging.


The Muslim Brotherhood’s political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP), has expressed cynicism over the military council’s staunch support for the cabinet of Prime Minister Kamal al-Ganzouri.


“Is it a desire to abort the revolution and destroy the people’s belief in their ability to achieve their goals? Or is there an intention to defraud or influence the forthcoming presidential election?” the Brotherhood’s party asked in a statement.


“If anyone intends to reproduce the former corrupt regime with new faces, the people are ready to move in order to revive their revolution,” the Islamist party threatened.


The military and the Brotherhood have worked together – or rather played together – in an often climate of distrust, which never burst into the open until last week.


Egypt’s military ruler Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi said he could not take it anymore. “We were careful not to be provoked, but what happened recently is enough.” Sounding the warning bell, he called “on all to be aware of history’s lessons not to repeat past mistakes.”


At this stage in Egypt’s transition, the Muslim Brotherhood likely realized that it and the military have two different understandings of democracy.


Unlike the generals, Islamists want a democracy in which elected officials and public institutions would have full power over the military and the country’s foreign policy. The ruling generals, under pressure from Washington, will never accept this…at least without a fight. It is Israel’s security here which is at stake!



(Published in English.alarabiya.net on March 2, 2012)

مغرب "الأوراش الكبرى"... إلى أين؟

مصطفى اجبيلى

 

ميناء طنجة المتوسط، تي جي في طنجة - الدار البيضاء، موروكو مول... إلخ، كلها مشاريع كبيرة من شأن أي بلد أن يفتخر بمثلها. لكن إلى أي حد يمكن لمثل هذه المشاريع أن تسهم حقاً في التنمية الاقتصادية للبلد؟ وما مدى نجاعتها في تقليص البطالة ومحاربة الفقر وتعزيز التنمية البشرية في بلد يتذيل بلدان شمال إفريقيا والشرق الأوسط في نسب التعليم؟ 

من بين عشرات المقالات اليومية في الجرائد المغربية نجد النقد والنقد المضاد في الشأن السياسي والاجتماعي وغيره, دونما التطرق بشكل كافٍ للسياسات الاقتصادية التي ينتهجها البلد. 

وقد أثار موضوع "الأوراش الكبرى" بالتحديد اهتمامي كونها تكلف دافعي الضرائب في المغرب أموالاً طائلة، وتجعل البلد برمته عبداً دائماً للدول والمؤسسات المالية العالمية المانحة للقروض دون أن تقدم هذه المشاريع "العملاقة" مردوداً إيجابياً ملحوظاً للشعب، خصوصاً الفئات الفقيرة منه. ربما تساعد هذه المشاريع في خلق بضعة آلاف من فرص العمل وتشجيع بعض الاستثمارات الأجنبية هنا وهناك, لكن الثمن باهظ جداً على المغرب. فمعظم تلك المشاريع عبارة عن صفقات سياسية أكثر منها اقتصادية. 

فمشروع القطار السريع يوهمني بأن المغاربة كلهم في عجلة من أمرهم كي يقطعوا المسافة من طنجة إلى الدار البيضاء في ساعتين عوضاً عن أربع. هذا المشروع - بحسب مراقبين - هو صفقة لإرضاء فرنسا الغاضبة من شراء المغرب طائرات إف 16 الأميركية بدلاً من "رافال" الفرنسية.. ببساطة هكذا تبدو الأمور. فرنسا أقرضت المغرب ملياري يورو كجزء أكبر من ميزانية إنشاء المشروع. ومعظم هذا المبلغ سيعود إلى فرنسا من خلال الشركة الفرنسية المكلفة بإنشاء المشروع والمهندسين الفرنسيين الذين سيعملون في المشرع.  

هكذا تعمل الدول والمؤسسات الكبرى، تقرض الأموال للدول الفقيرة من خلال اتفاقيات رسمية وتستعيدها في البداية  بشكل غير مباشر من خلال شركاتها التي تعمل في إنشاء هذه المشاريع، وبعدها بشكل مباشر حيث تقوم الدول الفقيرة بسداد الديون والفوائد المفروضة عليها، وحين تشتد الأزمات الاجتماعية على هذه الدول الفقيرة وتتخلف عن سداد ديونها في الوقت المطلوب تعاد جدولة هذه الديون بشروط عادة ما تكون سياسية كشراء الذمم في الأمم المتحدة والتبعية المطلقة، أو اقتصادية كفرض مزيد من الفوائد على القروض وفتح المزيد من القطاعات أمام الشركات الغربية، وفى بعض الأحيان تفرض عليك أن تقبل أن تكون مزبلة لنفاياتها النووية أو مستنقعاً لصناعاتها الملوثة للبيئة.. وكل هذا طبعاً باسم التنمية الاقتصادية العمياء. 

هذا ما يحدث في المغرب للأسف الشديد، نقترض فنتورّط ثم تُفرض علينا شروط من قبيل أن نفتح مولاً كبيراً لتسويق الماركات العالمية وامتصاص المزيد من دماء المغاربة، أو منح هكتارات شاسعة من الأراضي لهذا الغربي أو ذاك الخليجي.

أتساءل ما إذا كان بإمكان فرنسا أن تقرضنا ملياري يورو لكي نطور بها صناعاتنا الوطنية ونبني بها مؤسسات لتكوين طاقات بشرية في أعلى المستويات العالمية. غالب الظن أن فرنسا سترفض؛ لأنها لو فعلت ستكون بذلك تساعد المغرب على أن يكون مستقلاً ذاتياً ومنافساً لها ولشركاته ولطاقاتها البشرية.

لقد آن الأوان لمن يرعى سياسات التنمية الاقتصادية في المغرب أن يدرك أن المغرب ليس دبي ولا أمريكا لكي يبني مولات وقطارات سريعة تورطنا أكثر مما تفيدنا. فلو كانت فيها فائدة لوجدنا تركيا كلها مولات وقطارات سريعة، فمثل هذه المشاريع عادة ما تكون عبارة عن مظاهر وليس دوافع للازدهار الاقتصادي، وهذا ما يجب أن يدركه المغرب، حسب رأيي المتواضع.

‘Selmy document’ rekindles violence in Egypt, raises calls for army’s swift exit

By Mustapha Ajbaili

A proposed legislation that sought to shield the Egyptian army from public scrutiny has rekindled the violence in the country and increased calls for a speedy exit of the ruling military council from power.

Groups across the Egyptian political spectrum, from the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists to secularist el-Ghad Party, rallied in a million-man march in Tahrir Square last Friday demanding that the legislation proposed by Egypt’s Deputy Prime Minister Ali al-Selmy be withdrawn.

Many suspect that Selmy indirectly proposed the draft law on behalf of the ruling military council.

At the end of the rally, a few thousand activists decided to camp at Tahrir Square until their demands were met, prompting a violent move by military police and security forces to evict the area. The move resulted in deadly clashes and escalated the situation to popular calls for the ouster of Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi.

The excessive approach by security forces to the peaceful protests evoked the brutality of ousted president Hosni Mubarak and led to prominent political figures and observers adopting a tougher stance on the ruling generals and their suspected dubious behind-the-scene plans.

Tarek al-Bishry, the chairman of Egypt’s constitutional panel, on Monday described the proposed supra-constitutional principles law as “invalid”.

Bishry told Al Arabiya that last Friday’s mass protest at Tahrir Square “has nullified” the legislation, known as the Selmy document.

“Selmy is trying to impose a document that has been rejected by the people and by the political elite. It is, therefore, invalid, and there is no need for him to talk about making amendments to it,” Bishry said.

“The important question to ask Selmy is why the persistence on this document after the Egyptian general public told you we don’t want it; why the persistence on amending something that has wholly been rejected?”

Egyptian presidential candidate and head of el-Ghad party Ayman Nour denounced the military-proposed draft law as unacceptable.

“We will not allow another dictator to rule the country,” Nour said in comments reported by Egyptian media.

“We will fight against only one power claiming authority in Egypt. We will not accept any attempt to divert the attention from the next parliamentary elections,” he added.

Veteran Egyptian journalist and political commentator Farrag Ismail said, “The catastrophe from the ongoing violence in Tahrir Square lies not in the death toll that continues to rise but in the possibility of the army containing the revolution by force.

“Eight months of military rule has given an impression that their appetite to remain in power has grown despite pledges to transfer power to civilians.”

Major General Mohsen al-Fangary has said the Supreme Council of Armed Forces would relinquish power by the end of 2012 provided there is calm in the country during the elections.

Ismail said the condition placed by the army on the transfer of power was a sign the ruling generals were looking to remain in power.

The powerful Muslim Brotherhood on Monday called on the Egyptians to be “alert” against “attempts to re-produce the previous regime in a different form.”

Addressing SCAF, the Brotherhood said, “The people entrusted you to lead the country during the transition period ... and we are not ready to extend it beyond the second half of 2012.”

The movement also urged the ruling military council break its silence and tell the people about their intentions to transfer power to a civilian authority.

(Published on english.alarabiya.net  on Nov.21, 2011)