CHRISTIAN NEWS: SOURCE on Muslim Brotherhood. NY Times, November 22, 2011. CAIRO — Egypt careened through another day of crisis with no end in sight as hundreds of thousands of people occupying Tahrir Square jeered at a deal struck on Tuesday by the Muslim Brotherhood and the military that would speed up the transition to civilian rule on a timetable favoring the Islamist movement.
The agreement, which centered on a presidential election by late June, appeared unlikely to extinguish the resurgent protest movement — the largest since the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak nine months ago. The crowd roared its disapproval when the deal was announced at 8 p.m., fighting spiked on the avenue leading to the Interior Ministry, and the number of protesters continued to swell.
Unlikely to satisfy the public demands for the military to leave power, the deal may have driven a new wedge into the opposition, reopening a divide between the seething public and the political elite, between liberals and Islamists and, as events unfolded, among the Islamists themselves.
“We refuse it, and the square has refused it already,” said Islam Lotfy, a former leader of the youth wing of the Muslim Brotherhood who was expelled from the organization with a group of others for starting a centrist political party. “They did not offer anything new. They are just bargaining with the people.”
Just four days ago, the Muslim Brotherhood kicked off a wave of protests against the military’s increasingly explicit attempts to decree for itself special powers and protections under the future constitution. But when a heavyhanded crackdown on demonstrators ignited a far broader and more violent backlash against the military’s power grab, Brotherhood leaders sent mixed signals about whether to join the swelling protests. And while other political groups called for a huge demonstration on Tuesday, the Muslim Brotherhood ordered its members to stay away for fear of jeopardizing elections as the violence hit a peak.
The Health Ministry said 31 people died in four days of unrest, and more than 600 were injured on Tuesday alone.
For the military and the Brotherhood, the deal was the closest embrace yet in the off-again-on-again partnership since the revolution between the country’s two most powerful institutions — reprising roles played out under Mr. Mubarak, who outlawed, but tolerated, the Muslim Brotherhood during his three decades in power.
For Egyptian liberals, the open deal between the two most powerful and organized forces in the nation raised fears of being caught between groups at odds with their goals: a military reluctant to submit to democratic oversight, and an Islamist movement with a potentially narrow view of individual freedoms.
“Pessimists fear the Saudi scenario,” Shady el-Ghazaly Harb, a liberal activist, said recently, referring to the possibility of imposing both strict Islamic moral codes and a harshly undemocratic government.
The agreement was worked out in a meeting held by Gen. Sami Enan, a top leader of the military council, who invited all of the major political parties and their leaders. Most liberal parties and leaders, including the presidential contender Mohamed ElBaradei, declined to attend, as did the moderate former Brotherhood leader Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, another presidential contender. All said that negotiating with the generals would confer legitimacy on their authority and that the solution to the crisis should come from the protesters in the street.
Of the roughly 10 parties and leaders that met with General Enan, the Muslim Brotherhood was easily the most influential. For the Brotherhood, the accord promises to achieve a critical goal, by beginning the first parliamentary elections in the post-Mubarak era on Monday, as scheduled; the Brotherhood’s newly formed Freedom and Justice Party is poised to reap big gains from its advantages in outreach and organizing. And with those gains in the new parliament, the Muslim Brotherhood would be able to help shape the writing of a constitution.
For the military, the deal would allow it to retain unfettered authority at least until late June. Many liberals and Islamists had grown concerned in recent months about the military’s increasingly overt effort to preserve a decisive role for itself in politics far into the future.
The military had pledged in March to hold a presidential election by September, but later it said that the presidential election would come only after the election of a Parliament, the formation of a constitutional assembly and the ratification of a new constitution — a process that could stretch into 2013 or longer.
The New York Times
Protesters are demanding that the military council, at the least, begin immediately delegating domestic decision making to a newly empowered civilian government that would replace the current civilian prime minister and cabinet, who have been charged solely with carrying out the generals’ orders. But instead the generals agreed only to install a new apolitical “technocrat” government that would continue to do the same.
And the agreement reached Tuesday may also allow the military to preserve a vital role in shaping a new constitution. The generals have already indicated they hope to enshrine in it special powers and protections for their own institution, insulating it from civilian control.
(Under the new timetable, drafting of the constitution is scheduled to take place in just about one month. Candidates would be required to start running for president before a new constitution had defined the job.)
In Tahrir Square, many accused the Muslim Brotherhood of a shortsighted selling out that would only damage its standing. “Everyone knows the Brotherhood are opportunists; now we know it even more,” said Adham Hafez, an artist volunteering at a field clinic, adding that he learned of the deal when his parents called to tell him “how disgusting it is.”
But there were also signs of dissent within the Muslim Brotherhood. Despite the orders not to protest in Tahrir Square, many in the Brotherhood Youth defied their elders to take a stand against continued military rule. “The Brotherhood Youth will have to take our own decision between what the organization wants and what our conscience tells us to do,” said Mr. Lotfy, the former Brotherhood Youth leader.
Magdy el-Attar, 41, a mechanic and a Brotherhood member who said he had spent four days in Tahrir Square, said he was so disappointed in what he saw as the group’s capitu
lation to the generals that he had taken off his Muslim Brotherhood badge. “It’s heartbreaking to see how they have lost their principles in exchange for a piece of power,” he said. “All they care about is their seats in Parliament. They became businessmen. We used to all call for freedom. Now all they are looking at is power.”
Many protesters and political leaders also faulted the Muslim Brotherhood and other parties to the deal for failing to deliver on a promised pullback of security forces from the four-day battle on the edge of the square.
A short time later, a cloud of noxious gas floated over the square, possibly intended to clear it without combat. Doctors have reported — and reporters have seen — civilians having convulsions after inhaling gas, leading to concerns and rumors about the nature of the gas the military showers each day on protesters near the street fighting.
“Tear gas with nerve agent & live ammunition being used against civilians in Tahrir,” Mr. ElBaradei wrote on Twitter. “A massacre is taking place.”
Many people still considered it unlikely that elections would begin on Monday, especially because of the continuing violence. Some liberals argued that the military council had already delayed its own pledged deadlines for elections so often that it could not be trusted to deliver on its latest promise.
“This deal will perpetuate the problem rather than solve it,” said Hossam Bahgat, executive director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights. The military council has tried to strike deals with various parts of the political elite, he said, “but the moment we are in right now is being driven primarily by disillusioned, predominantly young Egyptians who came out to say they have had enough of military rule and the mismanaged transitions.”
Dr. Michael Youssef – Guest Columnist –
After making numerous phone calls and speaking to many Christian leaders in Egypt this week, I have learned that what is really happening on the ground is far removed from the television reporters’ happy endorsement of democracy seekers. To describe what is really going on around the country as “barbaric” would be an understatement. While some of the protestors may be true democracy lovers, the widespread terrorism on display defies all human decency.
The truth about recent events in Egypt reveals that the country has disintegrated into a total anarchy and barbarianism that would make the Vikings blush.
Peaceful Christians are being beheaded in their own homes. Their possessions are being carried off as police either stand helplessly by or, for a portion of the booty, turn a blind eye. And surprise, surprise! Nearly all the victims of beheadings were Christians killed by Muslim fundamentalists.
Not only are the Egyptian Islamists poised to take over the country as a result of elections this week, but these acts of terrorism are serving as propaganda tools to “prove” that they and they alone can bring order to the country with their Sharia law. So, for now at least, these terrorist acts reinforce their cause and agenda.
Deal said to favor Muslim Brotherhood
Tags for Muslim Brotherhood article: Cairo, Mubarak, Tahrir Square, Muslim Brotherhood, Muslim Brotherhood Youth