There is another Presidential Election that Americans should be following. Of course, we all acknowledge that the US Presidential Election is the one that will shape the future of the planet most profoundly. But another Presidential Election is coming up the end of May and this one will shape the future of the Middle East and accordingly, the planet.
This important election is happening in Egypt. It is the first ever multi-candidate race that promises to be free, fair and transparent.
Unlike the race in America, the timeline for Egypt’s contest is short. Beginning back on Saturday, 10 March, candidates could begin registering their names. This registration, now ongoing, requires hopeful candidates to complete several forms to provide basic personal information including financial disclosures. Each potential candidate must also have either the support of 30 members of the Peoples’ Assembly; or signed and notarized recommendation forms from 30,000 Egyptian citizens including some who reside in each of the governorates; or be the nominee of his/her political party. It turns out that whichever option the hopeful candidate chooses, it is a rigorous process, not without pitfalls! The registration process will end on 8 April at 2:00 PM.
Nevertheless, on Monday, 9 April, an initial list of candidates and the names of the citizens, MPs, or the political party that recommended them will be released. Then the campaigning will begin. Just 45 days later, 23 and 24 May, Egyptians go to the polls! Actually, campaigning has already begun as hopeful candidates seek to complete the registration process and the media speculate on the possibilities and analyze the possible outcomes.
The speculation on the results is already in high gear. There are fears of back room deals between the Muslim Brotherhood and the SCAF (military leaders). Candidates who might be good presidents find themselves tainted by association with overthrown dictator, Hosni Mubarak. The generational divide between Egypt’s significant population of under thirty voters and their elders has added complexity to prognostications.
Egyptian political analyst Moustafa Kamel al-Sayed has argued that the entire political scene is blurred in a way that makes it very hard to guess who the next president might be. Sayed, who is also a professor of political science at Cairo University, argued that many analysts overlook the fact that Egypt has never really been through presidential elections and that is why it cannot be compared to countries with long-established democracies. (Al-Arabiya News, 21 March, 2012)
According to Ahramonline, 22 March, 2012, "The leadership of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood will reportedly discuss the possibility of nominating a presidential candidate at a group meeting scheduled for Friday. Some observers say the move is indicative of a political dilemma for Egypt's largest and most influential Islamist group." They report "...expelled member and presidential contender Abdel-Moneim Abul-Fotouh is finding significant support from among the Brotherhood’s young cadres, and that his overall popularity appears to be growing, even among Coptic-Christian quarters." For more, go to
http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/7/37419/Egypt/Presidential-elections-/In-a-corner,-Muslim-Brotherhood-mulls-presidential.aspx
All of this points to high drama as the Campaign unfolds. We will update our readers in future posts, Stay tuned!
Friday, March 23, 2012
Saturday, March 10, 2012
"Islamism at the Crossroads"
An article with this title appeared in the Al-Ahram Weekly, 16 - 22 February, 2012. This is the premier English language newspaper in Egypt and became our main source of information during our stay there.
The author, Gihan Shahine, states that the results of Egypt’s first free parliamentary elections "indicated that a majority of Egyptians may want an Islamist government." He goes on to point out that "Egypt’s largest and best organized group, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party now constitutes the largest bloc in parliament, followed by the ultraconservative Salafist Nour Party which unexpectedly is the second largest political group in the parliament."
The article summarizes the concerns of liberal and secular groups as well as Coptic Christians that the new government will push for an Islamist agenda. There are numerous secular opinion makers who are expressing serious doubts about the sincerity of the Muslim Brotherhood’s contention that it is a moderate group that wishes to implement Shari’a Law without sacrificing personal freedom.
So, the big question is whether the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party will move to the right and align with the Salafist Nour Party or aim for a centrist coalition that includes secularist parties. Some analysts have postulated that perhaps Egyptians were not seeking Islamist rule but voted for the Freedom and Justice Party candidates because they had integrity and clean hands.
While this article shed a great deal of light on the political situation in Egypt, it also raised questions in our minds. The first question concerned the meaning of the terms Islamist and Islamism. In the western media, these terms are often used to describe a radical interpretation of Islam such as the one that drives members of Al-Qaeda to crash airplanes into buildings or the Taliban to practice brutal repression of women and massacre Afghan civilians. Is this the same interpretation of Islamist and Islamism that Gihan Shahine uses? Clearly not!
What, then, is the definition of these terms for the Egyptians? Further research was clearly needed to elucidate this.
As a start, we obtained a copy of the Constitutional Declaration of 2011, the interim constitution that guides Egypt during the transition, from the website of Egypt’s Cabinet of Ministers.
http://www.cabinet.gov.eg/AboutEgypt/ConstitutionalDeclaration_e.pdf
The first two articles of this essential document state:
Article 1
The Arab Republic of Egypt is a democratic state based on citizenship. The Egyptian people are part of the Arab nation and work for the realization of its comprehensive unity.
Article 2
Islam is the religion of the state and the Arabic language is its official language. Principles of Islamic law (Shari’a) are the principal source of legislation.
So, if Islam is the state religion and Islamic law (Shari’a) the source of legislation, isn’t Egypt Islamic already? Or is Egypt Islamist?
A search of the constitutional history of the country shows that an article similar to the current Article 2 was introduced into the constitution in 1980, when Anwar Sadat was President. Thus, in theory, Shari’a law has been the source of legislation for many years! One could wonder what if anything, will change with the new parliament, labeled Islamist by Al-Ahram, as they begin to make policy? What will change may be not so much that the country will become more Islamic but that it will be a democratic state based on citizenship rather than a state ruled by a dictator and his confederates and enforcers.
Returning to the question about the meaning or the terms Islamist and Islamism we have concluded that these are ambiguous and that their meaning is not well understood among our readers who are mostly American and European non-Muslims. Therefore, we have adopted a new Pioneer West policy: The words Islamist and Islamism will henceforth never be used in our writings!
The author, Gihan Shahine, states that the results of Egypt’s first free parliamentary elections "indicated that a majority of Egyptians may want an Islamist government." He goes on to point out that "Egypt’s largest and best organized group, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party now constitutes the largest bloc in parliament, followed by the ultraconservative Salafist Nour Party which unexpectedly is the second largest political group in the parliament."
The article summarizes the concerns of liberal and secular groups as well as Coptic Christians that the new government will push for an Islamist agenda. There are numerous secular opinion makers who are expressing serious doubts about the sincerity of the Muslim Brotherhood’s contention that it is a moderate group that wishes to implement Shari’a Law without sacrificing personal freedom.
So, the big question is whether the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party will move to the right and align with the Salafist Nour Party or aim for a centrist coalition that includes secularist parties. Some analysts have postulated that perhaps Egyptians were not seeking Islamist rule but voted for the Freedom and Justice Party candidates because they had integrity and clean hands.
While this article shed a great deal of light on the political situation in Egypt, it also raised questions in our minds. The first question concerned the meaning of the terms Islamist and Islamism. In the western media, these terms are often used to describe a radical interpretation of Islam such as the one that drives members of Al-Qaeda to crash airplanes into buildings or the Taliban to practice brutal repression of women and massacre Afghan civilians. Is this the same interpretation of Islamist and Islamism that Gihan Shahine uses? Clearly not!
What, then, is the definition of these terms for the Egyptians? Further research was clearly needed to elucidate this.
As a start, we obtained a copy of the Constitutional Declaration of 2011, the interim constitution that guides Egypt during the transition, from the website of Egypt’s Cabinet of Ministers.
http://www.cabinet.gov.eg/AboutEgypt/ConstitutionalDeclaration_e.pdf
The first two articles of this essential document state:
Article 1
The Arab Republic of Egypt is a democratic state based on citizenship. The Egyptian people are part of the Arab nation and work for the realization of its comprehensive unity.
Article 2
Islam is the religion of the state and the Arabic language is its official language. Principles of Islamic law (Shari’a) are the principal source of legislation.
So, if Islam is the state religion and Islamic law (Shari’a) the source of legislation, isn’t Egypt Islamic already? Or is Egypt Islamist?
A search of the constitutional history of the country shows that an article similar to the current Article 2 was introduced into the constitution in 1980, when Anwar Sadat was President. Thus, in theory, Shari’a law has been the source of legislation for many years! One could wonder what if anything, will change with the new parliament, labeled Islamist by Al-Ahram, as they begin to make policy? What will change may be not so much that the country will become more Islamic but that it will be a democratic state based on citizenship rather than a state ruled by a dictator and his confederates and enforcers.
Returning to the question about the meaning or the terms Islamist and Islamism we have concluded that these are ambiguous and that their meaning is not well understood among our readers who are mostly American and European non-Muslims. Therefore, we have adopted a new Pioneer West policy: The words Islamist and Islamism will henceforth never be used in our writings!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)