I write these notes two
days later on my way back to Berlin form a short visit to Egypt in a
moment of what felt like calm before a storm. Ethiopian plans to
construct a series of dams on the Blue Nile are a cause of great
concern, and president Morsy's suggestion on a TV interview that „we
will rise our hands and pray to our Lord“ to make sure that there
will be enough water reaching Egypt, does not sound like a
well-thought strategy. There was a wave of lengthy electricity cuts
in mid-May, and after a week of fairly reliable electricity,
electricity cuts began again three days ago. There is a constant
shortage of gasoline and diesel and long queues at gas stations. The
economic situation is difficult, and a friend who works as a salesman
of boat and ship equipment told that the even petroleum companies
which so far have been the most reliable customers, have become
unreliable when it comes to paying their bills. Political freedoms
are getting further curtailed, several activists have been arrested,
face charges, or are imprisoned. Most recently, on Monday, Ahmed
Douma received a six months prison sentence for insulting the
president (which immediately provoked an „Insult the President“
campaign on social media). While the Muslim Brotherhood is evidently
failing to solve the urgent problems of the country, they are more
successful in establishing their control over institutions of the
state step by step, most prominently at the moment in the Ministry of
Culture where the new minister of culture has started to change
directors of cultural institutions in order to slowly establish
ideological control over an institution of the state that until now
has been an important leftist and liberal bulwark.
In short, Egypt is in a
miserable shape. And it may be a golden hour for the opposition against
the Muslim Brotherhood's rule.
After meeting A.I. in the
café on Saturday evening, I went to see a Hagg F. and his wife, both
teachers. F's wife and daughter were watching the latest Arab
Idols show on television,
while Hagg F. and his friend AA. were talking about poetry and
politics. Minutes after my arrival, the electricity was cut off (for
the second time that day), and remained so for an hour. In the
darkness illuminated by a torchlight, we entered a discussion about
the isolation of intellectuals in a conservative society. AA. argued
that the problem of living in a village is that there is little
distance between people of different opinions and visions of life,
which is why one has to build high mental walls between oneself and
others to avoid conflicts. Intellectuals from the village, he argued,
essentially face three choices: moving away, going crazy, and
isolation. Those who move away can come back on weekends, and for
them life in the village is a holiday, a time out of the pressures of
city life. For those who stay, it is very difficult.
While AA. elaborated his
point with an anecdote about Nietzsche and the shared predicament of
those who try to come up with progressive, exceptional ideas in
conservative society, there was a knock on the door, and M., a cousin
of Hagg F. in her mid-twenties walked in and asked if he could lend
her his USB stick because she needed to print out more forms for the
Tamarrud signature campaign to remove trust from president Morsy.
„I'm doing the campaign at home, at work, wherever I can,“ she
told. She is getting a lot of signatures.
The Tamarrud (literally
rebellion, disobedience, insurgency) Campaign is the most ingenious move of the
revolutionary current since quite some time. It was launched by a
small group of activists in early May and has since then become
extremely popular despite repeated arrestations and attacks against
people collecting signatures. After too many endless battles with the
police and Ikhwan supporters on the streets that over and again did
not bring a result, the signature campaign is a peaceful and
inclusive tactic of resistance and opposition. Most importantly, it
is able to overcome the social isolation of the activist few, to
mobilise people like M., and to reach out to a lot of people who
could not be reached by revolutionary street action.
In the village, the
campaign has encountered a very positive response. The success and
ease of finding people who would sign with their name, address, and
citizenship number against the president, has given the village
revolutionaries a new sense of confidence and power in place of the
isolation and frustration that had previously prevailed among them.
Nationwide, the campaign
has the declared aim to collect 15 million signatures until 30 June,
the first anniversary of Morsy's presidency. So far they have more
than seven million, and they keep collecting. It has no binding legal
force, however, and what exactly will happen when the campaign
reaches its set deadline on 30 June is an open question. But already
now, it has the immediate effect of raising the spirits of the
revolutionaries and giving them a new sense of confidence and power –
a power which they are also trying to actively excercise.
On Saturday morning, the
head of the local council of the village (the same one who decided to
cooperate with the revolutionaries back in spring 2011 and remained
in office unlike the head of the city council who got into a fight
with them), called a number of people to a meeting to rescue a public
housing project for the youth from alleged theft and
„Brotherhoodisation“ (akhwana). There is a plot of land
behind the youth centre which the local council of the village bought
back in the 1980's, and where the foundations for public housing had
been laid weeks ago. A local businessman, however, produced an
apparently false contract to prove his ownership of the plot of land.
He was supported by the city council of the nearby town which is
meanwhile controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood. The assumption is
that the businessman is acting as an agent of the Brotherhood against
the local council of the village which is still lead by men of the
old system (like governors, also heads of city and local councils are
appointed, not elected in Egypt). Now the head of the local council
of the village was trying to mobilise the revolutionaries to support
him against the Muslim Brotherhood.
Late at Saturday night, a
group of men from the revolutionary circle gathered in a café near
the main mosque of the village late at night to discuss what to do.
There was a sense of energy and empowerment among them. They were
already emboldened by the success of the Tamarrud Campaign, and by
seeking their help, the town mayor had recognised them as a power in
local politics. But they were determined to play their own game.
As they discussed the
issue in detail, they agreed that the story stinks. They had no doubt
that there was dirty game by the Brotherhood and the local
businessman going on, a scheme of indirect takeover of power in the
village by the Ikhwan (who have become so unpopular in the village
that some new functionaries in the town have been advised not to set
their foot in the village), and a blatant case of land theft and
corruption. But they were also convinced that the head of the local
council was after private interests of his own, that there was bound
to be money flowing into his and his clicque's pockets through the
construction project – and probably there would be manipulation in
the distribution of the apartments as well.
Instead of joining one
side or the other, they decided to mix up the game and play it by
their own rules. The story is already out and soon it will be making
rounds in the village. „There will be a lot of hugger-mugger“
said one of them. M.R. countered: „Hugger-mugger is our strength.“
M.R., a member of
ElBaradei's Constitution Party, came up with a suggestion that
convinced everybody present: The revolutionaries will make the whole
thing public and demand that the entire process is made transparent,
starting from the choice of a contractor to build the housing all the
way to the distribution of the apartments and their prices.
The next day some of the
men went to meet the head of the local council and photographed
documents about the case. S. who lives in Alexandria, and D. who has
started to work as a freelance journalist in Cairo are trying to use
their contact to get television and press coverage, And everybody in
the village will be talking about it.
This was a golden
opportunity, they agreed while sitting and planning in the café late
at night, a moment to seize the day and exploit the current
unpopularity of the Ikhwan.
The talk turned to future
elections (date not yet set). M.R. wants to run for the local
council, the others encouraged him and promised their support, and
the discussion moved to the question of party politics, especially
whether the National Salvation Front will be able to agree on
candidates from the many allied parties. In the electoral district,
several parties as well as the independent farmers' union all have
serious candidates to propose – many more than there are seats that
can be realistically won. It will be a big fight.
As the discussion went on,
I thought to myself that while these guys are determined to play
their own game, at the same time they are about to take a crucial
step away from revolutionary purity towards pragmatic politics with
all the tricky negotiations and alliances of local politics involved.
It is the moment of planned, intelligent, peaceful action in order to
make a positive difference – but it will come along with all kinds
of complications, problems and question marks.
But if the village
revolutionaries currently do have a concrete plan, nationwide things
look less clear. On Saturday evening I went with S. to a
barber shop for a shave (a luxury which greatly enjoy in Egypt and
miss in Europe). Y. the barber asked S. a question that people keep
repeatedly asking: „Do you think that Morsy will go on 30 June?“
S. replied, sceptically: „It will be an uproar and it will be
over.“ Y's hope was that the Tamarrud Campaign together with big
demonstrations will force the Brotherhood to step down. This is an
expectation I have heard repeatedly: „On 30 June, we shall see“.
But what will there be to see? Y. he was certain about one thing:
„There will be blood“.
„There will be blood“
is something I have heard very often these days. It is based on the
assumption that the Brotherhood will never give up power peacefully,
that violent confrontation is inevitable. This expectation, even hope
for violence stands in a curious contrast with the non-violent
success of the Tamarrud Campaign. I remain puzzled, and it is a
puzzlement many others share with me. While people of different walks
of life and different political visions come together these days in
their rejection of the Brotherhood (I have met too few Brotherhood
supporters on this trip to say something about their point of view),
their visions about what to do about it, and what should come after
them go far apart. Some hope for the return of the military. Some
expect that the Brotherhood will stay in power but that their gradual
takeover of the state needs to be stopped. Some put their hope in a
transitional presidential council (which has been demanded by many
revolutionaries since summer 2011). Many – perhaps the most –
tell me that while they think that Morsy must go, they really don't
know how it can be done, or who could possibly govern Egypt after the
Brotherhood and do it better.
The current condition is
unbearable, and its unbearable nature along with innovative tactics
of opposition makes it possible to perhaps seize the day and change
the condition. Now that hundreds of thousands have gone out to
streets against Erdogan in Turkey, it looks like the grip of
political Islam on power may be successfully contested even where it
has been economically successful. But this sense of opportunity is
shadowed by the realisation that there is a terrible lack of
convincing alternatives.
The greatest failure of
the Muslim Brotherhood has been its inability to create durable
alliances with other political forces across ideological and social
divides. They have dramatically wasted an opportunity to become the
leading power of constructive political change – instead, they are
struggling on all fronts, national and local alike, to establish
control, creating opposition as they do so, becoming more and more
authoritarian to protect their power, while having very little
success in solving any urgent matters. They may continue doing so for
many years to come, which is not exactly a bright vision of the
future . But the bigger problem is that there is no reason to assume
that anybody else could do better. None of the many competing
factions in Egypt's social and political landscape is alone strong
enough to run the country. Whoever will try to rule Egypt alone will
fail, and face fierce resistance by everybody else. At the same time,
it looks more difficult than ever to make durable alliances, to share
power, and to accept others in spite of ideological differences. More
and more people are recognising that this is a core problem – but
also how exceedingly difficult to solve it is.
In this moment of
confusion, the idea of bloodshed emerges as a terrifying promise of a
fierce, decisive battle that may finally bring about a solution. But
of course, It won't. It will most likely only destroy more. There
will be blood. But what is needed is something else: tactical
innovations, new ways of doing inclusive politics that can seize the
day the way and unite different factions. The Tamarrud Campaign is
prophetic of what may be possible one day, although that possibility
does not have a recognisable shape yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment