Escalating protests in Egypt

What's happening right now in Egypt is really important.  As I read things, the last few months have seen the steady counter-attack by the regime against the various protest movements which had become increasingly active over the last year and a half: the judges, Kefaya, the MB, and so on.   As the latest round of protests, repression, and arrests kicked in, you could sense a palpable air of hopelessness spreading.   The Bush administration could hardly be bothered to pretend to care.  According to emails I got, and some news accounts, even al-Jazeera was backing off coverage of the protests - probably in response to the arrest of its correspondent in the Sinai.

Over the last few days, we're starting to see whether some of the constituent elements of the contentious movements of 2005 can kick in.   The protests over the hearings on judges Mahmoud Mekki and Hisham Bastawisi have turned large, and the harsh regime response is receiving some coverage in the Arab media:  al-Quds al-Arabi covers it,  though neither of the allegedly liberal Saudi owned dailies (al-Sharq al-Awsat and al-Hayat) can find room for it on the front page;  while both al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya currently have long lead stories on their web sites, illustrated with the same AFP picture (I heard that the al-Jazeera camerman got beat up pretty badly for his efforts) (NOTE:  Egypt didn't show up in al-Jazeera's news brief just now, though- and today's prime time Behind the News spot is devoted not to Egypt but to the violence in Somalia).

Internet activists are doing everything they can to draw attention to the cause, focusing on arrested blogger Alaa Abd al-Fattah - a smart move, putting a known face on the crackdown.  A small party just surprised the government with a lawsuit demanding equal access to the state-owned media, according to al-Jazeera.   Some of the Western media is paying attention, as these protests pose fewer dilemmas than did Muslim Brotherhood complaints of repression.  Bush doesn't seem to be paying much attention, but at least his lack of attention is getting some attention.

So it brings us to a direct test of some big questions.  Can media and internet activism push back against regime repression in any serious way?   Does the US still care to back such protestors against the Arab security state, or care enough to do more than wag its finger distractedly?  The eminent Egyptian judge Tareq al-Bishri released a 96 page book yesterday about the crisis facing the Egyptian judiciary, arguing that the regime is facing perhaps its greatest test right now.  So are a lot of other forces active in today's Arab world - from the Arab media to popular movements to America. 

UPDATE:  per comment below, the State Department issued a quite critical statement in this morning's press briefing (it hadn't shown up on the State website when I was writing the post, and still doesn't, so I don't know exactly what was said).   An excellent start - but follow-up (high level attention, and meaningful consequences) is critical.

.... and, State Department comment is this:

We are deeply concerned by reports of Egyptian Government arrests and repression of demonstrators protesting election fraud and calling for an independent judiciary. Particularly troubling are reports of Egyptian police tactics against demonstrators and journalists covering the event that left many injured. We urge the Egyptian Government to permit peaceful demonstrations on behalf of reform and civil liberties by those exercising their rights to freedom of assembly and expression.

We are also troubled by reports that the periods of detention of many of those arrested have been extended and that security-related charges have been filed against them. We have noted our serious concern about the path of political reform and democracy in Egypt and actions such as these are incongruous with the Egyptian Government's professed commitment to increased political openness and dialogue within Egyptian society. We will be following up with the Egyptian Government regarding our concerns and will continue to push for political reform and freedom of speech and press. We support the rights of Egyptians and people throughout the Middle East to peacefully advocate for democracy and political reform.

Now, Mr Words, may I introduce you to Mr Deeds?   

Comments

[Ghurab al-Bain]

The U.S. State Department issued a critical statement today about the violence in Egypt and the repression of peaceful demonstrators, journalists and the pressure on independent judges - so they are not completely silent! They are also saying some of the same things in Arab media outlets yesterday and today.

[Craig]

Does the US still care to back such protestors against the Arab security state, or care enough to do more than wag its finger distractedly?

What are the options again? :)

If Bush was President back in 1979, would you have had him "back his words" supporting democracy by supporting Ayotollah Khomeini against the Shah?

Not every protest movement is pro-democracy, you know. I don't see a good outcome in Egypt, with or without Mubarak, so I have a really hard time deciding what I want my government to do. I'm encouraged by strongly pro-liberal democracy Egyptian bloggers, but I've been quite taken aback by how strongly the Muslim Brotherhood seems to be supported by the Egyptian population. I like secular dictators better than islamic theocracy, so...

What are my options, again?

[SP]

Craig, if you think the current Egyptian regime is any better than the Iranian theocracy, there are clearly some ideological blinkers begging to be torn off here...you can glibly say that "not every protest movement is pro-democracy" but if you had to live in Egypt and see the brutality with which the regime treats its citizens and if you could see how much courage it takes for these people to come out and do something about it - and by the way, most of these protestors are NOT Islamists - you would realize that something needs to change. Mubarak wants you to think it's either him or the Islamists, because that's what will keep him in power. But the regime as it exists is untenable, and the sooner you listen to the legitimate demands of the protestors, the better your chances of preventing another radical Iran-style revolution. In fact it is a very good sign that non-islamist opposition groups are working with Islamists, because it makes it more difficult for the militant Islamists to claim that they are the one voice of justice and everybody else is the enemy. Can't you see that the Islamists can only increase their credibility when secularism is associated with a brutal repressive dictatorship?

[Craig]

SP,

if you think the current Egyptian regime is any better than the Iranian theocracy

I do, for a variety of reasons, but my most selfish reasons are that the Mubarak regime doesn't want to kill Americans.

For less selfish reasons, I believe Iran has the worst government on the planet. I don't mean to say Egypt has a good (or even an "acceptable") government. I'm just saying that Iran's is worse.

but if you had to live in Egypt and see the brutality with which the regime treats its citizens and if you could see how much courage it takes for these people to come out and do something about it

Well, it's true I've never been to EGypt, but I've seen dictatorial brutality first hand. I spent most of the 1980s visiting dictatorships, it seems like.

I do recognize how much courage it takes to oppose a tyrant. I don't mean to minimize that.

and by the way, most of these protestors are NOT Islamists

Well, that's good news, if true... but that doesn't change the fact that only the muslim brotherhood seems capable of mobilizing demonstratable opposition to Mubarak.

you would realize that something needs to change.

Oh, I think something is going to change in Egypt. I just hope it's a change for the better!

Mubarak wants you to think it's either him or the Islamists, because that's what will keep him in power.

Are you saying, it's not? Are you sure this is just a Mubarak plot, and not a reality?

But the regime as it exists is untenable, and the sooner you listen to the legitimate demands of the protestors, the better your chances of preventing another radical Iran-style revolution.

It may be 15 or 20 years too late for that. Jimmy Carter dropped support for the Shah prior to the 1979 revolution, but Iranians still blamed the US for mis-deeds going all the way back to 1953.

In fact it is a very good sign that non-islamist opposition groups are working with Islamists, because it makes it more difficult for the militant Islamists to claim that they are the one voice of justice and everybody else is the enemy. Can't you see that the Islamists can only increase their credibility when secularism is associated with a brutal repressive dictatorship?

Yes. That's exactly what happened in Iran. That seems to be the recipe in muslim countries. That's what bothers me. Things don't work out the same in muslim countries as they do in non-muslim countries. We don't have a success story out of the muslim world, yet.

[The Lounsbury]

For less selfish reasons, I believe Iran has the worst government on the planet. I don't mean to say Egypt has a good (or even an "acceptable") government. I'm just saying that Iran's is worse.

Are you smoking some cheap crack?

North Korea, Burma / Myanmar right off the bat are far, far worse.

Bloody American whankers - "Iran's the worst thing on the planet because of passing ideoglurge obsession"

[Craig]

Thanks insult, Lunsbury :D

Your opinion is your own, and my opinion is my own. Neither North Korea nor Burma, as far as I know, is a direct supporter of international terrorism, and neither (as far as I can tell) has committed wholesale murders of foreigners they were not at war with in foreign lands, or on their own lands for that matter. And if you don't count starvation, I seriously doubt North Korea and Burma *combined* have murdered as many of their own innocent citizens.

I think you are letting the relative comfort that the oil money allows Iran to provide for it's own citizens fool you.

[No Preference]

Jimmy Carter dropped support for the Shah prior to the 1979 revolution, . . .

Yeah, about five minutes before.

. . . but Iranians still blamed the US for mis-deeds going all the way back to 1953.

Get real. If Iran had overthrown our government in 1953, and interfered with ou internal politics ever since, do you suppose that we would have forgotten? Particularly since regime change is the official position of the US government.

Can't you see that the Islamists can only increase their credibility when secularism is associated with a brutal repressive dictatorship?
. . .
Yes. That's exactly what happened in Iran. That seems to be the recipe in muslim countries. That's what bothers me. Things don't work out the same in muslim countries as they do in non-muslim countries. We don't have a success story out of the muslim world, yet.

This is

1) Inaccurate. Indonesia, Bangladesh and Turkey are the first, third, and fifth biggest Muslim countries, and they don't fit into your profile.

2) Arrogant. What's this with "we don't have a success story out of the muslim world, yet". Those places don't belong to us. This is the kind of thinking led us to overthrow the democratic Iranian government in the first place.

[SP]

Craig, perhaps you ought to learn a little bit about the Middle East before making sweeping pronouncements based on your ideological preferences. I shudder to think that people like you are in positions of policy influence in the US.

But for the record, I would say that yes, the opposition and especially the protestors who have come out in the last several weeks (supporting judges and the rule of law, for crying out loud) are not just Islamists.

Events will soon prove to you the futility of believing a dictatorship can work and can protect American interests in the region.

[Craig]

No Preference,

Yeah, about five minutes before.

Whatever. You're agreeing with me that the US would still be blamed, whether it continues to support Mubarak or not, right?

You're just agreeing with me sarcatically :p

Get real. If Iran had overthrown our government in 1953, and interfered with ou internal politics ever since, do you suppose that we would have forgotten? Particularly since regime change is the official position of the US government.

Same. You're agreeing with me, in an insulting manner. I appeciate that :)

This is

1) Inaccurate. Indonesia, Bangladesh and Turkey are the first, third, and fifth biggest Muslim countries, and they don't fit into your profile.

Why'd you list them out of order? And none of those three bears (or bore) any resemblance to the dictaorships in the Middle East, that I can see.

Do you consider either Indonesia or Bangladesh to be "successful" states?

Modern Turkey is a relic of the old Ottoman empire. It's becoming more Islamic, not less. It was entirely secular in the not too distant past. I consider Turkey's democracy to be in jeopardy. Because of Islam.

2) Arrogant. What's this with "we don't have a success story out of the muslim world, yet". Those places don't belong to us. This is the kind of thinking led us to overthrow the democratic Iranian government in the first place.

What is this "us" crap? I'm not like you, don't put me in the same category with you. I resent it. :D

When I said "we" I mean humanity as a whole. It was your own arrogance that lead you to believe I was referring to my specific nationality.

[Craig]

SP,

Craig, perhaps you ought to learn a little bit about the Middle East before making sweeping pronouncements based on your ideological preferences.

Why should I do that? You just made sweeping pronouncemnts about me, personally (do you know me?) and made sweeping pronouncemnets about the US government, it's employees, and it's policies.

Abu Ardvark, I gotta say... you've got the most abusive commenters I've run into in quite some time. 4 people particapting, and 3 of them began their particpation with personal attacks. SP didn't make the personal attack until the second comment.

Kudos, SP :P

[SP]

Craig, if you can't deal with honest responses to your strong statements, you might think twice before making them.

I am also not sure at this point what you are talking about, because you refer to "the Muslim world" and "dictatorships in the Middle East" and "Islam" interchangeably, and then change your mind when someone calls you on this. May I remind you of the large Muslim populations living in South Asia (there are many more South Asian than Middle Eastern Muslims) that have participated peacefully in the democratic process. And when democracy has failed in Pakistan, the military has been more to blame than any Islamist group.

As for your concern about Islamist groups working with other opposition groups and whether this is a cause for concern, I don't see why this is any more of a problem than the Christian Right working with the Republican party. There are some in the Christian Right who are just as looney as the looniest Islamists, such as Christian Reconstructionists, and some who are willing to work within the rules of democracy. Would you deny them the right to political participation based on the loonies? Iran is an example that certainly gives us pause, but you don't have the sort of clerical structure in Egypt that could produce a theocracy on Iranian lines. Islamist political participation would most likely work rather as it does in Turkey.

[SP]

Here, for the record, are statements you have made that I would consider gross generalizations:

"That seems to be the recipe in muslim countries. That's what bothers me. Things don't work out the same in muslim countries as they do in non-muslim countries."

"I consider Turkey's democracy to be in jeopardy. Because of Islam."

You need to draw some causal connections here, and you'll have some work to do if you're trying to suggest that Islam per se is the problem.

[Craig]

Sp,

Craig, if you can't deal with honest responses to your strong statements, you might think twice before making them.

You keep telling me what to do in a most demeaning manner. I don't work for you. If I did work for you, I'd quit. You call abusive personal attacks "honest opinions" - you'd be one rotten son-of-a-bitch to work for :O

[No Preference]

When I said "we" I mean humanity as a whole. It was your own arrogance that lead you to believe I was referring to my specific nationality.

!!

I rest my case.

[Craig]

I rest my case.

What case is that? Did I miss something? All I saw was a bunch of sarcastic insults.

[JB]

Well, _I_ think you know something about the Middle East, Craig. And I'm interested in your take on some of the ideas going by here under the static. Someone remarked in there that Egypt is not going to go the way of Iran because there is no comparable clerical hierarchy, meaning, I presume, that the Muslims here are Sunni not Shi'a. Do you not think that that is relevant?

I don't know how many of the protestors are Islamists -- I suspect only the protestors know -- but support for the Brotherhood doesn't seem to be a particularly radical position to take here. The people loathe the very idea of blowing up hotels etc in Sinai. They detest Bush but do not (yet) particularly hate America, certainly not Americans (well, at least not in Cairo). As for supporters of the Brotherhood, while mostly they do want Shari'a in some form, they are pretty sober, down-to-earth types who probably resemble the Islamists of Malaya or, yes, Turkey, more than those in Iran.

No, Indonesia and Bangladesh are not models of good governance. But surely both have very much improved on what was there when the people weren't allowed to vote.

JB

[praktike]

I hate to disagree with SP here, because she definitely knows what she's talking about as compared to Craig, but it is not true that most of the protesters aren't Islamists. Most of them on Thursday were from the MB, and apparently there were buses more of them that the government stopped on the way into the city.

[Anna in Cairo]

Yeah Praktike but they were piggybacking on the judge issue to suit themselves. In earlier protests the MB was not the main or leading group.

[the aardvark]

What fun! A weekend comment section spat - that'll show me to spend mother's day offline. Re the protestors, I had heard the same as prak about the busloads of MB for these protests. Anna's no doubt right about them hopping on the bandwagon, but man, they sure do make the wagon go faster and heavier when they hop on board...

[SP]

I am not currently in Cairo so was relying on what I heard from friends - busloads of MBs sounds very plausible, but again, they did not start off these protests, and since our esteemed colleague was pointing to the Islamist menace as a reason for ignoring calls for democratization in Egypt, specifically saying that the Egyptian opposition are not necessarily democrats, and that a secular dictatorship would be preferable, I felt it important to point out that this round of protests, and the wide coalition it seems to have drawn, is based on the abuse of electoral law and judicial independence. BTW did the MB at the protests join in the anti-regime slogans?

[praktike]

well, take it from me that busloads of MBs is not only plausible but al-haqiqa.

that said, it is also true that the judges' stand has attracted support from across Egypt's professional class and beyond. this is a winning issue, it seems, and a unifying one for the usually ineffective opposition.

[praktike]

well, take it from me that busloads of MBs is not only plausible but al-haqiqa.

that said, it is also true that the judges' stand has attracted support from across Egypt's professional class and beyond. this is a winning issue, it seems, and a unifying one for the usually ineffective opposition.

[Anna in Cairo]

So there is another big protest today. They are now weekly every thursday. We got a note from the embassy saying avoid downtown. Stay tuned.