Middle East/North Africa #11 - now with added Theoretical Collapse

[The Marquis de Leech]

Can you name a single example of a modern democratic country in which their democracy preceded the civil institutions and civil law?

Define democracy, civil institutions, and civil law.

I imagine future democratic leaders always looking over their shoulders, knowing that even after winning a majority vote, if they try to trample all over the losers of election, a sufficiently motivated desperate minority has the ability to depose them with the help of military and courts is a very good thing.

Let's pretend that they were trampling over the rights of the minority. Where does the justification for military intervention stop? Was Venezuela's failed coup against Hugo Chavez justified? Would the UK military have been justified in launching a coup against Margaret Thatcher?

Fact is, once the military starts playing with democratic processes for "good" reasons, it'll do it for bad reasons too. Military coups against a democratic government are inherently wrong.

[Gears of the Beast]

So you don't care how Egyptians think, but you know they're all crazy Muslims who will stop rioting. Cool story.

*sigh* what I meant was that it's not relevant to whether or not Morsi is crazy.

[Istakhr]

You're the one proposing that the Brothers were on the verge of replicating Khomeini, so it's up to you to explain how they were actually going do to that without the charismatic leader willing to mould the state to his vision of clerical rule, or the total chaos of state collapse (comparing Iran in 1979 to Egypt in 2011-12... wow...) oh, and without the theory of rule of the jurisprudent.

In short similarities between 1979 Iran and 2011 Egypt:

Both Morsi and Khomeini wanted to codify the mainstream Islam of their country into law.

Both came to power after a largely bloodless revolution.

Both revolution were instigated by university students and young cosmopolitans who were either followers of non traditional islamic movements or secular.

Both movements stayed out of the fight until near the end of revolutions, and both promised to stay out of power and broke their promisses subsequently.

Both movements were very well organized and had a history of helping the poor and underprivileged and had the good will of these groups.

Both promised the moon to win the election, (Justice, bread, equality), while having no experience in governance and then failed to deliver.

Both faced rivalry from a more conservative but less well organized islamic movement. (Salafis and Mahdavieh) They both managed to ally with these rivals in the first phase to ram through islamic constitutions in the face of a fractured opposition.

Both moved to disband and reform a dependent judiciary.

Where Iran was unlucky was that higher echelon of Iranian military were largely too dependent on Shah and had to flee after the revolution, so no old institution of power existed in revolutionary Iran. Then a Iran-Iraq war gave Khomeni the chance to unite the country behind his regime and crush all his opposition.

I think this is a strange reading of the last two years. Mostly because I don't think people are happy with governments playing lip service to Islam - either they're liberals who want secular government, or Islamists of some persuasion who want governments to stop pay lip service. My evidence for this is... AKP, Ennadha, the Libyan elections and FJP and al-Nour in the Egyptian parliamentary elections.

I said people don't care, meaning while they happily vote for islamists, even if you force a secular constitution like the US constitution on any of these countries and then have elections for president and congress while islamic parties would win majority of the vote, they're not going to get enough votes or even agreement between themselves to change such a constitution nor are you going to see a new popular revolution to bring an islamic constitution.

What's clear is that there's more to political Islam than the Brotherhood and Khomeini, as we've seen in Tunisia and Turkey, and as we saw in the Egyptian presidential elections, which were a five way split between old regime, Brotherhood, reformist, Nasserist and salafi. If the second round was Abdel Fattouh vs Sabahy, or Amr Moussa v Shafik, we'd be looking at a very different Egypt right now, and that was all possible with a few % of the vote changing hands.

Brotherhood, Khomeini, and mainstream Wahhabis are all traditionalist movements out to codify what is the traditional Islamic values of their societies into law. This is not true of Al Qaida, Jihadies, reformists, Nasserist, Marxist Islamists or any other flavor of political Islam. The first group are essentially reactionary movements against both the second group and secularism. They also generally have broad appeal among uneducated and poor in their respective countries while the second group of ideas just like secularism belongs mostly to cosmopolitan and the educated class.

That's also what most Egyptians would say about sharia, so how do you explain them siding with the military against Morsi?

Because they just want a lip service to Islam and don't really care? Because most want Shria law almost as much as americans wanted to ban interracial marriage in 1968?

Again as they have shown under nationalist dictators, most are not willing to pay any price to get their wish.

[Shryke]

Define democracy, civil institutions, and civil law.

Let's pretend that they were trampling over the rights of the minority. Where does the justification for military intervention stop? Was Venezuela's failed coup against Hugo Chavez justified? Would the UK military have been justified in launching a coup against Margaret Thatcher?

Fact is, once the military starts playing with democratic processes for "good" reasons, it'll do it for bad reasons too. Military coups against a democratic government are inherently wrong.

Your problem is simplifying this down to "military vs democratic government" which misses all the nuance in the situation.

[Istakhr]

Fact is, once the military starts playing with democratic processes for "good" reasons, it'll do it for bad reasons too. Military coups against a democratic government are inherently wrong.

You are absolutely right about military interventions, but where we differ is in our view on democracy.

You view democracy as inherently the best system, but I don't.

In my view democracy on its own has no inherent good or bad value, I view democratic governance as a continuum starting with forms of liberal democratic system + population as inherently the best systems of government and forms of illiberal democracy + population as inherently the worst.

[The Iceman of the North]

Drawing a conclusion about the events in Egypt is way too early. The military removing a democratically elected government is not ideal, but the situation is hardly that black and white.

I'm concerned about some of the moves by the military, like closing broadcasting station loyal to MB, and putting the MB leadership in 'house arrest'.

Except for the most rabid anti-Islamists, most would agree that the fall of Mubarak, and the consequent elections, were a huge step forward for Egypt. Likewise, Morsi's rule was a gradual step backwards towards the goal of a functional liberal democracy.

But it's too early to tell if recent events are a small, but necessary, step backwards, before the continued move forward, or if they are a more permanent step backwards.

[ThinkerX]

This is pretty much what the entire Islamic world wants in their government. It's just that no one has gotten around to defining True Islam™ for the satisfaction of the faithful in its entirity, or explaining how that relates to handing sewerage and IMF loans.

Pretty much my understanding as well. Even worse for the more radical moslem groups, such as Al-Queda.

A few years ago, I read a long article (New Yorker, maybe?) going over the contents of one of the hard drives captured from Al-Queda. Lots and lots of revolutionary plans, tactics, that sort of thing. Even a grand strategy of sorts. But when it came to governing afterwards, it came down to: apart from the ideaological and security forces, they'd just hire a few people. Said people need not even be members of their group. Literally all of about two paragraphs. No conception of economics, public works, any of that. It was almost like they expected to literally turn the clock back five hundred years. On reading that, I concluded Al-Queda was doomed to fail even if they did topple a few middle eastern governments.

[Guest]

Check out this incredible photo of our little nation on the Nile.

(interesting stuff in the rest of the post too)

[Fez]

First of all, my bad. I totally missed this thread when I made my thread.

Second, Mohammed ElBaradei has been appointed the interim prime minister. Personally I'm kinda surprised by this, the military is seemingly deliberately provoking the Islamists, but I guess they consider it necessary to ensure secularist support and also hopefully give a friendly face of the new government to the West.

Third, violence seems to be getting worse. Last I saw, 36 people were killed and over 1,000 were wounded last night in clashes between pro- and anti-Morsi groups. Surprisingly, a number of people were shot, and in incidents that the military had nothing to do with, which means there's more guns in Cairo than previously thought.

[TalalOfDorne]

At the moment, I dont have anything to contribute.

(Not sure if Im allowed to share this)

Another reason why I loathe the Supposedly-muslim Brotherhood. And I must clarify that they (The Brotherhood) Do not represent Muslims, not one bit. They are just power hungry extremists who want control over the country by using religion.

[KAH]

Whether one applauds Morsi's ousting or not, one thing seems clear - the Egyptian military establishment is simply too entrenched to allow for civil control. Any democratically elected government will feel tacit (or overt, if need be) pressure to make a deal with the military establishment, thus cementing the status quo. The latest development serves to fix this state of affairs further - possibly for decades.

Echoes of Pakistan or Turkey...

[Mad Monkey]

Second, ElBaradei has been appointed the interim prime minister. Personally I'm kinda surprised by this, the military is seemingly deliberately provoking the Islamists, but I guess they consider it necessary to ensure secularist support and also hopefully give a friendly face of the new government to the West.

I think now they're saying he's not. As I understand it Islamists within the anti-Morsi coalition oppose ElBaradei.

[All-for-Joffrey]

Check out this incredible photo of our little nation on the Nile.

(interesting stuff in the rest of the post too)

That photo that's been making the rounds isn't from a protest. NASA took it in 2010 I think. I swear to god, people can just make any random shit up they want in this day and age and it makes it to the blogs of pundits who supposedly know what they're talking about. Someone else had posted that picture, claiming it was from the protests, on a website I write for and I was really embarrassed. I mean really, even if there were that many protesters (there are a shit ton to be sure--but not enough to cover the entire Nile), why would they be protesting in rural areas along the Nile? I wonder if so many people are buying into this picture that it will pop up into a history book a few decades down the line. Ugh.

/end rant

Anyway, I'm not sure el-Baraedi is a great pick. As much as I like him, he could potentially push the Salafists right into the Muslim Brotherhood camp, paving the away for the Muslim Brotherhood to win another round of elections (after Morsi's run, I don't think they could win an election again without Salafist support). This is, of course, assuming that the military even intends to hold legitimate elections, which very well could turn into a round of who gets to be the next Mubarak/Egypt's Next Top Dictator.

[Usotsuki]

At least 40 people have been killed in a shooting incident in Cairo, say officials and the Muslim Brotherhood, amid continuing unrest over the removal of President Mohammed Morsi.

The Brotherhood says its members were fired on while they were holding a sit-in at a Presidential Guard barrack.

But the army said a "terrorist group" had tried to storm the barracks.

There are also suggestions that the popular coup may in fact have been a Kermit gambit, the popular discontent to which the military responded being due in no small part to deliberate disruptions of the fuel and power supplies by the Praetorians themselves.

This should end well.

[The Iceman of the North]

At the moment, I dont have anything to contribute.

(Not sure if Im allowed to share this)

Another reason why I loathe the Supposedly-muslim Brotherhood. And I must clarify that they (The Brotherhood) Do not represent Muslims, not one bit. They are just power hungry extremists who want control over the country by using religion.

It has to be added that this kind of violence are committed by all sides in the conflict, including the military and anti-MB protesters.

[All-for-Joffrey]

Ha. So remember my OP about the NGO workers detained and convicted by Morsi for "fomenting unrest" in Egypt? This thread is about to come full circle.

Not that this completely justifies the charges, but turns out there was a lot to that after all. Al Jazeera English just broke a story about the US channeling funds through NED, NDI, NRI and Freedom House to support not just anti-Morsi politicians but many other colorful characters espousing violence and government overthrow, including one brutal police chief from the Mubarak era. The US also assured many of these people that they would publicly back them after they had galvanized public opinion enough to result in large scale protests against Morsi. Not that Morsi needed any help from the US on that account -- who the fuck are the mucks that determine foreign policy? Not only was this completely unethical and illegal, it also jeopardizes U.S. interests since they were caught and even if they weren't caught, it surely couldn't have been all that helpful or effectual when Morsi was doing just fine making a mess of things without our help.

Activists bankrolled by the programme include an exiled Egyptian police officer who plotted the violent overthrow of the Morsi government, an anti-Islamist politician who advocated closing mosques and dragging preachers out by force, as well as a coterie of opposition politicians who pushed for the ouster of the country's first democratically elected leader, government documents show.

Information obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, interviews, and public records reveal Washington's "democracy assistance" may have violated Egyptian law, which prohibits foreign political funding.

It may also have broken US government regulations that ban the use of taxpayers' money to fund foreign politicians, or finance subversive activities that target democratically elected governments.

I shouldn't be surprised by once again, the Hope and Change administration has stooped to the time-tested and ineffectual tactics of bullying the rest of the world and undermining other democracies by supporting those parties in our interests rather than suck it up and work with the politicians the people actually choose (I hope to God the US isn't implicated in the actual coup but at this point, it wouldn't surprise me at all).

ETA: Upon a reread, this article is written a bit disingenuously. They haven't found anything tracing funds until after 2011. Nonetheless, it raises significant questions about the shitheads that these government's and these NGO's choices of people they're funding.

[The Progressive]

So is any of the pro-coup advocates gonna comment on the recent massacre of morsi-supporters by the egyptian army?

eta: the egyptian military just ordered the arrest of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, charging them with inciting violence in a clash that saw troops shoot 55 Mursi supporters dead .................. we sure are looking at a possible egyptian civil war real soon.

[All-for-Joffrey]

Looks like Mr. Merdle's assessment was right. The army has been indeed manufacturing the power shortages. An Egyptian billionaire and former Mubarak sycophant financed and supported Tamarood (unbeknownst to the movement, which he is completely unabashed about).

The apparently miraculous end to the crippling energy shortages, and the re-emergence of the police, seems to show that the legions of personnel left in place after former President Hosni Mubarak was ousted in 2011 played a significant role — intentionally or not — in undermining the overall quality of life under the Islamist administration of Mr. Morsi.

And as the interim government struggles to unite a divided nation, the Muslim Brotherhood and Mr. Morsi’s supporters say the sudden turnaround proves that their opponents conspired to make Mr. Morsi fail. Not only did police officers seem to disappear, but the state agencies responsible for providing electricity and ensuring gas supplies failed so fundamentally that gas lines and rolling blackouts fed widespread anger and frustration.

“This was preparing for the coup,” said Naser el-Farash, who served as the spokesman for the Ministry of Supply and Internal Trade under Mr. Morsi. “Different circles in the state, from the storage facilities to the cars that transport petrol products to the gas stations, all participated in creating the crisis.”

Working behind the scenes, members of the old establishment, some of them close to Mr. Mubarak and the country’s top generals, also helped finance, advise and organize those determined to topple the Islamist leadership, including Naguib Sawiris, a billionaire and an outspoken foe of the Brotherhood; Tahani el-Gebali, a former judge on the Supreme Constitutional Court who is close to the ruling generals; and Shawki al-Sayed, a legal adviser to Ahmed Shafik, Mr. Mubarak’s last prime minister, who lost the presidential race to Mr. Morsi.

But it is the police returning to the streets that offers the most blatant sign that the institutions once loyal to Mr. Mubarak held back while Mr. Morsi was in power. Throughout his one-year tenure, Mr. Morsi struggled to appease the police, even alienating his own supporters rather than trying to overhaul the Interior Ministry. But as crime increased and traffic clogged roads — undermining not only the quality of life, but the economy — the police refused to deploy fully.

Until now.

White-clad officers have returned to Cairo’s streets, and security forces — widely despised before and after the revolution — intervened with tear gas and shotguns against Islamists during widespread street clashes last week, leading anti-Morsi rioters to laud them as heroes. Posters have gone up around town showing a police officer surrounded by smiling children over the words “Your security is our mission, your safety our goal.”

[TalalOfDorne]

This just confirms the idea that the US is supporting the MB.

[All-for-Joffrey]

This just confirms the idea that the US is supporting the MB.

How so?

Also, what are you on and can I have some?