Main menu:

a fow of the books I've read

Native Son The Fountainhead The Colossus of Maroussi The Woman in the Dunes Confessions of a Mask The Journey to the East

More books »
Book recommendations, book reviews, book lists

Site Search

Feeds

Recent Posts

Similar Posts

Most Popular

Recent Comments

Categories

Archive

Links 20 July 2013

Wall Street Journal, In Egypt, the “Deep State” Rises Again:

    “In the months before the military ousted President Mohammed Morsi, Egypt’s top generals met regularly with senior aides to opposition leaders, often at the Navy Officers’ Club nestled on the Nile.
    “The message: If the opposition could put enough protesters in the streets, the military would step in — and forcibly remove the president.
    “‘It was a simple question the opposition put to the military,’ said Ahmed Samih, who is close to several opposition attendees. ‘Will you be with us again?’ The military said it would. …
    “The two sides needed each other. Opposition parties had popular credibility, unlike Mubarak-era officials. Mubarak figures brought deep pockets and influence over the powerful state bureaucracy. …
    “As Mr. Morsi’s ouster neared, there were increasing meetings between the military and opposition. They included senior aides to [National Salvation Front leader Mohammed] ElBaradei, former presidential candidate and Arab League chief [Amr] Moussa, and another presidential candidate, Hamdeen Sabahy, according to Mr. Samih, and other people close to top NSF members. …
    “The generals said that if enough Egyptians joined public protests, the military would have little choice but to intervene, according to several activists close to Mr. ElBaradei and U.S. officials. ‘The military’s answer was, if enough people come out into the streets, then it will be exactly like Mubarak,’ Mr. Samih said.”
    [NOTE: To get past the subscriber paywall, search for the text of the first paragraph using Google and click on the link there.]

Kevin Drum in Mother Jones, Here’s How the Coup in Egypt Went Down:

    “The military, representing the ‘deep state,’ negotiated a deal with Morsi’s secular opponents…. The deep state’s job was to keep public services in shambles as a way of stoking public anger. The secularists provided the populist cover and the shock troops for widespread protests. The military provided the muscle to oust Morsi and take over the government. After the deed was done, public services were quickly restored, the secularists were given a share of political power, and the military regained much of its old influence and independence. All nice and neat.”

Associated Press, Disputes Between Morsi, Military Led to Egypt Coup:

    “The degree of [the] differences [between President Mohammed Morsi and armed forces chief General Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi] suggests that the military had been planning for months to take greater control of the political reins in Egypt. When an activist group named Tamarod began a campaign to oust Morsi, building up to protests by millions nationwide that began June 30, it appears to have provided a golden opportunity for el-Sissi to get rid of the president. The military helped Tamarod from early on, communicating with it through third parties, according to the officials.
    “The reason, the officials said, was because of profound policy differences with Morsi. El-Sissi saw him as dangerously mismanaging a wave of protests early in the year that saw dozens killed by security forces. More significantly, however, the military also worried that Morsi was giving a free hand to Islamic militants in the Sinai Peninsula, ordering el-Sissi to stop crackdowns on jihadis who had killed Egyptian soldiers and were escalating a campaign of violence. …
    “In April, the youth activists of Tamarod, Arabic for ‘Rebel,’ began collecting signatures on a petition for Morsi to step down. When it said it had 2 million signatures in mid-May, the military took an interest and worked through third parties that connected the group with liberal and opposition-linked businessmen who would bank it, said two high-ranking Interior Ministry officials.
    “The campaign claimed in June to have more than 20 million signatures — though the number has never been independently confirmed — and called for mass rallies against Morsi to start June 30, the anniversary of his inauguration. El-Sissi issued a statement saying the armed forces would intervene to stop any violence at the protests, particularly to stop Morsi supporters from attacking the rallies. He gave the two sides a week to resolve their differences — with the deadline being June 30.”

Max Blumenthal in Al Jazeera English, People, Power, or Propaganda? Unraveling the Egyptian Opposition:

    “Among the first major Egyptian public figures to marvel at the historic size of the June 30 demonstrations was the billionaire tycoon Naguib Sawiris. On June 30, Sawiris informed his nearly one million Twitter followers that the BBC had just reported, ‘The number of people protesting today is the largest number in a political event in the history of mankind.’ …
    “Sawiris was not exactly a disinterested party. He had boasted of his support for Tamarod, lavishing the group with funding and providing them with office space. He also happened to be a stalwart of the old regime who had thrown his full weight behind the secular opposition to Morsi.
    “Two days after Sawiris’ remarkable statement, BBC Arabic’s lead anchor, Nour-Eddine Zorgui, responded to a query about it on Twitter by stating, “seen nothing to this effect, beware, only report on this from Egypt itself.” Sawiris seemed to have fabricated the riveting BBC dispatch from whole cloth. …
    “Some Egyptian opponents to Morsi appear to have fabricated Western media reports to validate the crowd estimates. Jihan Mansour, a presenter for Dream TV, a private Egyptian network owned by the longtime Mubarak business associate Ahmad Bahgat, announced, ‘CNN says 33 million people were in the streets today. BBC says the biggest gathering in history.’
    “There is no record of CNN or BBC reporting any such figure.”

Patrick Kingsley in The Guardian, Killing in Cairo: The Full Story of the Republican Guards’ Club Shootings:

    “In the early hours of 8 July 2013, 51 Muslim Brotherhood supporters camped outside the Republican Guards’ club in Cairo were killed by security forces. The Egyptian military claimed the demonstrators had attempted to break into the building with the aid of armed motorcyclists. …
    “The military has said that the assault on the protesters was provoked by a terrorist attack. At about 4 a.m., according to the army’s account, 15 armed motorcyclists approached the Republican Guards’ club compound. The army said that the motorcyclists fired shots, that people attempted to break into the compound, and that the soldiers then had no choice but to defend their property.
    “However, a week-long investigation — including interviews with 31 witnesses, local people and medics, as well as analysis of video evidence — found no evidence of the motorcyclist attack and points to a very different narrative, in which the security forces launched a co-ordinated assault on a group of largely peaceful and unarmed civilians.”

Reuters, Egypt’s Brotherhood Proposes Crisis Talk Framework via EU Envoy:

    “The Muslim Brotherhood said on Thursday it had proposed through an EU go-between a framework for talks to resolve Egypt’s political crisis, its first formal announcement of an offer for negotiations since President Mohamed Morsy was toppled.
    “Brotherhood official Gehad el-Haddad, who represented the movement in previous EU-facilitated talks, told Reuters…[that] the Brotherhood would be willing to negotiate over any political issue, including new elections to replace Morsy as president, but insisted that the army would first have to reverse its decree that unilaterally removed Morsy.
    “‘First they have to reverse the coup,’ he said. ‘You can’t come on a tank and remove an elected leader…. It is a stand-off, it is either a military coup or a democratic choice.”

Egypt Independent, Tamarod Calls for Protest Against Constitutional Declaration:

    “The Tamarod campaign and the 30 June Front have both said that they have strong misgivings concerning the roadmap announced by the Army, stressing that they want the constitution to be rewritten entirely. They have announced their dissatisfaction with the current Constitutional Declaration, and have called on the Egyptian people to participate in rallies in Tahrir Square and at the Ettehadiya Presidential Palace on Friday to make those demands.”

The Telegraph, Chinese Museum Found with 40,000 Fake Exhibits Forced to Close:

    “The museum’s public humiliation began earlier this month when Ma Boyong, a Chinese writer, noticed a series of inexplicable discrepancies during a visit and posted his findings online.
    “Among the most striking errors were artifacts engraved with writing purportedly showing that they dated back more than 4,000 years…. However, according to a report in the Shanghai Daily the writing appeared in simplified Chinese characters, which only came into widespread use in the 20th century. …
    “Wei Yingjun, the museum’s chief consultant…said he was ‘quite positive’ that at least 80 of the museum’s 40,000 objects had been confirmed as authentic. …
    “Mr. Wei said that objects of ‘dubious’ origin had been ‘marked very clearly’ so as not to mislead visitors and vowed to sue Mr. Ma, the whistle-blowing writer, for blackening the museum’s name.”

The Guardian, Dutch Art Heist Paintings May Have Been Burned by Suspect’s Mother:

    “Ash from an oven owned by a woman whose son is charged with stealing seven multimillion-pound paintings, including works by Matisse, Picasso and Monet, contained paint, canvas and nails, a Romanian museum official said on Wednesday.
    “The discovery could be evidence that Olga Dogaru was telling the truth when she claimed to have burned the paintings, which were taken from Rotterdam’s Kunsthal gallery last year in a daylight heist.
    “Ernest Oberlander-Tarnoveanu, director of Romania’s National History Museum, told the Associated Press that museum forensic specialists had found small fragments of painting primer, the remains of canvas and paint, and copper and steel nails, some of which pre-dated the 20th century.”

From “Superchill” to Boston Bomber

A major controversy, apparently, has been stirred up by Rolling Stone’s decision to put accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on its cover, using a photo that portrays him as a dreamy-eyed teenager — even though he is a dreamy-eyed teenager, and the cover story the photo illustrates is about him.

Some people seem to think the photo is too rock-star-like or heroic, and are upset, apparently, that no photos are available that make Tsarnaev look more menacing and deranged. (The photo is a self-portrait he used on his Twitter account.) Others criticize the idea of profiling Tsarnaev at all, arguing that Rolling Stone should have reported on the bombing’s victims or first responders instead. In response to their criticism, major retailers like CVS and Walgreens are refusing to put this issue on their newsstands.

But anger at the article or its packaging ignores the fact that the story itself deserves to be told. How did a seemingly well-adjusted kid — an immigrant success story, one might say — go from being a wrestling team captain, model student, and laid-back stoner to alleged terrorist in two short years? Viewed purely in terms of dramatic potential, doesn’t this story contain far more human interest than the stories of the victims — who are, after all, only part of the story by tragic accident, rather than through choices they themselves made?

If you are fascinated by stories of how bad people get to be the way they are — and I admit that I am, having previously read about folks like Jim Jones, Marshall Applewhite, David Koresh, Jeffrey Dahmer, Andrew Cunanan, and Jared Loughner — then by all means read the original article, excellently reported by Janet Reitman. If the media controversy is more your thing, then check out this story in The New Yorker, this one in The Atlantic, or this one in Slate.

Moment of Rupture


Italian cabinet minister Cecile Kyenge, an orangutan, Senator Roberto Calderoli.

At a rally of his suppporters on July 13, Italian Senator Roberto Calderoli said this about Immigration Minister Cecile Kyenge, Italy’s first cabinet minister of African origin:

    “I love animals — bears and wolves, as everyone knows — but when I see the pictures of Kyenge I cannot but think of, even if I’m not saying she is one, the features of an orangutan.”

“I’m not saying she is one” — classy!

Also, bears and wolves are acceptable, but orangutans not?

Following a storm of criticism and demands that he resign, Calderoli called Kyenge to apologize to her personally. He even offered to send her flowers. She accepted the apology, but advised him to “reflect deeply.” In a later interview with the BBC, she added:

    “What kind of politics do they want to be doing — politics based on insults or politics based on concrete issues? … That’s why what he kicked off can’t stay between us but has to transcend my personal case. … It’s a moment of rupture for the country. Italy is trying to change at the moment and to take into account the fact that there is another Italy here too.”

Calderoli seems to have a history of problems with that “other Italy.” In 2006 he had to resign from a cabinet post under Silvio Berlusconi, after his appearance on a TV program wearing a T-shirt emblazoned with cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed helped to ignite protests at the Italian consulate in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in ten deaths.

Links 15 July 2013

Rami G. Khouri in The Daily Star, Spare Us Your Intellectual Disneylands:

    “Arab citizens, who now can express their identities and mobilize in the millions for mass political action, represent the agency of the individual citizen that remains, in my mind, the single most important development in the country since January 2011. …
    “Egyptians are not mobs who must choose only between democracy and army rule; rather they comprise thousands of citizen groups that rise and fall according to the times and conditions. Some go to public squares, some give to local charities, some stay home and watch television and vote when they are given that opportunity, and many millions do some or all of these things. This historic assertion of citizen agency in the past 30 months has resulted in indigenous political movements whose fortunes rise and fall. Groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, the revolutionary youth, Salafist Islamists, the National Salvation Front…all have only one thing in common: They are accountable ultimately to the will of the Egyptians, and cannot try to impose a system of rule or national policies that the citizenry does not accept.”

Baheyya, Fashioning a Coup:

    “It’s soothing to believe that a popular uprising ejected an incompetent Islamist president. It’s not comforting to point out that a popular uprising was on the cusp of doing so, until the generals stepped in, aborted a vital political process, arrested the president, and proclaimed their own ‘roadmap’ for how things will be from now on. …
    “With their July 3 coup, Egypt’s new military overlords and their staunch American backers are playing an age-old game, the game of turning the public against the ineluctable bickering, inefficiency, gridlock, and intense conflict that is part and parcel of a free political life, so that a disillusioned, fatigued people will pine for the stability and order that the military then swoops in to provide. …
    “As the recently self-designated ‘eminence grise’ Mohamed ElBaradie summed it up, ‘Without Morsi’s removal from office, we would have been headed toward a fascist state, or there would have been a civil war.’
    “And that is the essence of the anti-political doctrine that worships order, fears political struggle, mistrusts popular striving, and kowtows to force majeure.”

Associated Press, Edward Snowden Has “Blueprints” to NSA:

    “Edward Snowden has highly sensitive documents on how the National Security Agency is structured and operates that could harm the U.S. government, but has insisted that they not be made public, a journalist close to the NSA leaker said.
    “Glenn Greenwald, a columnist with The Guardian newspaper who first reported on the intelligence leaks, told The Associated Press that disclosure of the information in the documents ‘would allow somebody who read them to know exactly how the NSA does what it does, which would in turn allow them to evade that surveillance or replicate it.’
    “He said the ‘literally thousands of documents’ taken by Snowden constitute ‘basically the instruction manual for how the NSA is built.’”

The Hill, Greenwald Warns Snowden Holds NSA “Blueprints”:

    “Greenwald’s latest comments come days after he warned that Snowden would release damaging information if he was not granted safe passage to asylum in a third country or if harm came to him.
    “‘Snowden has enough information to cause more damage to the U.S. government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States,’ Greenwald told an Argentine newspaper last week.
    “‘The U.S. government should be on your knees every day praying that nothing happens to Snowden because if something happens, all information will be revealed and that would be their worst nightmare,’ he added.”

Washington’s Blog, The Government Is Spying On ALL Americans’ Digital and Old-Fashioned Communications.

James Fallows in The Atlantic (quoting a reader), The Impending Senate Vote on Confirming Nominees:

    “‘On the procedural level that the public can see, Congress is hopelessly gridlocked in the worst manner since the 1850s…. As a consequence, Obama cannot get anything done; he cannot even get the most innocuous appointees in office.
    “‘Yet he can assassinate American citizens without due processes…can detain prisoners indefinitely without charge; conduct surveillance on the American people without judicial warrant; and engage in unprecedented — at least since the McCarthy era — witch hunts against federal employees (the so-called insider threat program). At home, this it is characterized by massive displays of intimidating force by militarized federal law enforcement agencies and their willing handmaidens at the state and local level. Abroad, Obama can start wars at will and pretty much engage in any other activity whatever without so much as a by-your-leave from Congress, to include just recently forcing down a plane containing a head of state. And not a peep from congressional Republicans, with the exception of an ineffectual gadfly like Rand Paul. Democrats, with the exception of a few like Ron Wyden, are not troubled, either….
    “‘Clearly there is government, and then there is government. The former is the tip of the iceberg…which is theoretically controllable via elections. The subsurface part is the Deep State, which operates on its own compass heading regardless of who is formally in power. The Deep State is a hybrid of national security and law enforcement agencies, key nodes of the judiciary…cleared contractors, Silicon Valley (whose cooperation is critical), and Wall Street.
    “‘This combination of procedural impotence on the one hand and unaccountable government by fiat on the other is clearly paradoxical, but any honest observer of the American state must attempt to come to grips with it.’”

MJ Rosenberg, I Can’t Imagine Being the Parent of a Young Black Man:

    “In addition to all the other random dangers teens face, black kids have to worry about the cops too or pseudo cops like George Zimmerman.
    “This verdict only confirms what black parents already knew: it is not safe out there for their boys. The good thing: maybe now their sons understand what their parents are so anxious about. Black parents aren’t paranoid. They know that their boys are at risk. Everywhere. …
    “I am glad I’m not black. I just don’t have the courage for it.”

George Dvorsky in io9, 10 Mindnumbingly Futuristic Technologies That Will Appear by the 2030s.

Erroll Morris in Slate, The Murders of Gonzago:

    “Josh Oppenheimer’s film The Act of Killing…is an examination of the Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66, in which between 500,000 and 1 million people died. The Act of Killing is truly unlike any other documentary film. … One of the extraordinary things about documentary is that you get to continually reinvent the form, reinvent what it means to make a documentary — and Oppenheimer did just that. He identified several of the killers from 1965 and convinced them to make a movie about the killings. But the film is even weirder than that. Oppenheimer convinced these killers to act in a movie about the making of a movie about the killings. There would be re-enactments of the murders by the actual perpetrators. There would be singing, and there would be dancing. A perverted hall of mirrors.
    “But there is method to Oppenheimer’s madness — the idea that by re-enacting the murders, he, the viewers of the movie, and the various perpetrators recruited to participate could become reconnected to a history that had nearly vanished into a crepuscular past. Oppenheimer has the optimistic thought that the past is inside us and can be brought back to life.”

The Paradoxes of the Egyptian Moment

Did deposing Morsi serve the interests of “the revolution”?

We have a situation in which the elected president of Egypt was unable, and apparently unwilling (or even clueless about) advancing the key goals of “the revolution” that brought him to power. Rather, he sought to advance the interests and entrench the power of the narrow faction from which he came. So the “forces of revolution” which had seemed outnumbered during elections (for parliament, for president, and during the constitutional referendum) reemereged and demanded a “reset” in which a new president be found to advance their interests.

Those interests include challenging the dominance of the army in the public sphere (politics and the economy) — but paradoxically, the “revolutionaries” called on the army for help in deposing Morsi because he was not the right man to lead the charge against the army and the deep state! So now we have a situation where the army and even the police are, provisionally, the sponsors and backers of a movement (“the revolution” led by Egyptian youth) which by its very logic of its intentions, will turn against them at some point down the road!

As a friend reminded me yesterday, the Muslim Brothers were by no means the leaders of the February 2011 revolution against Mubarak. However, they were the best-organized political force left standing once Mubarak’s old guard was defeated, so they were the main beneficiaries of the elections that the Febuary 2011 revolution made possible. The February 2011 revolutionaries then found themselves in the unenviable position of having achieved a key demand — free and fair elections — which nevertheless set Egypt on a course that was in direct conflict with the rest of their demands — namely for an open, inclusive, and participatory society based on human dignity and social reform. This deeper transformation, which the revolution had really been all about to begin with, simmered under the surface over the past year and a half, largely frustrated by the Muslim Brothers who had seized power, and lacking an organized, institutional voice.

Finding that voice and building those institutions (through political parties, NGOs, the media, and elements of the new state) are the unfinished business of “the revolution.” The recent army-sponsored “reset” has once again opened the space for that to happen, but the “revolutionaries” will have to continue their transformative struggle, both through elections and culturally, socially — and of course realize that the army that helped them today is in a marriage of convenience only, and can’t be counted on to share their vision of an open society over the long term.

Links 09 July 2013

New York Times, Army Kills 51, Deepening Crisis in Egypt:

    “The mass shooting of Islamist protesters by security forces on Monday at a sit-in for Mohamed Morsi, the ousted president, injected new outrage into the standoff over his removal by Egypt’s top generals….
    “Leaders of the Brotherhood, Egypt’s largest Islamist group and best-organized political force, said the generals had now shown their authoritarian colors, using lethal weapons to crush dissent while holding the freely elected president captive. They called for a national ‘uprising’ against the return of a military dictatorship. …
    “Sit-in participants said gunmen had fired on them from atop the military buildings surrounding their camp. Video footage captured by the Islamists showed a soldier firing down from a roof while another calmly filmed the mayhem below.
    “Sandbagged gun turrets were still visible hours later on some rooftops, and the angles of scores of bullet holes in cars, lampposts and the Islamists’ makeshift metal barriers indicated that gunfire hit at an angle from above.
    “Many witnesses said the fighting lasted for hours, with hundreds of heavily armed soldiers chasing mostly unarmed protesters through the streets for blocks while continuing to shoot. Bullet holes, bullet casings and pools of blood dotted the ground hundreds of yards from the presidential guardhouse where the fighting had begun.”

Juan Cole, Egypt: Muslim Brotherhood Calls for “Uprising” as Plan for Elections is Announced:

    [Dr. Cole cites an eyewitness account by a man named Omar Ahmed who is "known to Egyptian friends whom I trust."]
    “He says that the army [used] a microphone to demand that the crowd near the Republican Guards Barracks disperse, and that the Brotherhood used their microphones to announce that martyrdom so near Ramadan would be a great thing. The army fired tear gas.
    “Then Omar heard firing at the troops and screams from the military side. The sniping was coming from al-Mustafa Mosque. The troops were also being hit with molotov cocktails. Then the microphone of the mosque threatened the troops, saying they are baby-killers.
    “Then a Brother began firing wildly with an automatic weapon. The troops returned fire and after that there were just bodies falling and men being taken into custody by the army. At 5 am, an hour into the clashes, reinforcements of more police and military showed up, and the Brotherhood militants withdrew to the Rabia al-Adawiya square or found refuge with local families in their apartments….
    “The dead include at least three military, and some 51 others, most of them likely non-combatants in the wrong place at the wrong time. …
    “On Monday evening, interim president Mansour tried to change the conversation by setting out a timetable for return to elected government. He said that within 15 days, a council of jurists must be appointed that would have two months to revise the 2012 constitution…. Parliamentary elections must be held by the end of the year or very early in Jan. 2014. The date for presidential elections hasn’t been set yet.”

Sarah Carr in Jadaliyya, On Sheep and Infidels:

    “There is a visceral hatred of the Muslim Brotherhood and its Salafi associates amongst some Egyptians. This hatred spans all social classes and predates current events. It is born out of an arguably justified mistrust and fear of the group, who have lied, put their own interests first, excluded other groups, ramrodded through an excuse for a constitution, attempted to give Morsi dictator powers, flirted with the military and dallied in sectarianism politics in a frightening way. It failed to understand that it was running a country, and it missed the point that for public relations purposes if you are an Arab president who desires to quash dissent through an organized group you better make sure that that group is in uniform.
    “Perhaps most importantly, they were feeble as hell at governing Egypt at a time when amateurs really just would not do.
    “When Morsi supporters attempt to put their case forward their arguments bounce back off a wall of hate, but — deep breath — in my opinion these arguments were not without merit — up until 30 June. … Mendacity, poor governance, self-interest, and sidelining of other political powers are pretty much the watch-words of all political groups and are not, in isolation, enough to justify a president’s removal by the military. …
    “So my position on events pre-30 June has not been changed by events since: the Muslim Brotherhood should have been left to fail as they had not (yet) committed an act justifying Morsi’s removal by the military. The price Egypt has paid and will pay for the consequences of this decision are too high. It has created a generation of Islamists who genuinely believe that democracy does not include them. The post-30 June fallout reaffirms this belief, especially with Islamist channels and newspapers closed down as well as leaders detained and held incommunicado…. It is Egyptian society that will pay the price of the grievances this causes, and the fact that, with a silenced media and no coverage from independent outlets they have been left with virtually no channels to get their voice heard. …
    “Nothing has changed. The real revolution will happen when army involvement in politics is a distant relic of history.”

Nikolas K. Gvosdev in The National Interest, U.S. Values and Interests Clash in Egypt:

    “Of course, one of the main problems was that Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood were classic “illiberal democrats”—prepared to accept the necessity of elections and to have some policies put to the voters for validation but in no way inclined to endorse the full panoply of civil and political rights and ready to impose limits on freedom of speech and assembly. They were, in other words, prepared to accept opposition—but only on their terms. …
    “This creates a new dilemma for Washington. Certainly American interests are served by having the Egyptian military—much more of a known quantity, compared with the Brotherhood, ‘back in the saddle,’ but it also means accepting the armed forces as a clear counterweight to the possible excesses of the popular majority or of political leaders like the Brotherhood—and allowing the army to set ‘red lines’ for politics and to enforce them. … To some extent, what has happened in Egypt resembles the ‘soft coups’ that used to occur in Turkey, where the military would intervene and where such intervention usually coincided with U.S. interests, even if it offended U.S. values.”

Human Rights Watch, Egypt: Judge Government on Respect for People’s Rights (from July 4):

    “Egypt’s new government should break decisively from a pattern of serious abuses that has prevailed since the January 2011 uprising, and make a commitment to respect the rights to free expression and peaceful assembly. Authorities should protect and promote the rights of all Egyptians, and halt arbitrary arrests of members of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliated Freedom and Justice Party. …
    “‘Egyptians suffered enormously under the generals and then under President Morsy’s government, which shoved human rights to the sidelines,’ said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. ‘One test of whether Egypt can return to a path of democratic development will rest on whether the Freedom and Justice Party can operate without political reprisals against its members.’ …
    “Egypt’s new interim president and the military leadership should immediately end reprisals against Muslim Brotherhood political leaders, including arrests or travel bans, and should allow the Freedom and Justice Party to fully exercise freedom of association, Human Rights Watch said.
    “The new government needs to make it clear immediately that it and all state bodies, including the armed forces, will respect all basic rights that apply within Egypt at all times.”

Agence France Presse, Morsy Ouster in Egypt Crushes Hamas Dreams: Analysts.

BBC News Magazine, Hikikomori: Why Are So Many Japanese Men Refusing to Leave Their Rooms?

Afrik.com, Homosexuality: Tariq Ramadan Drops a Bomb in Dakar (in French).

    “In a country with a 95% Muslim population who are radical with regard to any recognition of homosexual status, one must be brave, yes, very brave to dare to integrate gays into the ranks of ‘followers of Islam.’ And that’s what the Swiss citizen of Egyptian origin did in confiding that ‘it isn’t because one is homosexual that one isn’t Muslim.’ A remark that continues to provoke controversy in the country. Tariq Ramadan didn’t stop there. … ‘All scholars are unanimous on the question. Islam forbids homosexuality, as do all the monotheistic religions. But, being homosexual doesn’t mean that one isn’t Muslim. There is no witch hunt,’ noted Tariq Ramadan, who went further. ‘We need to promote a discourse of responsibility and avoid judging.”

Model Women


Manhattan, 2003.


Fez, 2013.

The Whole Truth

This article by Zied Boumaiza on the Nawaat Tunisia website is a shade more pessimistic than I am, but it comes close to capturing my feelings. The original is in French, so I’ve taken the liberty of translating the whole thing for my English-only readers.

— • —

The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It can’t stray from its path, nor change its essence according to context, affinity, or mood. There’s only one justice, too, for everyone and from every angle. It can’t keep quiet in the depths of a noble soul without risk of suffocation.

So let’s tell it like it is, despite the pain of defending today what we’ve always fought. It’s torture, isn’t it, to take the side of yesterday’s oppressor. What to do if today he’s the oppressed? Power changes sides, but principles remain unchangeable.

A coup d’état, a putsch, a usurpation, a betrayal. That’s what it is. Without any euphemism, let’s not try to cover up what just happened in Egypt with pretty words.

Military men who depose a president elected through universal suffrage, who put him in prison and all the leaders of his party with him — a party, let us note in passing, that swept more than 60% of the seats in democratic elections — who suspend a constitution ratified by popular referendum with more than 67% of the vote, or in other words, a plebescite.

The Egyptian “people” have clearly filled the streets and squares of Egypt with a dramatic surge unique in History to demand the fall of the regime, but is that enough to force out a regime installed by the will of the people?

The will of the people is measured in number of votes, not in square meters nor in decibels. More than 12 million voted for Shafik last time, enough to fill Tahrir Square five times, yet he wasn’t the winner. Isn’t that democracy? Do we need to reread our classics?

    “Election: an operation by which free citizens choose their masters.”

So this people had the chance three times over to hand the Muslim Brothers a stinging defeat. Three attempts to reject political Islam, three bullets to shoot down that mediocrity, and instead, this great people propelled the Brotherhood to the throne of Egypt three times in a row. So there’s no surprise that the Brothers would think they had a blank check. And even then, not a television station was censured, not a word in a newspaper was crossed out by those in power, despite an out-of-control press. For good or ill, they respected the freedom of the press a thousand times better than their successors. That’s a fact.

So this great people has to own up to its choices — and by the way, there are millions who still do own up to them, and who today feel like they’ve been stabbed in the back. Those people don’t resemble me. I believe they’ve been duped, blinded, and are completely wrong, but I understand their rage perfectly.

The rest of you, progressives, democrats, and activists for the rule of law, isn’t it shameful, this complicit silence or this unseemly gloating? Isn’t it a betrayal of the values you’ve defended your whole lives? So shake off your discomfort and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

As far as Egypt is concerned, that country I love so much — it will never again raise its head. The democratic process has stalled out, injustice is accomplished, and trust is forever shaken. There’s no way to turn back. The anger is churning and will keep churning, and the resentment will always be there. The fury has begun, and God alone knows how many corpses it will take before it’s over.

“I Use My Own Brain”

Wow. Just watch this, and let this 12-year-old kid explain the political situation in Egypt to you.

(Thanks to Razan Ghazzawi on Facebook.)

Links 06 July 2013

Daniel Levy in Al Jazeera English: Mubarak’s Children Come Home:

    “The man undoubtedly cooing as he watched the military coup against Mohamed Morsi…was his authoritarian predecessor Hosni Mubarak. Mubarak’s prison cell must now be a cheerier place, and one reason stands out. For all of their vocal hatred of the ex-leader and apparent objection to everything ‘Mubarakist’, the Tahrir revolutionaries have just proven themselves to be the most faithful followers of his core legacy — anything but the Brotherhood. …
    “The Morsi year was hardly a success story…. But to embrace the army as the great liberator just as it was busy deposing a democratically elected president and upper House of Parliament, moving tanks against rival protestors, arresting political leaders and shutting down TV stations, surely that requires a large dose of pre-existing prejudice. From day one of Morsi’s election to day 366 (when the military coup ultimatum was announced) it was more the opposition than the presidency who rejected power-sharing and compromise, insisting instead on zero-sum politics. …
    “The Tahrir protesters abandoned at least two key democratic principles — respect for outcomes expressed at the ballot box and the non-interference of the military in politics. If the Tamarod (rebel) movement, behind the latest anti-Morsi mobilization, really had 22 million supporters as it claimed, then that should have been translated into votes in parliamentary elections scheduled by President Morsi for later this year. If there were grounds for doing so, a new Parliamentary majority could then have impeached the President. …
    “This is not a victory for freedom but for the old regime, or more precisely the Egyptian deep-state — a bureaucratic, military, and business elite, that never went away, is considered to be the real power in Egypt, and that just reasserted its interests.”

Mark Levine in Al Jazeera English: L’Etat, C’Est Nous — Who Will Control the Egyptian State?

    “For its part, the military clearly considers itself, if not coterminous with the Egyptian state, then the primary conduit through which the needs and desires of the people can be realised…. Its main strategy for maintaining the ‘legitimacy’ that Morsi so quickly lost is to serve as the grand mediator of contending social and political forces that, left to their own devices, risked tearing Egypt apart.
    “In so defining its role the military has taken a page from the Arab world’s deepest state, Moroccan monarchy and the Makhzen, the political and economic elite that surrounds, is managed by and serves it. … By defining itself above partisan politics and economic interests, the King and Makhzen have been able to rule Morocco for centuries, weathering challenges that sent many other regimes to the historical dustbin and ensuring a level of entrenched political power and corruption that is the envy of most autocratic regimes. It’s a record the Egyptian military would love to emulate.
    “The question is, will the Egyptian people accept the Makhzenification of the Egyptian military? … As for the one revolutionary group within the leadership, the Tamarod movement represented by El Baradei, he and senior Tamarod leaders such as Mahmoud Badr have showered the military with praise in recent days, an attitude that has angered many revolutionary activists. Yet it’s hard to imagine Badr or any other leader of the ‘rebellion’ actually believes in the good intention of the military or other remnants of the old order. … Perhaps it is Tamarod and the millions of other protesters in the streets of Egypt…who are playing the military and the deep state, and not the other way around.
    “Who’s playing whom will become clear in the coming months. The only way the ‘rebellion’ will complete its revolutionary transformation is if it fundamentally transforms the Egyptian economy and the deeply buried political networks that still control it. And the military will do whatever it can to prevent this from happening.”

Nathan Brown in The New Republic: Egypt Coup — A Roadmap for Backseat Drivers:

    “[General Abdel Fattah] Al-Sisi’s statement [deposing President Morsi] was immediately blessed by the Sheikh of al-Azhar, Egypt’s top religious official. And the country’s largest Salafi party fell into line as well. Al-Azhar and the Salafis are rivals to the Brotherhood to be sure, but why were they so quick to sign off on deposing Egypt’s first Islamist president?
    “Here’s the unspoken secret: the military, al-Azhar, and the Salafis got exactly what they wanted in the 2012 constitution. There are provisions on the military (no real civilian oversight), al-Azhar (a muscular supervisory role over Islamic legal issues), and the Islamic sharia that each of these actors want to protect. The Brotherhood had allowed these clauses in order to get necessary support for a constitution that other political forces had bitterly come to oppose.
    “So when it comes time to suggest constitutional amendments, today’s happy family of Morsi opponents may turn into a rather dysfunctional group. This is precisely where the 2011 revolution began to go off the rails…. It could happen again.”

Reuters: Egypt Left Leader Backs Military Role, Sees Short Transition:

    “Egypt’s leading left-wing politician endorsed military intervention to oust elected Islamist President Mohamed Mursi and said he expected a short transition to a new democratic president and parliament.
    “Hamdeen Sabahi, leader of the Popular Current movement…said the army had implemented the will of the people and was not seeking power for itself. …
    “Those who called Mursi’s removal this week a military coup were insulting the Egyptian people, who had turned out in their millions to demand his ouster, Sabahi said. …
    “Sabahi, a firebrand orator who models himself on former Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser, spelled out the sequence of steps he said had been agreed for the transition.
    “‘We have agreed on a roadmap that has a new constitution that will be drafted by a committee to amend the suspended constitution and change the disputed articles, after which people will vote on it in a referendum. Then, there will be a presidential election, then a parliamentary election,’ he said.”

Jack Whelan in After the Future: Egypt and the Problem of Democratic Legitimacy:

    “According to the civics text books, a democracy is a government in which the people are sovereign. … [Yet] it’s been demonstrated time and time again that majorities often get it wrong. … The ancient Greeks thought democracy was a form of government that inevitably devolved into tyranny precisely because of its vulnerability for majorities to be manipulated by demagogues who used popular support to obtain power, and then used that power to establish an autocracy. …
    “And so it should be obvious that because a government was democratically elected, it does not mean that it has legitimacy. The ballot box confers what I would describe as a provisional legitimacy; it’s not absolute. Ultimately legitimacy is conferred in the streets. …
    “There isn’t something sacred about democratic elections. If 50% + 1 of your electorate is insane, ignorant, and easily manipulable, you probably shouldn’t have them. … Democratic elections, I’d argue, have legitimacy only in societies with majorities that possess a basic level of decency, maturity, and civic mindedness…. Legality does not equal legitimacy.”

Jack Whelan in After the Future: Sirota v. Brooks on Egyptians’ Mental Capacity:

    “What if the Christian fundamentalists in Mississippi completely dominated the state Republican Party in the next election cycle, win in a landslide, and ram through the substitution of Biblical Law for its state constitution? Would that be ok just because a majority supported it in a democratic process? Or would it be a sign that most Mississipians lacked the mental capacity to govern in the modern world? Why is it different in Egypt, and why is it wrong to question the mental capacity of any country, state, or party that allows itself to be governed by religious fanatics? …
    “Democracy is not an end it itself; it is a means to an end, namely to deliver within the framework of a contemporary, pluralistic society a basic level of sanity and decency. If I live in a society in which power resides with an entrenched faction dominated by actors who are not sane and decent, even if they are democratically elected, then democracy has failed. If insanity and indecency have clotted the system with majority approval, then the decent, sane people in the minority cannot be blamed for looking for other than democratic means to fix the problem.”

(Yes, but who decides who the “sane and decent” people are — and who gives them that right? Apparently, they just know who they are, and they give themselves that right. This “right to know better” is the flaw of liberal elitism, which led to the Christian fundamentalist backlash in the US in the first place. A similar arrogance can be seen today among certain secular-minded people in the Arab world. They only support democratic outcomes if those outcomes break their way. See the quote from Daniel Levy above: “It was more the opposition than the presidency who rejected power-sharing and compromise, insisting instead on zero-sum politics.”)

Michael Plitnick in Souciant: Egypt’s Elusive Democracy.

Lakome.com: Egyptian Crisis and Eventual Repurcussions for Morocco — What Do Moroccan Politicians Think? (in French).

The Guardian: Morsi’s Downfall Determined by Coffee Shop Rebels Rather than Army:

    “‘The economy was being wrecked by the [Brotherhood] movement,’ [said a senior western diplomat who had spent time with Morsi]. ‘They were spending at least $1.5bn per month more than they should have. They were using months and months of reserves at a critical level. You couldn’t deny the underlying trend that the government was heading for bankruptcy.’ …
    “By March, serious diplomatic efforts had started to convince Morsi to form a government of national unity.
    “‘We were trying to convince them to broaden the base of political participation,’ said the diplomat. ‘After much negotiation, they declined and then went about making it even worse by maintaining a technocratic government run by newly promoted lower-grade officials with bad ideas.’ …
    “By mid-June, with other state institutions now sharing the military’s alarm, the tide was clearly turning against Morsi. Tamarod claimed to have received more than 20m petition signatures.
    “Within a week, citizens experienced shortages of essentials, especially food and fuel. Long queues for fuel are rare in Egypt, where the military…is usually a guarantor of supply. But in the leadup to the first anniversary of Morsi’s swearing in — June 30 — …the shortages seemed specially severe.”

(Doesn’t this last bit belie the headline, which claims that youth, not the army, are responsible for the fall of Morsi? Doesn’t it raise the suspicion that the army may have engineered fuel shortages, to stoke popular discontent with Morsi’s government at a crucial time?)